Tony Abbott talking about mandatory drug testing for dole recipients
- Thread starter b simpson
- Start date
Or just someone who cares about our rights like privacy. Most might be happy to give theirs away, but I'm not (and I don't do drugs, except for a double shot coffee every now and then).
To be honest Hoffy I don't really follow.
Does this have something to do with you correcting me that Abbotts daughters dubious scholarship was only 60k, rather than 60k per year?
To answer your question on where I found out about this, it was on the news when I was at the gym, channel 9 I think. I didn't answer it before because I can't see how it's relevant or interesting to anyone. Did I hit a sore spot or something?
If that was really true, then no-one would ever vote for the other party..the same party would simply keep on being re-elected every Election.
Whilst Labour are good at lowering taxes for the masses, and spending to create infrastructure etc, it's not much good at the end of the day when the National debt is going up at the rate of ten grand per second...
Folks here are crying about how tough it will be on the average guy, but - as has been said already by a few - it's time to get fairdinkum and stop the endless summer of handouts and bludging.
Yeah; there are many who are justified for a handout/help etc - the whole scene needs to be tightened up big time and weed out those who are not deserving.
I heard on the radio yesterday that the ATO is owed more than a billion in unpaid fines etc - and that's just them...I'll bet the sherriffs, RTA, cops etc can add a few more stories of unpaid pesos to the pile.
Last edited:
Hot Rod, perhaps you could explain this, then:
http://www.tai.org.au/content/sustaining-us-all-retirement
It was your precious Liberals that introduced tax free super pensions. Loss of tax revenues? 35 BILLION in 2013-2014 alone. But as we all know, giving tax free incomes to people who are the greatest burden on taxpayers makes a heck of a lot of sense, amirite!
Woe betide the party that dares to strip that entitlement!
Let's not forget the First Home Owners Grant and the Baby Bonus, too.
Last edited:
Mark but what about the people that are on the wrong side of 55,and now due too acute alcoholism nervous breakdowns erratic behaviour end up on welfare in a park or car some who have worked all their life and paid tax just goes to show the real competence of the experts that some of our government people listen to..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=56SAxtf-RTg
Last edited:
All things that were done prior to Kevin07 were done when there was plenty of money around and there was still a positive cash balance in the bank account.
Labor had the chance to change super too, but they didn't touch it in the 6 years they were in power. They seemed quite happy with the tax concessions, or is that not correct??
But, yes, that would be a logical place to look to increase tax revenues.
Maybe next year's budget. You only have to wait another 12 months.
No sore point. I just thought it interesting that you so heavily exaggerated the issue (and did so again in this post) I'm sure you are well informed. I notice that it is a common trait in people who subscribe to conspiracies. You know, like Rupert is running the show.
Exactly right, but it doesn't stop non-Liberal supporters from throwing rocks from the sideline.
Do you know how stupid it sounds being lectured from Labor and the Greens who wouldn't know a surplus if they fell over one, standing there waggling their finger about what the Liberals should have spent their surplus funds on, and how they supposedly wasted it ??
Hello.....Labor and the Greens run such massive deficits, we can't even start a conversation about what they should spend a surplus on !!
Labor and Labor supporters and Greens and Greens supporters standing there on the sidelines throwing rocks at Liberals voted in to fix a Budget mess that Labor and the Greens created is tragic.
People who hate Liberals and Liberal Govts love trotting out the line that Labor did the best they could, and revenues dropped like a rock. Rubbish, they obviously haven't seen the national scorecard over the years....and just believe what Labor feed them.
The fully signed off national accounts, as published by the Govts as historical fact don't lie. They are the sum total of all of the policies and all of the efforts applied. It's been 6 years since the GFC, but Labor still hide behind that excuse. The Liberals never hide behind the Asian crisis, Y2K, Sept 11, wars in Iraq or Afghanistan......there will always be something to blame.
You just keep to the task and balance the books regardless.....or in the first few years of every Liberal Govt, slowly turn the ship around to head away from deficits and back into surplus.
The real figures reveal that revenues continued to climb, it's just that Labor let expenditure go through the roof and they refused to ever say no to any request.
Keating Years
Year.............Revenue ($ B).........Costs ($ B).........Result ($ B)
1990-91............100.2..................100.6...................0.4 Labor Deficit
1991-92..............95.8..................108.4.................12.6 Labor Deficit
1992-93..............97.6..................115.7.................18.1 Labor Deficit
1993-94............103.8..................122.0.................18.1 Labor Deficit
1994-95............113.4..................127.6.................14.1 Labor Deficit
1995-96............124.4..................135.5.................11.1 Labor Deficit
Keating gets booted out for running a dreadful ship deficits and debt as far as the eye can see, but before he goes he threatens that the Liberals won't be able to do any better.
You can clearly see, no matter what the revenue, Labor refused to back off on the spending side. They just can't balance a budget.
With the right plan, and the right attitude, with a change to a Federal Liberal Govt, we see an immediate turn around in the fortunes. Australia is a big ship, but it takes a while to steer the country into a better direction.
Howard Years
Year.............Revenue ($ B).........Costs ($ B).........Result ($ B)
1996-97............133.6..................139.7...................6.1 Liberal Deficit
1997-98............140.7..................140.6...................0.1 Liberal Surplus
1998-99............152.0..................148.1...................3.9 Liberal Surplus
1999-00............166.2..................153.2..................13.0 Liberal Surplus
2000-01............183.0..................177.1....................5.9 Liberal Surplus
2001-02............187.6..................188.6....................1.0 Liberal Deficit
2002-03............204.6..................197.2....................7.4 Liberal Surplus
2003-04............217.8..................209.8....................8.0 Liberal Surplus
2004-05............236.0..................222.4...................13.6 Liberal Surplus
2005-06............255.9..................240.1...................15.8 Liberal Surplus
2006-07............272.6..................253.3...................17.3 Liberal Surplus
2007-08............294.9..................271.8...................23.1 Liberal Surplus
By this stage, the economy is in fantastic shape. The accumulated Labor debt from 1996 which blew out to $ 96 Billion has been completely eliminated, and the Govt is socking excess surplus away into the Future Fund and putting cash into the Bank.
You can see the Liberal Govt encouraged the economy to grow, but ensured that the expenditure side never got out of control.
The economy by now has been completely restored, and the country is on a magnificent footing to handle any shocks that may come it's way.
As a reward, the Liberals get booted out of Govt. This new boy on the scene with no experience, Kevin Rudd, sounds fantastic on the TV.....he's saying all the right things so why not, let's give him and his completely inexperienced team (the vast majority of the experienced ministers from the Hawke and Keating Govts had all retired) a go.
As they say, a change is as good as a holiday.
Rudd and Gillard Years
Year.............Revenue ($ B).........Costs ($ B).........Result ($ B)
2008-09............292.6..................316.0.................27.0 Labor Deficit
2009-10............284.7..................336.9.................54.5 Labor Deficit
2010-11............302.0..................346.1.................47.5 Labor Deficit
2011-12............329.9..................371.0.................43.3 Labor Deficit
2012-13............more of the same massive deficits
Those deficits are absolutely massive !! Each one of them. It'll take years of pain to rectify the damage caused by each of them. Collectively, it'll take decades and decades to repair the damage done in those 6 Labor and Green years.
The other years following are just the same.....but they aren't listed on my source....see below.
Can anyone see a pattern ??
Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the country couldn't go on with that trajectory ??
Have a look at the revenues between 07/08 and 11/12. They've increased by a huge $ 35 Billion since Howard and Costello's last year in office. It doesn't matter though, because Labor's spending went through the roof from 271 Billion up to 371 Billion.
Having that huge 100 Billion increase in spending, some 3 years after the GFC hit, pushed the 20 Billion surplus in Howard's last year to a 40 Billion deficit. No problem.....solution is to keep spending apparently.
Gillard's and Swan's famous words with their fantasy surplus promise was "we can't afford to fail, and we will not fail." It only took 6 months for them to give up on it and call it too hard.
They had no answer then, and the Labor Party and Green Party have no answer now.
People may criticise the Liberals now, seems to be a popular sport.....but I haven't heard one substantial idea yet from anyone in Labor or elsewhere on how to repair our now broken system.
Oh for the luxury of being able to sit back and criticise how the Labor Party misspent their surplus. They haven't had one for 25 years and given their current attitudes, aren't likely to ever manage the Budget competently enough to ever see one again.
Without getting the Budget and deficits and massive Labor debt under control, this country will be hamstrung. The elected Liberal / National Govt is doing the hard yards again, just like they were forced to do in 1996 to mop up the disaster handed to them.
Let's not start throwing rocks at them just as they are about to pick up the bucket and mop and start cleaning up for us.
Published Govt Source...........http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm
Last edited:
Without wanting to get too off-topic, how much ministerial experience did the '96 Howard government have? I seem to remember in 95/96, the Liberal party was war-gaming possible Labor attacks against them in focus groups, and identified their (the Liberals) lack of experience in government as one of the few weaknesses they had going into the election.
Ironically, they ran a similar campaign against Rudd (remember the L-plate attack ads?) and the Labor party in the '07 campaign.
And on another note, the revenue (mostly Tax) growth and spending growth under both colours of government has been ridiculously high since the mid-90's. Not all of that can be explained away with growth in health and aged spending. Any guesses on how big the government gravy train will get before the coming apocalypse?
Hot Rod, that 35 billion is for this tax year alone. Not counting the years it's already been in place and the ongoing years it will remain in place. Since it was introduced, we are probably pushing 100 billion dollars in lost tax revenue. As more and more people retire, that number is only going to increase. Not to mention that it's on a decreasing tax base as our current population is experiencing negative growth.
Let's look at it for what it was - a cheap vote grab. The Libs knew it wasn't sustainable and it's only going to be a matter of time before it's removed. The sooner, the better. There were rumours that Labor would remove the entitlement, but they realised it would be political suicide to do so.
The funny thing is, if it was Labor that had enacted it, you and plenty of other Liberal supporters would be pointing your fingers at them saying how it was yet another stupid policy.
But is was paid for in the forward estimates and budgeted for when times were good with money in the bank and surpluses to the horizon. When the GFC hit and things changed dramatically then changes should have been made as the GFC was not foreseeable.
But Labor didn't touch it for 6 years.
They had the same economic modelling at their disposal prior to the current government, yet seemed happy and left it in place. They had control of both the House of Reps and the Senate and could have hit every mum and dad with a new tax with no problems and clawed this money back and not damaged the budget as much with huge deficits.
Why the sudden rush for the Libs???
They brought it if when it could be afforded, Labor left it in when it couldn't be afforded and now it's the Libs fault for not immediately addressing it in their first budget along with probably the most unpopular budget in 20 years????
I'm putting my money on it being looked at for next year's budget. Only 12 months away, so don't worry too much.
I'm sure there'll be lots of other nice stuff too to keep everyone nice and warm around the fire discussing the merits or not on these cold June days.
Discussions yes....suggestions from non-Liberals about what to do - zip.
Journalists won't even ask the Labor pollies about what their plan is to get the Budget under control. You'll get pages and pages of what they won't do, but nary a peep about what they would do.
They've been fed the same line for the last 25 years that it's just around the corner and have never see a surplus from Labor.
After 25 years of failure, the journo's simply stop asking.
As can be seen above, everyone steers well clear, and discusses anything but.
Journalists won't even ask the Labor pollies about what their plan is to get the Budget under control. You'll get pages and pages of what they won't do, but nary a peep about what they would do.
They've been fed the same line for the last 25 years that it's just around the corner and have never see a surplus from Labor.
After 25 years of failure, the journo's simply stop asking.
As can be seen above, everyone steers well clear, and discusses anything but.
At the very least, Costello would have been aware of and understood cyclical business conditions. The GFC was very foreseeable. Maybe not to the extent that it happened, but it was inevitable. He's a sharp guy - he would have known very well that implementing that policy was unsustainable - yet he went ahead and proposed it anyway.
The Liberal Government at the time took advantage of the mining boom that was in full swing at the time to, as I stated earlier, pull a cheap vote grab. They knew it wasn't going to last forever, but took us all for a ride economically, regardless. But hey, it's not going to be Howard and Costello that have to pick up the pieces, so why should they give a rats?
All political parties are guilty of doing the same.
- All of Labor's $ 96 Billion in net debt fully paid off.
- Over $ 22 Billion in cash sitting in the Bank, earning the country huge interest.
- Over $ 60 Billion in cash locked away in the Future Fund so Labor couldn't spend it.
Yep, they really left the place in a shambles.
Boy o boy, Labor really had to struggle when they first were handed the Treasury keys.
If that's your definition of having to "pick up the pieces"....then you've got your metaphors all mixed up.
Yeah, I bet everyone wishes now that they had to pick up the same pieces as when Howard left office.
Your "all political parties" line is popular with the uneducated masses but without rigour and well wide of the mark.
may i politely pont out that a surplus is over-taxation? i mean, 20bil surplus is 20bil of confiscated taxes not being put to good use.
may i also politely point out that printing cash for infrastructure projects - and solely quarantining the press for such (ie not the day to day running of said projects) is shown not to have an inflationary effect on quasi socialist economies? if so, why do we borrow for infrastructure? would it not be better to funnel the taxes used to fund these projects into the day to day running and just print for construction only? after all, the govt sets a budget and tenders the project based on meeting those costs, how the money comes about for that makes no difference at the receiving end of the equation.
(yes - i'm aware that the military would jump on board, reclassify warships/tanks/guns from assets to infrastructure and print away)
may i also politely point out that printing cash for infrastructure projects - and solely quarantining the press for such (ie not the day to day running of said projects) is shown not to have an inflationary effect on quasi socialist economies? if so, why do we borrow for infrastructure? would it not be better to funnel the taxes used to fund these projects into the day to day running and just print for construction only? after all, the govt sets a budget and tenders the project based on meeting those costs, how the money comes about for that makes no difference at the receiving end of the equation.
(yes - i'm aware that the military would jump on board, reclassify warships/tanks/guns from assets to infrastructure and print away)
Dazz for PM...!
It is amazing that not one Labor or Green supporter has come out with an alternative other than to argue what they would NOT do.
If only Dazz had jagged a seat in the '13 election, maybe Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt would be speculating about his leadership ambitions instead of Turnbull.
Unsustainable until it was changed, and the Libs left Labor a nice war chest to spend, and they did and then some.
There was nothing to stop Labor putting the tax back onto super except themselves. They did not do it when they had the chance. The GFC was one of those "all bets are off" moments. All previous agreements become null and void and the government of the day should do what is required in the best interest of the country.
Labor went into spend mode using borrowed money for their fun. At no time did they really start to increase taxation to claw back the income side of the ledger.
Now the Libs are in and are unpopular because they are cutting spending and raising taxes. Wonders never cease.
What is past is past. We can argue until blue in the face but that can't change he past.
The future holds many difficult decisions.
Better to be discussing what can be done within the current economic realities, as these can make a difference.
The Libs are in now, what can they do?
I reckon taxing super again will be a winner for the budget, but a loser for votes.
What policy comes out in the end will be a cobbled together hotch-potch to appease minority parties to get it through the Senate at some point in the future.
Similar threads
