Public Debt by Country

[Lovey80]

mmm....shiney!

Your sentiments are exactly the same as mine. Government in any form you look at is the most inefficient use of tax payer dollars. Only the private sector can hope to get best bang for buck. When a recession hits, every government known to man thinks they have the solution, or politically they must be seen to have the solution and must be doing "something". This is the big fallacy. Cutting taxes at a time of recession is a FAR better alternative. Put the peoples money back in the peoples pockets and let them decide where the money goes. People are not stupid (most people) and can decide for themselves where the money is best spent and the private sector can adapt to this very quickly and free market economics will prevail to have us coming out the other side much faster without a need to claw all of those WASTED dollars back from the tax payer to pay for all of their little special interest groups that got tax dollars from the gov't to build stuff all.

Gillard is trying to get the budget back in surplus because she knows that Labor put us in the hole bigger than any time in history in record time. From a 20 or so Billion Surplus to 220+billion in debt in the blink of an eye and nearly NOTHING of long term worth to show for it. Labor are seen (they are) to be bad with money and people want a gov't to be fiscally responsible. She knows that Labor are seen for what they are (fiscal morons) and claiming to deliver a surplus (all the while the assistant treasurer is sneaking in the back door to parliament to raise the debt ceiling) is what she thinks will giver her credibility on fiscal matters. She will fail woefully of course and the coalition will be back in at the next election. Just a pitty they have a moron for a leader also.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

But what I'm trying to say is that the efficiency is not what matters in a recession. It is the stimulation of the velocity of money.

For every dollar that the incompetent bludgers gain via salary, they will spend some proportion of that money in consumption (such as buying food or drinks from privately run pubs, fast food chains, family restaurants etc) whereas the alternative is that nobody hires the bludger and he/she doesn't have any money to spend to fuel these private enterprises which in turn reduces the income from private enterprises.

It's all one big cycle and very much interlinked, there is a bigger picture than simply watching the government spend money and failing.

The project might fail but they might succeed at distributing money into the economy and pushing for better consumer sentiment.

thanks fishball, got a giggle from the "incompetent bludgers" phrase :lol:

Well Rudd did a similar thing except he didn't employ anyone - he gave everyone in Australia a cheque (if you were lucky). And do you know what most people did with it? Spent it on bills or banked it. Probably the same thing the majority of parents who get the "baby bonus" are doing - paying electricity, water, rates or banking it.

 

[fishball]

Nice post, I agree with you pretty much completely lovey.

I guess my pessimism stems from the fact that once government obtain power or taxes they will never voluntarily reduce it themselves and the next best thing which comes to my mind is government spending that money to stimulate the private sector via salaries of dud employees.

Reducing taxes would do so much more and the moron Keynesian economists believe that cutting taxes is not as efficient. They argue that the cut in taxes is not a direct GDP increase because some people may save up their money as opposed to pushing it into the economy. And people wonder why I love talking about economics on here yet hated stuyding economics at uni and high school..

Anyway, we all agree our government is sh*t when it comes to using money which is the most important thing

 

[Lovey80]

No mate I'm not misreading you, I understand what you are saying I just don't agree with it. Basically I see any expansion by government in it's spending programs must be accompanied by a bureaucracy to administer it, therefore reducing the value of every dollar spent.

I guess that's true with the bureacracy and what not.

But what I'm trying to say is that the efficiency is not what matters in a recession. It is the stimulation of the velocity of money.

For every dollar that the incompetent bludgers gain via salary, they will spend some proportion of that money in consumption (such as buying food or drinks from privately run pubs, fast food chains, family restaurants etc) whereas the alternative is that nobody hires the bludger and he/she doesn't have any money to spend to fuel these private enterprises which in turn reduces the income from private enterprises.

It's all one big cycle and very much interlinked, there is a bigger picture than simply watching the government spend money and failing.

The project might fail but they might succeed at distributing money into the economy and pushing for better consumer sentiment.

This is the fallacy that needs to be stamped out of mainstream though for ever! The velocity of money argument has been used for a long time and it has FAILED every time. Take the biggest example of this and it is happening right now. The USA are "stimulating" the velocity of money into the economy at unprecedented rates, yet the US economy is tanking hard. All it is doing is kicking the can down the road until the correction actually has a chance to correct the malinvestments, and poor use of previously cheap credit. Once this finally happens the US can start to rebuild on a better footing. It is loose government money that gets you into this situation in the first place. Adding more loose money just makes the problem bigger and bigger and the eventual fall that much harder.

 

[thatguy]

...Cutting taxes at a time of recession is a FAR better alternative. Put the peoples money back in the peoples pockets and let them decide where the money goes. People are not stupid (most people) and can decide for themselves where the money is best spent ...

Sorry your faith in people is MUCH more then mine, something along the lines of an iPhone4 and LCD TV is what that would result in. This government is almost completely hopeless but is almost 100% better then the average Sheeple

 

[fishball]

This is the fallacy that needs to be stamped out of mainstream though for ever! The velocity of money argument has been used for a long time and it has FAILED every time. Take the biggest example of this and it is happening right now. The USA are "stimulating" the velocity of money into the economy at unprecedented rates, yet the US economy is tanking hard. All it is doing is kicking the can down the road until the correction actually has a chance to correct the malinvestments, and poor use of previously cheap credit. Once this finally happens the US can start to rebuild on a better footing. It is loose government money that gets you into this situation in the first place. Adding more loose money just makes the problem bigger and bigger and the eventual fall that much harder.

The US is failing because they're printing more money without backing to 'stimulate' the velocity. The way I'm talking about is for the government to spend their OWN money (not print more). They are different.

The velocity of money is a proven concept and is nothing new, it has existed long before the US was even established and dates way back to historical times.

In order for an economy to recover there has to be spending and if no one else is willing to spend the government has to spend as a last resort.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

...Cutting taxes at a time of recession is a FAR better alternative. Put the peoples money back in the peoples pockets and let them decide where the money goes. People are not stupid (most people) and can decide for themselves where the money is best spent ...

Sorry your faith in people is MUCH more then mine, something along the lines of an iPhone4 and LCD TV is what that would result in. This government is almost completely hopeless but is almost 100% better then the average Sheeple

I don't care what the "sheeple" spend their money on - at least it's getting into circulation. When govts spend money - only their mates benefit.

 

[fishball]

Haha government spending or...rorting? Wait, same thing different words.

 

[PerthStack]

I'm against big government myself and yes there has been a lot of failures by the government to spend money efficiently.

However there is a place and time for government spending during recession, especially when unemployment starts to hit 10%. When people stop spending, when companies freeze hiring, it makes sense for the government to employ some people to keep their skills up to date (prevent decay of labor skills), motivate consumer spending among many others.

So make government bigger? Then taxes increase because payroll and administration costs increase.

No, they should cut taxes, decrease the size of government departments - encouraging private enterprises to expand and employ, putting more money in the pocket of consumers.

So you want us to go the way the US is? They have steadily reduced taxes over the last 30 years and now they are broke and their infrastructure is crumbling and as they have 10% unemployment, it seems allowing corporations to keep more cash doesn't translate to more jobs or prosperity, it just creates richer CEOs and shareholders and poorer workers.
I like not having to consider bankruptcy if ever I get sick. I like driving on roads that are well maintained. I like having the resources available after natural disasters, unlike the poor bastards in New Oleans who just got left hanging in the wind.
The Government built our telecommunications infrastructure, our road and rail systems, our coal industry and power grids using tax dollars and it seems to have worked out well.

 

[fishball]

So you want us to go the way the US is? They have steadily reduced taxes over the last 30 years and now they are broke and their infrastructure is crumbling and as they have 10% unemployment, it seems allowing corporations to keep more cash doesn't translate to more jobs or prosperity, it just creates richer CEOs and shareholders and poorer workers.
I like not having to consider bankruptcy if ever I get sick. I like driving on roads that are well maintained. I like having the resources available after natural disasters, unlike the poor bastards in New Oleans who just got left hanging in the wind.
The Government built our telecommunications infrastructure, our road and rail systems, our coal industry and power grids using tax dollars and it seems to have worked out well.

Good points PerthStack. There definitely is a use for government but in my experience all your points are good in theory but not in reality.

I like not having to consider bankruptcy if ever I get sick.
Have to pay heaps of private insurance or get slapped with massive medical bills, not as bad as the US but not something I'm willing to pay 49% tax for.

I like driving on roads that are well maintained
Anzac Parade in Sydney along the Kensington area is a massive joke. There are more potholes there than rural roads in China lol...

The Government built our telecommunications infrastructure
Oh so that's why I have to pay $33 line fee to Telstra and have spotty reception along the North Shore in Sydney and have almost no rural reception! Wonderful stuff... ! Going into a tunnel? No reception! Raining? No reception!

our road and rail systems
Yeah our railways are world class top level. Hmm wait...what's that Japan, China, Hong Kong, Korea are all in front of us!? No way!

our coal industry and power grids using tax dollars
Oh that's why my energy bills are so bloody cheap! Wait...

Just saying...lol

 

[Lovey80]

...Cutting taxes at a time of recession is a FAR better alternative. Put the peoples money back in the peoples pockets and let them decide where the money goes. People are not stupid (most people) and can decide for themselves where the money is best spent ...

Sorry your faith in people is MUCH more then mine, something along the lines of an iPhone4 and LCD TV is what that would result in. This government is almost completely hopeless but is almost 100% better then the average Sheeple

I don't care what the "sheeple" spend their money on - at least it's getting into circulation. When govts spend money - only their mates benefit.

Bang on mmm....shiney! We need to remember that it is the people money in the first place, is just taking a little less for a short period really such a bad idea? I am not talking about cutting the big corporate taxes just the individual taxes.

I am starting to think the Liberal Democrats 30/30 idea has a lot to offer.

Cheers

Chris

 

[Shaddam IV]

I would like to see two levels of government instead of 3 in Australia. And I don't really care which has to go, they are all a bunch of self interested inefficient power hungry oxygen thieves.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

the states need to go

 

[Mr Medved]

That graph is crap. The US and UK are much much higher than that. Australia's risk is not the public debt it is the private debt that will most likely get taken on by the tax payer when the next crisis hits. You can bet your last ounce the level of mortgages in Australia that are on "freezes" or similar right now to disguise the defaults is skyrocketing, they don't want these true figures publicised while house prices begin the correction. They can't hold on much longer though.

+1

Last I checked private debt/GDP was 165%. If that goes on the government balance sheet we are FUBAR. Every indication is that is what will happen based on Swan's track record as Treasurer.

For the record - we only have two levels of government in Australia; the Commonwealth and the States. Local councils ARE NOT government. They are not recognised in the constitution, have been rejected three times in referendums, and two-thirds of Australians did not support the establishment and continuance of local government (1988 referendum).

BTW the third level of government is over in the old dart.

 

[mmm....shiney!]

Sorry your faith in people is MUCH more then mine, something along the lines of an iPhone4 and LCD TV is what that would result in. This government is almost completely hopeless but is almost 100% better then the average Sheeple

I don't care what the "sheeple" spend their money on - at least it's getting into circulation. When govts spend money - only their mates benefit.

Bang on mmm....shiney! We need to remember that it is the people money in the first place, is just taking a little less for a short period really such a bad idea? I am not talking about cutting the big corporate taxes just the individual taxes.

I am starting to think the Liberal Democrats 30/30 idea has a lot to offer.

Cheers

Chris

I'll bang on as much as I'm allowed lovey. Get rid of income tax ( or at least reduce it to say 10%), get rid of CGT, get rid of payroll tax, increase GST!!!!!. For those income tax lovin socialists, just do a quick search on why income tax was introduced in the first place. To fund the war effort. Not very socialist is it? Payroll tax? To help fund a pension benefit. Now we've got compulsory super we don't need a payroll tax. What else will I bang on about? Oh stuff it, I'm goin to bed.

 

[fishball]

I'd agree with having a fixed income tax of say 20% or so. Get rid of CGT, get rid of payroll tax, get rid of GST.

GST does nothing but push the gap between poor and rich further and further. Payroll tax is useless. CGT is dumb, it penalizes savers and rewards people who take excessive risks. Fixed income tax helps reduce the gap between the middle class and the rich, how many really really rich people actually pay 48% tax? Not many. It's the middle class without the fancy accounting who have to foot this tax.

Oh well, never gonna get taxes reduced since our gov is greedy and unrelenting (at stealing).

 

[Dynoman]

Now I wanna see a graph showing a list of the worlds biggest creditors. Let's see....China....Saudi Arabia....Germany.....Switzerland ??

 

[Blockhead]

MAJOR FOREIGN HOLDERS OF TREASURY SECURITIES
(in billions of dollars)
HOLDINGS 1/ AT END OF PERIOD


New 5/ Old 5/
Series Series
Mar Feb Jan Dec Nov Oct Sep Aug Jul Jun Jun May Apr Mar
Country 2011 2011 2011 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010
------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------

China, Mainland 1144.9 1154.1 1154.7 1160.1 1164.1 1175.3 1151.9 1136.8 1115.1 1112.1 843.7 867.7 900.2 895.2
Japan 907.9 890.3 885.9 882.3 875.9 873.6 860.8 832.5 817.3 799.9 801.2 784.8 793.8 783.3
United Kingdom 2/ 325.2 295.5 277.9 271.6 242.5 209.0 190.5 181.0 107.2 94.5 363.6 350.7 321.1 279.0
Oil Exporters 3/ 222.3 218.8 215.5 211.9 204.3 207.8 215.4 211.7 209.3 210.2 216.3 228.6 232.9 223.4
Brazil 193.5 194.3 197.6 186.1 189.8 183.0 181.0 170.5 167.7 163.8 158.5 161.5 164.4 164.5
Taiwan 156.1 155.9 157.2 155.1 154.4 154.5 153.3 153.4 153.8 151.9 128.6 126.2 126.9 124.8
Carib Bnkng Ctrs 4/ 154.8 169.4 166.5 168.1 158.8 146.3 157.7 172.6 164.1 178.9 165.9 166.3 153.2 148.2
Russia 127.8 130.5 139.3 151.0 167.3 176.3 173.3 173.7 175.7 168.2 123.4 126.8 113.1 120.1
Hong Kong 122.1 124.6 128.1 134.2 134.9 135.2 131.9 133.9 131.2 137.0 141.0 145.7 151.8 150.9
Switzerland 111.6 110.4 107.6 107.0 107.0 107.7 110.0 113.0 111.8 106.5 100.1 84.4 80.0 78.8
Canada 93.3 92.9 86.5 76.7 76.7 66.1 56.5 44.9 43.0 35.9 93.7 84.8 81.9 77.1
Luxembourg 81.1 81.0 83.0 86.4 81.9 78.5 86.1 79.0 98.9 97.6 96.6 75.6 76.9 83.9
Germany 59.8 58.3 61.1 60.5 58.6 58.2 57.9 56.8 55.3 52.2 54.0 55.8 54.8 53.7
Thailand 57.1 57.6 56.5 52.0 52.2 52.7 50.4 47.3 40.8 35.7 49.3 46.3 46.9 43.5
Singapore 55.7 66.7 57.8 72.9 62.2 66.4 56.7 55.4 55.3 53.3 50.5 40.6 42.4 45.5
Ireland 44.0 42.0 44.4 45.8 50.0 48.9 51.5 49.5 51.1 55.7 48.3 48.0 45.7 43.3
India 39.8 40.3 40.6 40.5 39.7 40.1 40.0 37.9 38.4 35.4 36.4 29.3 31.0 32.0
Turkey 36.2 34.3 32.9 28.9 29.1 27.8 27.8 29.7 26.7 25.7 25.5 27.6 27.9 28.7
Korea, South 32.5 31.2 31.9 36.2 39.8 39.4 38.7 39.9 37.6 37.0 38.7 37.8 38.7 40.1
Belgium 32.2 32.0 32.1 33.2 33.4 33.4 33.8 51.9 34.3 34.8 17.2 17.6 18.5 17.1
Poland 28.4 27.3 26.3 25.5 27.2 28.8 28.4 26.6 24.8 25.7 23.2 23.4 24.6 23.4
Mexico 28.1 34.6 34.4 33.5 32.6 34.8 36.8 36.1 33.5 33.1 33.2 34.2 33.1 36.1
Netherlands 25.1 24.9 25.4 22.7 22.1 22.0 23.1 25.1 24.2 24.7 17.3 17.6 19.6 19.2
Italy 24.2 24.3 24.6 23.7 23.6 23.7 24.1 23.6 23.2 22.7 20.1 20.8 20.3 20.5
Philippines 23.4 22.7 22.8 20.1 19.2 18.5 18.5 19.3 20.3 20.0 14.3 14.4 15.0 14.6
Norway 21.4 20.8 19.4 19.6 19.0 18.0 18.1 17.5 16.3 15.4 16.1 15.2 15.0 14.6
Sweden 21.3 17.7 17.0 16.8 15.2 16.1 15.4 16.8 17.7 17.6 16.5 13.4 15.3 16.3
Colombia 20.2 20.1 19.8 20.2 20.3 16.7 16.3 16.5 16.4 16.4 17.0 15.7 15.7 16.2
Israel 18.9 19.8 19.9 20.6 20.5 17.9 17.6 16.3 17.9 18.3 18.4 20.1 19.9 22.0
France 17.7 30.2 30.2 15.0 20.1 23.5 23.3 26.1 19.8 24.2 36.0 37.9 40.6 39.8
Chile 16.7 16.0 15.0 13.9 13.4 13.4 13.0 13.0 13.1 12.0 12.2 12.0 12.0 11.9
Egypt 15.3 14.9 20.7 26.0 29.8 30.5 30.6 29.2 25.9 25.0 29.4 28.0 21.1 21.4
Malaysia 11.2 11.3 11.3 11.5 11.7 11.6 11.5 11.7 11.7 11.1 11.1 10.5 10.9 11.0
Australia 10.3 12.6 14.7 14.9 14.9 15.7 18.0 15.5 19.2 18.4 14.5 14.1 17.9 14.4
All Other 199.1 196.9 194.4 193.0 200.5 201.5 204.2 206.7 206.8 199.1 171.1 174.6 168.1 163.4
Grand Total 4479.2 4474.3 4453.0 4437.9 4412.5 4372.9 4324.1 4271.8 4125.3 4069.9 4002.8 3958.1 3951.1 3877.8

Of which:
For. Official 3175.7 3186.3 3176.9 3188.4 3211.6 3227.2 3192.1 3144.1 3099.2 3071.4 2690.3 2690.8 2715.1 2703.3
Treasury Bills 414.9 432.4 438.9 462.3 499.2 531.3 495.4 486.9 473.5 454.4 454.4 466.9 498.5 501.3
T-Bonds & Notes 2760.8 2753.9 2738.0 2726.1 2712.5 2695.9 2696.7 2657.2 2625.8 2617.0 2235.9 2223.8 2216.6 2202.0

Department of the Treasury/Federal Reserve Board
May 16, 2011

1/ Estimated foreign holdings of U.S. Treasury marketable and non-marketable bills, bonds, and notes
reported under the Treasury International Capital (TIC) reporting system are based on annual
Surveys of Foreign Holdings of U.S. Securities and on monthly data.
2/ United Kingdom includes Channel Islands and Isle of Man.
3/ Oil exporters include Ecuador, Venezuela, Indonesia, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar,
Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria.
4/ Caribbean Banking Centers include Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles and Panama.
Beginning with new series for June 2006, also includes British Virgin Islands.
5/ New series reflect new benchmark survey taken in this month. Estimated positions based on the
previous survey are shown for comparison.

 

[Elemental]

I'd agree with having a fixed income tax of say 20% or so. Get rid of CGT, get rid of payroll tax, get rid of GST.

GST does nothing but push the gap between poor and rich further and further. Payroll tax is useless. CGT is dumb, it penalizes savers and rewards people who take excessive risks. Fixed income tax helps reduce the gap between the middle class and the rich, how many really really rich people actually pay 48% tax? Not many. It's the middle class without the fancy accounting who have to foot this tax.

Oh well, never gonna get taxes reduced since our gov is greedy and unrelenting (at stealing).

Income tax should not exceed the company tax rate. Otherwise, where's the incentive to work? CGT was one of the worst taxes ever created but I don't agree with the line that 'the rich' don't pay a lot of tax. As an accountant I know that is just wrong. In general, rich people don't actually earn money themselves. Companies they control earn and pay company tax @ 30%. There's no accounting in the world that can change the fact that if an Australian company makes a profit, it pays tax @ 30%. if an individual earns it, they might pay more than 30% which is where the misconception might come in. But again, if the rich individual earns cash they will pay the tax - there's not much we can do about it.

 

[Lovey80]

mmm....shiney! Lol mate! When I said bang on, I meant bang on target, hit the nail on the head lol.

I agree that personal income tax should not exceed company tax. 30% tax is plenty to pay the gov't. It also gives incentive to improve yourself and work harder-therefore becoming a more productive member of society. When the sky is the limit, with no down side of gov't taking more an more and more(for doing absolutely nothing) as YOU do better and better and better there is a win for all.

I only even knew about the Liberal Democrats from a link somebody posted on here last week or so. Buy do a search and have a read about their 30/30 tax policy. Has a whole bunch of benefits with only downside to able bodied bludgers that don't want to work.