Where did Labor spend all the money exactly?

Court Jester said:
petey said:
Can't wait for the "Where did Liberal spend all the money exactly?" thread that I predict will appear ~ August 2017.


lol I am waiting for the -- I cant believe the liberals are increasing this tax or cutting this spending or firing our nurses threads--- it will be much sooner than 2017
We had those when the Newman Govt got elected (many by the same people bleating about the mismanagement, wasteful spending and debt bingeing of the Bligh Govt). Can't please the people who have no consistent rational basis for their position on political issues and simply flap and winge about the weather today. Why anyone thinks compulsory voting from these people is rational is beyond me.

A rational, thought-out consistent ideology is actually not that hard to find - maintaining that consistency in the face of the the implications is too hard for most people however.
 
errol43 said:
JulieW..What happens when the 6 months are up...I know increase the Child Minding fees to 100%... Its only fair...You bring the child into the world, it's only fair that the government looks after it till it can earn a living.

It will be only $52billion...

When is this welfare madness going to stop?

Regards Errol 43

I suspect it will only be 52 Bill until all those professional managers in the public service who put off kids until their eggs were fighting to get out, decide that half of their $120k salaries (plus super!) are a nice incentive. Compared to that the nieces who become temporarily employed at uncle's business long enough for the grant to kick in are a drop in the ocean.

Middle class welfare, especially to buy votes, really annoys me!
 
JulieW said:
errol43 said:
JulieW..What happens when the 6 months are up...I know increase the Child Minding fees to 100%... Its only fair...You bring the child into the world, it's only fair that the government looks after it till it can earn a living.

It will be only $52billion...

When is this welfare madness going to stop?

Regards Errol 43

I suspect it will only be 52 Bill until all those professional managers in the public service who put off kids until their eggs were fighting to get out, decide that half of their $120k salaries (plus super!) are a nice incentive. Compared to that the nieces who become temporarily employed at uncle's business long enough for the grant to kick in are a drop in the ocean.

Middle class welfare, especially to buy votes, really annoys me!
 
bordsilver said:
Big A.D. said:
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.
Pretty much all of these guys opinions were a priori. The ANU study commissioned by the Australian Government that estimated the impact of fiscal stimulus on household expenditure showed that "the direct payments made to households by the Australian government in early 2009 - the Tax Bonus for Working Australians - had no discernible effect on consumption, at least of non-durables. Additionally, the impact of the announcement that payments were to be made had only a small and transient impact." I wonder why the Treasury declined to provide a link to the specifically commissioned paper on their website alongside the propaganda.

Anyway, as reported by Steve Kates and others, we did have a recession. Besides the issue that Government expenditure is spuriously recorded in the GDP statistics as a contribution to growth irrespective of what it has been spent on, the "avoidance" of a recession is because, by convention, it requires two consecutive quarters of falling GDP to be officially counted. But look at the facts and decide whether it is the conventional definition that is the problem. In every way but the official way, Australia experienced a recession. But whatever you wish to call it, a downturn of some sort we most definitely did have. The unemployment rate rose from 4.3 per cent in March 2008 to 6.1 per cent in March 2009 - a 40% increase.

More importantly, one of the best measures of real incomes (far better than real GDP) is real net national disposable income per capita (as reported by the ABS). On any basis (trend, seasonally adjusted or original), people's real incomes FELL between March 2008 to March 2010. So over half of all Australians experienced two years of stagnating or falling real incomes and yet we "avoided a recession". In contrast real incomes per capita grew consistently in the preceding ten years with an average annual growth of 2.7 per cent. Yippee for the Kruddy-Swanster geniuses keeping us "out of recession" by giving out provenly useless fiscal stimulus and building overpriced school tuckshops, COLA's and halls that won't make a jot of difference to the future productivity of the nation but kept the members of the building unions employed and super-high expense. And now we have well over $30,000 of debt per worker forced onto the credit card. Luckily they have a bunch of hamster slaves who can work for free for half a year to pay for this. I love working for free in the interests of helping Swanny's mates keep their McMansions.

Fantastic post. I recently attended a union meeting where the union rep tried going political and defended the Labor party's debt and compared it to a household income. Problem was he was doing the figures as if income and gdp were the same thing
 
The raw numbers. Bit tricky to see but every quarter in 2009-10 was below the same quarter in 2007-08 and the same has happened in the last 3 quarters (i.e. on average we have all been getting poorer over the past 9 months). Given this is the average, over half of the Australian population are likely to have been feeling this pain.

In contrast, no quarter was below the previous year's quarter for the entire period between 1996-2008.

6824_rgndi-march2013.png


Edit: A few typos on the graph, but should be self-explanatory.
 
Old Codger said:
"Where did Labor spend all the money exactly?"



Handouts to gullible socialist ZOMBIES!
And committees.
And big troughs for the Greens to feed out of.
And on funding NGOs whose role is to lobby the Govt for increasing Govt and Govt funding (particularly to NGOs).
 
Some one? sent me a list of overseas gifts/aid? given out in the last 6 yrs and I didn't save it duuur. It was a LOT!!, anyone got any ideas?
 
bordsilver said:
The raw numbers. Bit tricky to see but every quarter in 2009-10 was below the same quarter in 2007-08 and the same has happened in the last 3 quarters (i.e. on average we have all been getting poorer over the past 9 months). Given this is the average, over half of the Australian population are likely to have been feeling this pain.

In contrast, no quarter was below the previous year's quarter for the entire period between 1996-2008.

http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/6824_rgndi-march2013.png

Edit: A few typos on the graph, but should be self-explanatory.

That looks like a return to prosperity
(or the wheels coming off)
 
bordsilver said:
The raw numbers. Bit tricky to see but every quarter in 2009-10 was below the same quarter in 2007-08 and the same has happened in the last 3 quarters (i.e. on average we have all been getting poorer over the past 9 months). Given this is the average, over half of the Australian population are likely to have been feeling this pain.

In contrast, no quarter was below the previous year's quarter for the entire period between 1996-2008.

http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/6824_rgndi-march2013.png

Edit: A few typos on the graph, but should be self-explanatory.

Wow thats crazy isn't it... Its almost like we had a global financial crisis start in 2008... Nah just kidding its all labors fault!
 
JulieW said:
That looks like a return to prosperity
(or the wheels coming off)
A significant portion of the jump up in the Dec-2010 and 2011 quarters was due to the ~15% increase in the exchange rate. But rather than returning back to the healthy heart beat pattern it faltered and flatlined.

Ordinarily the March quarter is the lowest in each annual cycle. Given the 10-15% fall in the exchange rate since Mar-2013 it'll be interesting to see whether the June and September quarters are actually stronger than the March quarter. I'd almost be betting that they will be lower.

In context, after our backwards year of 2010 where average real incomes declined (the recession we supposedly never had), it is true to say that we have recently been enjoying the highest average real incomes ever in Australia's history, but that is what we are supposed to expect based on the continuous improvement in our standard of living. The upward trend is normal and the chaotic flatlining etc in recent years is clearly abnormal.
 
More lies from socialist supporters:
:D

Mb_wide_alp-420x0.jpg


The Gillard government oversaw the smallest increase in cost of living of any Australian government for at least 25 years despite the introduction of the carbon tax, a new study has found.

Moreover, Australian households have seen real incomes - disposable income minus cost of living increases - rise 15 per cent since just after Labor took office, giving the average household a $5324 a year boost, or $102 a week.

The results of the survey by the University of Canberra's national centre for social and economic modelling go much of the way to answering the question Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has asked repeatedly throughout the election campaign: ''Are we better off than we were six years ago?''
Advertisement

The answer, at least in terms of family incomes, is an emphatic ''yes'' according to the centre's research. Since Labor took power, the ''standard of living'' - the centre's term for rises in disposable income subtracted by cost of living increases - has risen 2.6 per cent a year, the exact same average annual increase as during the 11 years of the Howard government.

During the first Rudd term, the cost of living rose 3.3 per cent each year but disposable incomes were up almost 6 per cent over the same period. During Ms Gillard's term, from 2010 to June 2013 (when the latest data was available), the cost of living rose 1.6 per cent while disposable income rose 4.2 per cent.

Treasurer Chris Bowen said: "Labor's world-recognised management of the economy through the GFC has flowed through to households.''

The Coalition has made easing cost of living pressures a central theme of the election campaign, with Mr Abbott, his senior colleagues and Coalition candidates regularly mentioning their determination to remove the carbon tax as a boon for families. The tax's axing will raise annual family incomes by as much as $500, the Coalition says.

Over the past year, there was a strong jump in electricity and gas prices as utilities rose almost 14 per cent, in part because of the carbon tax. There were also strong increases in housing (up 5.7 per cent) due to rising council rates, health (up 6 per cent) and education (up 5.5 per cent).

But these items account for less than 15 per cent of household expenditure.

The rises were offset by a sharp drop in mortgage repayments due to lower interest rates and a fall in audiovisual equipment. Other expenses - household goods and services, personal care, transport, clothing and food - all rose less than 1 per cent.

Lower income earners and renters were hardest hit by cost of living increases, although all cohorts of people enjoyed rising standards of living.

A spokesman for shadow treasurer Joe Hockey maintained that Australian families were under cost of living pressures. ''Under this government, families are still feeling the pain and Labor's solution is to impose new and increased taxes,'' he said.

''On average, electricity prices have increased over 90 per cent since Labor came to power, in part due to Labor's carbon tax. Labor runs around telling lies about the Coalition but won't admit that the policies of Labor - like the carbon tax - have driven up the cost of living for Australian families.''



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...-says-study-20130830-2sw8l.html#ixzz2dVm4lKil
 
:lol: Lies with statistics. Besides making up their own numbers separate to the ABS and overlaying them with ABS, their definition of real household disposable income is clearly different.

6% annual increase under Rudd and 4.2% under Gillard??? Even ignoring population changes, over Rudd's entire period between Dec-2007 and Jun-2010 there was only an 8.03% increase. On a per capita basis it was only 2.99%. Over the entire period Dec-2007 to Mar-2013 there was a TOTAL increase of only 6.63% per capita (i.e. only 1% per year). Their numbers do not match up.

In contrast the Howard era had an average annual increase of 2.8% per capita over the 11.5 years (or 4.15 per cent a year in total). Again, this is nothing like the supposed 5.4% in their graph.

The numbers are all in ABS Catalogue Number 5206.0 - Australian National Accounts: National Income, Expenditure and Product.
 
Yes I'm really glad that conservatives never lie with statistics or we'd never be able to believe either side of politics.
 
JulieW said:
Yes I'm really glad that conservatives never lie with statistics or we'd never be able to believe either side of politics.
Everybody tries to tell stories with statistics. Some stories are even true and some statistics are even reliable.
 
MyNamesNotBen said:
bordsilver said:
The raw numbers. Bit tricky to see but every quarter in 2009-10 was below the same quarter in 2007-08 and the same has happened in the last 3 quarters (i.e. on average we have all been getting poorer over the past 9 months). Given this is the average, over half of the Australian population are likely to have been feeling this pain.

In contrast, no quarter was below the previous year's quarter for the entire period between 1996-2008.

http://forums.silverstackers.com/uploads/6824_rgndi-march2013.png

Edit: A few typos on the graph, but should be self-explanatory.

Wow thats crazy isn't it... Its almost like we had a global financial crisis start in 2008... Nah just kidding its all labors fault!
You might even say there was actually a recession where, contrary to political rhetoric, people (and the economy) went significantly backwards for a period - which is all this side discussion has been about.

The same sort of decline in real incomes happened in 1989-1991 as well which was actually called a recession.
 
bordsilver said:
JulieW said:
Yes I'm really glad that conservatives never lie with statistics or we'd never be able to believe either side of politics.
Everybody tries to tell stories with statistics. Some stories are even true and some statistics are even reliable.

But not those from the Australian National University it seems.
 
JulieW said:
bordsilver said:
JulieW said:
Yes I'm really glad that conservatives never lie with statistics or we'd never be able to believe either side of politics.
Everybody tries to tell stories with statistics. Some stories are even true and some statistics are even reliable.

But not those from the Australian National University it seems.
Are we grumpy today?
 
'Under Labor electricity has increased 90%'......Ouch that ones really hurts! I think this is the 'main' reason things are so bad at the moment.....No one can afford the power bills, especially businesses......and they have to pass on the extra costs to the consumers to cover the costs of the power bills?

Its like when petrol hits 1.60 or more every now and then......EVERYTHING goes up accordingly!
 
Back
Top