How refreshing! Someone who actually knows what they are posting about. Politician does not equal diplomat, they are very different things.
I wouldn't go that far. I just did a little bit of research.
The elephant in the room is falling revenue.
The tax cuts during the Halcion days leading up to the GFC are an ongoing drag. Anyone who had an extended pay freeze or cut knows that you don't get back to where you otherwise would have been.
What's bad for many and doesn't bother others is it's a regressive tax. And the black economy is alive and well. And that's why it probably will be increased![]()
The only fall in revenue was the Treasury's guesstamate of the revenue. In fact, revenue went up, the problem was the spending went up even more.
By the way, the Treasury uses the same computer modelling as Tim Flannery. Enter a series of data and just before the submit button there is one more section - 'Enter the result that you want this modelling to show ...'
The elephant in the room is falling revenue.
.......
... I think we have a right to know what they will do.I don't know what they are afraid of. Everyone knows that projects will have to be cut (better yet the entire Global Warming Dept. That will save several $Billion.) The current spend spend spend policy has to stop.
I don't know what they are afraid of. Everyone knows that projects will have to be cut (better yet the entire Global Warming Dept. That will save several $Billion.) The current spend spend spend policy has to stop.
...The current spend spend spend policy has to stop.
.......
All babies will be born equal but the minority's are more equal than the majority's. Smacks of social engineering.
Yeah I'm not confident of either party actually acknowledging that situation properly but I feel that with the end of the mining boom there's all sorts of ramifications with less money in the economy and less revenue coming in to fill the Commonwealth coffers. I'm also still unhappy with the answers that Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey have been giving in response to 'what will be cut'... they are very evasive. It's like they are trying to coast in with a 'small target' policy like Johnny Howard in 1996 - I think we have a right to know what they will do.There is not 'less money in the economy'. After a slight fall in revenue in 08/09 on account of global conditions, revenue has risen and is estimated and projected to continue. The only 'fall in revenue' is against Treasury's preposterous 'forecasts' (which included the blundered mining and carbon tax revenue that never eventuated). Revenue is far greater now than it was 5 years ago (over $70 billion more).
Okay, well say that the current budgetary deficit is $20 billion (for example), if the government chops $20 billion from expenditure (as Abbott is supposedly going to do) then doesn't that mean $20 billion less in the economy? Also, if the Current Account Deficit (CAD) expands by a great amount (which its predicted to), doesn't that also mean more money going off-shore than coming in? And if taxation receipts are so much more than five years ago then why was I reading recently that national GST revenues have crashed? Is there some other source of revenue that's taken its place?We can tell you're on the government's side... The current budget deficit, no need for examples, just use real figures, they're real easy to find is $30.1 billion. That is the figure quoted in the 2013 PEFO documentation.
And, please, please, please try and understand what the GST is, we know that all Labor (and Green) stooges have a problem with this. The GST is a STATE (that is STATE) tax. Julia Gillard, Wayne Swan, Penny Wong, Kevin Rudd and Chis Bowen all sit in Federal Parliament, they are the ones always complaining about receipts being down, when indeed they are up. What the GST does or does not do is irrelevant to them (and this thread) because it's whole income goes to the states, the Feds get to spend exactly 0% of it whether the takings are up, down, left or right.
You have a way with words, sir. The GST is a FEDERAL TAX, imposed by the previous Howard government. Its proceeds may well go to the States, but the states did not introduce it, or operate it.Okay, so the ATO collect the tax at a federal level, and yes the federal government implemented it but the fact is, as you say 100% of the proceeds go to the states. An increase in such (by rate or base) will not help provide a balanced federal budget.
We can tell you're on the government's side... The current budget deficit, no need for examples, just use real figures, they're real easy to find is $30.1 billion. That is the figure quoted in the 2013 PEFO documentation.
It is possible to reduce expenditure without removing too much from the overall economy. For example if you're careful in cutting company taxes and employment goes up you can generate an overall gain in income from income tax. An incoming government could spend less by demolishing the clean energy finance corporation, and other non essential service areas.
And, please, please, please try and understand what the GST is, we know that all Labor (and Green) stooges have a problem with this. The GST is a STATE (that is STATE) tax. Julia Gillard, Wayne Swan, Penny Wong, Kevin Rudd and Chis Bowen all sit in Federal Parliament, they are the ones always complaining about receipts being down, when indeed they are up. What the GST does or does not do is irrelevant to them (and this thread) because it's whole income goes to the states, the Feds get to spend exactly 0% of it whether the takings are up, down, left or right.
I am thinking of running a book on the post-election activity.
If, as seems distinctly possible, the Opposition wins the election and forms the next Government, how many days will elapse before the inevitable comment that, "The previous Government left things a lot worse than we thought, so we won't be able to keep some of our promises."
It happens every time.
Frankly there's a whole lot of things they need to dump anyway as their promises are actually more expensive than the Labor Party's:I can see the Liberal's implementing it exactly as it is, that are just that stubborn and set in their ways. They'll just slash and burn something we actually need to pay for it!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-23/labor-seizes-on-economist-prediction-of-30-billion-shortfall/4906924
Before anyone jumps on me, it's from a fairly reputable source and it's just an indication that there's been (to quote the Simpsons) "A lot of crazy promises" by both sides. The paid parental leave scheme is an obvious HUGE ticket item and I just can't see it being implemented in its current form.
I can see the Liberal's implementing it exactly as it is, that are just that stubborn and set in their ways. They'll just slash and burn something we actually need to pay for it!
Personally I think the Liberal's have made too many expensive or poorly thought out promises on purpose. Six months in they drag out the old story of "budget in worse than expected deficit due to Labour's mismanagement" then set to work axing all the programs they had no real intention to do anyway ! They'll never cut road projects or giving money to the rich, so that just leaves Hospitals, Schools, their not properly costed NBN plan, ARTC funding, Welfare/Pensions, the "Green Army".