The only result I can see after spending $4 billion on insulation is that all the businesses that were created as part of the exercise will fold afterwards, all of the people that were working putting in the insulation will be out of a job afterwards, and all that will be left are some well insulated homes.
I suppose it's his gesture towards coping with 'climate change', i.e. less need for air conditioning/heating if houses are insulated. I think the principle is reasonable but it does not deserve the amount of money spent on it he has suggested. It will also spawn many rip off merchants.
Nothing to pin any kind of future on, nothing to build on, nothing to utilise, no seeds of growth planted, its highly unlikely any innovations will have resulted from it, nobody reskilled or educated as a result of it.
I'd hoped that the funds destined for Education might have been some attempt to employ more teachers, or improve teacher education so that we produce teachers who are actually properly equipped to teach. But no, it's to go to creating splendid new assembly halls, music auditoriums etc. These are great if there's plenty of spare money but hardly seem a priority for borrowed money.
Geez build the railways up in the Northern territory to exploit the minerals out of there.
Or expand the ports so that when the mining resumes at full levels there are not the bottlenecks causing ships to wait at sea for days before loading/unloading.
Or build a gas pipeline up to Asia. Solve water and erosion problems. Spend on a complete overhaul and consolidation of health administration in Australia and related health services which are back in the 19th century in a lot of instances - this will encourage all sorts of innovation - health is an area crying out for innovative ideas and any significant spending will result in all sorts of side benefits and will likely create lasting, internationally competitive businesses. It will also help out all of the ageing Australians that will need those health services.
Yes. Even put funds into new nursing homes for the ageing population, at the same time introducing a level of user pays for upper levels of care.
But no lets put the money into pokies, alcohol and insulation bats - in quantities unheard of.
What a disgraceful waste of years of Australian productivity and savings - current and future. Banana republic here we come.
Someone wake me up ... or is it April 1st? ... or did the Chaser team somehow manage to take over the Australian media for a day?
It's certainly feeling like some sort of bad dream.
But are all of us wrong? Most of the country's economists seem to be in favour of it.
I agree this is all aimed at confidence. The Govt simply havent got the money to bail us out of this, problem is their lame attempts will burden future generations with enormous debt, Rudd doesn't give a root , this is his moment in the sun.
I think he's actually revelling in all the drama.
Reckless borrowing and spending is what caused this problem. And what do we do? Spend more money we don't have.
Deficit spending is extremely short sighted. It assumes that someone will lend us huge amounts of money and that we can pay the interest on it. You would think that the current rise in US treasury yields market may be of some warning to Rudd?
We need to do the opposite, that is, encourage savings and cut back public sector spending. There is no other way to weather this out.
That's my natural inclination also. But wasn't this what happened in the Great Depression and as a result all the umm experts have resolved to do the opposite now?
Quite apart from whether massive spending does work for more than five minutes, the whole concept imo encourages the population to continue in the belief that it's just fine to go on spending more than you earn, and that there is no day of reckoning.
No. Infrastructure spending is only good if there is a demand for it and right now there is little. Every dollar the government spends is one less dollar for more essential social services later. We taxpayers will end up paying it all back plus interest.
Building bridges to nowhere will only make the recovery take longer.
Perhaps there is sense in building infrastructure now which will be needed when the recovery occurs. I don't see that assembly halls in schools fit into this category.
I dont think he was saying that. More that we might need to do something else in 6 months time and if we spend all the money now - where do we go next? Borrow another trillion $???
And how do we pay it back?
Personally, I earn and pay tax and would like to understand a few of the details. Given that I am working and paying tax, I dont have time. So I am glad Turnbull is sticking his knackers on the line to do it for me.
I couldn't agree more. The urgency with which Rudd & Co expect the Senate to pass this legislation is quite obscene. I also would like a detailed account of just how all this proposed spending is going to create exactly how many jobs and details of how long these jobs will last, e.g. the fly by night batt installers.
The whole thing smacks of panic by a government who is high on fear and low on expertise as to how to fix the problem. They seem to be taking the view that if you slap around enough money something positive might come out of it.
Malcolm Turnbull has significantly risen in my estimation with his preparedness to take such an unpopular stand. He may find he has more support than he may have anticipated.
Did anyone see the Lateline interview with Peter Costello last night?
Back to his old fiery self. I can't help wishing he was still Treasurer right now.