TheEnd said:
O.k so some are saying 400Billion is not even a lot of debt which I tend to disagree with.....What i'm trying to understand though is where and how did Labor get us into all that debt?
Okay, no offence but:
(a) $400 billion is
not a lot of money when you compare it against out $1.4 (annual) GDP and our very low tax-to-GDP ratio of (about) 22% of GDP which is roughly the 5th lowest in the developed world (i.e. the 32 countries that have things like running water, electricity and indoor toilets).
Anyone living in a major Australian city who "owns" their own house is more than likely in a
much worse budgetary situation than our federal government is in terms of debt-to-income ratios,
(b) Where the money went is a matter of public record and you can read the Treasury documents online if you really care that much about the subject,
(c) The short version is that the money was spent on two things:
(i) stuff that would prevent the country from slipping into a recession, and that
only includes things that prevented the country slipping into recession and
not things that would be of long term benefit to the nations such as roads, ports, broadband, railways, etc. The purpose of Recession Avoidance spending was to avoid a recession, nothing more, nothing less. The cost to the nation of a recession was more that we spent avoiding it. There are dozens of internationally respected economists and institutions who have endorsed our government's spending initiatives during the Global Financial Crisis as having a material effect on avoiding a recession or depression.
(ii) Continuance of middle class welfare because the Babay Boomer generation make up nearly half of the registered voters in this country and they're nearing retirement so no political party then or since is game enough to wind back the tax benefits that are handed out to people who's circumstances just happen to match up with those of the typical Baby Boomer.