The Abbott Government

[SirRumpole]

The intention was to stop the system being abused, and hence reduce costs, by people who make a doctors visit for every minor complaint because it is free to do so. The co-payment was a disincentive for that. Increasing the Medicare levy doesn't provide such a deterrent.

Is there any modelling to show this will actually occur?

has any modelling been done on the cost involved should someone not see the doctor and then go from preventative or early treatment to ending up in hospital or requiring longer and more expensive treatment?

Personally, the idea of sitting around in a doctor's office for an hour getting the flu from people who just want a certificate for work is enough disincentive for me not to go to a doctor for a "minor complaint" (and in whose opinion is a complaint minor ?).

It may be more effective to do some random audits on doctors whose claims on Medicare appear excessive in relation to others in the same area.

Random audits like the tax department does could be effective in reducing fraud and over servicing. The propensity for doctors to order batteries of tests at the drop of a hat is imo more causitive of high Medicare costs than a minority of people wasting their time at the doctor's office because it's "free".

 

[Logique]

Liking Julie Bishop.

Who is Credlin anyway, to be dictating to elected MPs like so many children.

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
A government disunited will fall - and every single one on board will lose

..Bishop is kicking back hard against Credlin, an event that has spilled into the public arena and could have *unpredictable consequences. It seems Bishop is ready to bring to a head the tensions over Abbott’s office...

..Ms Bishop is believed to have made the decision, however, that she will no longer be taking orders from Ms Credlin, an attitude that is receiving support from other members of cabinet, who also feel Ms Credlin is too controlling..

 

[Calliope]

Liking Julie Bishop.

Who is Credlin anyway, to be dictating to elected MPs like so many children.

Abbott is so busy playing Mr Nice Guy, someone has to do the hard yards. I admire Credlin. I am starting to dislike Bishop.

 

[Logique]

I wonder whose idea it was to reduce by $5 the Medicare payment to doctors, who will just pass it on to patients.

That's just plain tricky, as the AMA has acknowledged, and who's to say it will get through the Senate anyway?

 

[trainspotter]

If population growth keeps slowing and stops artificially boosting GDP, the Abbott Govt may preside over the first recession in a generation. I wonder what that will do their reputation as economic managers.

So Howard was a charmed ministership riding the coat tails of the Lucky Country and there was no fiscal responsibility displayed during his time as the PM of Australia? Yerrrrrrrrr rightio then ... I am off to the bottom of the garden with the fairies playing the violin.

As per usual the incumbent government will blame the previous government for the mess we are in.

Your logic says the economic environment is not particularly relevant to how the Govt is performing. Your logic says it was somehow possible to get through the GFC with no budget deficit - a feat no country in the world achieved, though Christopher Pyne seems to believe it was possible for the Liberals, yet with revenues higher than the post GFC period the current Govt is seeing debt increase. Why is that so? It's certainly not due to the start of the resource CAPEX cliff kicking in, nor the fall in the participation rate, or the near halving of the terms of trade rise when compared to pre boom levels. It must be all down to a Government unable to live within it's means and match spending with revenue. Pure and simple really.

So how much did Labor actually sell off and borrow to get us through a GFC ?? The catalyst for this was the 2008 financial crisis that had thrown the United States and western Europe into recession and come close to fusing their banking systems. The crisis had not, however, affected Canada or most of Asia. It was countries running big government debt and deficits that were in crisis control. (read NOT Australia)

Malcolm Turnbull, then opposition leader, followed soon after. "In four years, net debt will be $70 billion … and the government has asked for the right, just a moment ago, to borrow up to $200 billion, or $9500 for every man, woman and child in Australia," he said.

All night, Coalition members, 57 in the House and Senate, rose to speak. Former treasurer Peter Costello, silent on the back bench for a year, was moved to genuine outrage.

"When you inherit an economy which has a budget in surplus and no net debt, which has unemployment at 30-year lows, where the credit rating has been restored to a AAA rating on foreign currency bonds, where you have a Future Fund of $61 billion and a Higher Education Endowment Fund, when you inherit an economy in that condition you have to find a fault somewhere," he said. "If you cannot find a fault somewhere, what problem have you got to solve? So the Labor Party, naturally enough, looked for a problem. The trouble is, it was the wrong one."

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/what-crisis-governments-only-crisis-is-labors-debt-20140504-zr4c3.html

Now we have the Liberals jacking up the debt ceiling claiming they are borrowing money to pay back the money that Rudd borrowed? Sound familiar??

Now that the bills are coming due, neither Rudd nor Gillard are around. It is the morning after. The clean-up. The payment due date. And the demographic challenge has loomed into focus. So let’s not confuse who did the spending and who is having to pay.

 

[banco]

So Howard was a charmed ministership riding the coat tails of the Lucky Country and there was no fiscal responsibility displayed during his time as the PM of Australia? Yerrrrrrrrr rightio then ... I am off to the bottom of the garden with the fairies playing the violin.

As per usual the incumbent government will blame the previous government for the mess we are in.



So how much did Labor actually sell off and borrow to get us through a GFC ?? The catalyst for this was the 2008 financial crisis that had thrown the United States and western Europe into recession and come close to fusing their banking systems. The crisis had not, however, affected Canada or most of Asia. It was countries running big government debt and deficits that were in crisis control. (read NOT Australia)



http://www.smh.com.au/comment/what-crisis-governments-only-crisis-is-labors-debt-20140504-zr4c3.html

Now we have the Liberals jacking up the debt ceiling claiming they are borrowing money to pay back the money that Rudd borrowed? Sound familiar??

You obviously don't know much about the GFC. Government debt and deficits had very little to do with it.

 

[trainspotter]

You obviously don't know much about the GFC. Government debt and deficits had very little to do with it.

You obviously don't know much about the GFC or how the global monetary system works banco. Notice how the countries with a strong banking system and low national debt escaped the primary ignition? Canada as an example. But you are all over this stuff already.

The RBA's latest Financial Stability Review hammers home this theme:

"The overall effect of offshore lending on Australian banks' total [non performing assets] has been relatively small because overseas exposures only account for around one quarter of their assets. In contrast to many overseas banks, the major Australian banks did not aggressively push beyond traditional geographical or product markets over recent years to seek out higher-yielding, but higher-risk, assets."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-04-27/33818

Here is an interesting website that has a decidedly different bent on the whole GFC thing.

FACT: Australia’s escaped relatively unscathed from the so-called “Global Financial Crisis” due to the legacy of the Howard Government leaving strong budget surpluses and eliminating the debt – Australia had no net debt federally, and, according to the IMF, some of the lowest gross debt in the world. Furthermore, the Howard government’s reforms to industrial relations ensured a flexible labour market and increase productivity. This – combined with some prudent monetary policy (the lowering of relatively-high interest rates by the Reserve Bank giving Australians a higher disposable income, thereby boosting consumption) and the strength of Australian banks – is what spared us.

https://www.taxpayers.org.au/factcheck-did-kevin-save-us-from-the-gfc/

Here is a bit more of the real picture.

TREASURY has been forced to withdraw a budget graph that overstated the effects on growth of fiscal stimulus spending across the G20 after a senior academic raised questions about its accuracy.

The original Treasury graph on stimulus spending, published in Budget Paper 1, used only 11 of 19 G20 countries and backed claims that the greater the level of stimulus spending, the greater the boost to growth above International Monetary Fund predictions.

But RMIT professor Sinclair Davidson said when all 19 countries in the G20 (the European Union is the other member) were included, the estimated slope depicting the stimulus effect became "statistically insignificant".

The revision comes as the government faces pressure over its projections on the resource super-profits tax and the opposition demands it release the figures behind its $38 million advertising campaign and a set of pie charts used by Wayne Swan to claim miners have been paying less than their fair share of tax.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...xaggerated-graph/story-e6frg6nf-1225875251275

 

[SirRumpole]

So Howard was a charmed ministership riding the coat tails of the Lucky Country and there was no fiscal responsibility displayed during his time as the PM of Australia? Yerrrrrrrrr rightio then ... I am off to the bottom of the garden with the fairies playing the violin.

Basically, that is a true statement.

Howard/Costello got the budget into shape by selling assets

http://www.marketeconomics.com.au/2095-more-facts-behind-the-howard-governments-debt-elimination

Then they squandered the mining boom by introducing nanny state welfare like family tax benefits and the baby bonus

Australia's most needlessly wasteful spending took place under the John Howard-led Coalition government rather than under the Whitlam, Rudd or Gillard Labor governments, an international study has found.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...f-the-loose-purse-strings-20130110-2cj32.html

So try to use some objectivity when discussing fiscal responsibility, the results may surprise you.

Have a nice violin lesson.

 

[trainspotter]

Basically, that is a true statement.

Howard/Costello got the budget into shape by selling assets

http://www.marketeconomics.com.au/2095-more-facts-behind-the-howard-governments-debt-elimination

Then they squandered the mining boom by introducing nanny state welfare like family tax benefits and the baby bonus

So try to use some objectivity when discussing fiscal responsibility, the results may surprise you.

Have a nice violin lesson.

Big difference between ZERO debt and this www.australiandebtclock.com.au

The Rudd government's stimulus spending during the financial crisis doesn't rate as profligate because the measure makes allowance for spending needed to stabilise the economy.

Seriously? Doesn't rate cause the economy required to be stabilised? Who wrote this? The IPCC?

Stradavarius sounds nice as it echoes over the duck pond.

Objectivity .... PULEEEEZE !!

 

[IFocus]

You obviously don't know much about the GFC or how the global monetary system works banco. Notice how the countries with a strong banking system and low national debt escaped the primary ignition? Canada as an example. But you are all over this stuff already.

Nope not really that simple but nice try.

It was the lack of Australian banks exposure to CDO's / US extreme type housing lending and the like was one big reason we got through with out a mere whimper.....ish SFA to do with low debt.

Remember mining shed 19% of its work force.....just say that again in case you missed it mining shed 19% of its work force. Retail (biggest sector of employment) did not shed labour because.......... pick a number

1. There was no problem
2. Because the Coalition said there was no problem
3. Rudd was a genus
4. Swan was a genus
5. There was no GFC in Australia
6. Ken Henry had seen all this before (go early, go retail, go hard)

If retail shed 19% of its workers what would have a strong banking system done then?

Hint SFA

 

[IFocus]

Howard/Costello got the budget into shape by selling assets

You are been grossly unfair they were economic genius's sell assets and increase spending.

 

[trainspotter]

Nope not really that simple but nice try.

It was the lack of Australian banks exposure to CDO's / US extreme type housing lending and the like was one big reason we got through with out a mere whimper.....ish SFA to do with low debt.

Remember mining shed 19% of its work force.....just say that again in case you missed it mining shed 19% of its work force. Retail (biggest sector of employment) did not shed labour because.......... pick a number

1. There was no problem
2. Because the Coalition said there was no problem
3. Rudd was a genus
4. Swan was a genus
5. There was no GFC in Australia
6. Ken Henry had seen all this before (go early, go retail, go hard)

If retail shed 19% of its workers what would have a strong banking system done then?

Hint SFA

So when I wrote ... "Notice how the countries with a strong banking system" ... meant nothing to you?

Ermmmm you might want to lay of the sunflower seeds:- http://theconversation.com/the-state-of-australia-the-economy-26230

Australia has the lowest debt (measured by Gross Financial Liabilities) in the OECD. In 2013, Australia’s Debt to GDP ratio was 34.4 %, Germany was 80.9 %, the UK at 111.6 %, USA at 106.5 % and the OECD average was 112.0 %. Debt crisis? What debt crisis?

or this?

Sure, the level of federal government debt remains relatively low, but its growth has been world-beating and the outlook is grave thanks to Labor’s populist but unsustainable increases in school and disability spending, which the Coalition has inherited. The IMF, which has no political axe to grind, also noted Australia would have the third-largest increase in net debt as a share of GDP among the group of rich countries.

The Abbott government des*erves credit for wanting to stem the escalation in public debt and never-ending budget deficits that, left unchecked, will ultimately *require actions that will undermine the steady increase in living standards Australians have enjoyed.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...ter-than-europes/story-fn59niix-1226920839651

or this?

Australia is not without its risks on the debt front and to be safe needs to continue to head back towards a budget surplus (to cap public debt) and for households to continue to run relatively high savings in order to boost their net wealth and cap household debt.

http://www.switzer.com.au/the-experts/shane-oliver/debt---how-does-australia-compare/

So debt had nothing to do with the GFC then? We had low debt giving us the ability to borrow more to stimulate the economy. Yeppers that happened. Unfortunately we have now become addicted to debt.

 

[Tisme]

Abbott is so busy playing Mr Nice Guy, someone has to do the hard yards. I admire Credlin. I am starting to dislike Bishop.

View attachment 60673

I tend agree with you. Credlin must have been allowed to procure as much power as she has.

 

[SirRumpole]

I tend agree with you. Credlin must have been allowed to procure as much power as she has.

The difference between Opposition and Government. Shadow Ministers and backbenchers can put up with a short period of an arrogant and powerful Head of Staff as long as she helps get the Party into government, but when it comes to putting up with her for 3 years, they start to get shirty.

An indication that Abbott can't make the transition from Opposition to government. Continually blaming Labor for his own mistakes is another.

 

[Tisme]

The difference between Opposition and Government. Shadow Ministers and backbenchers can put up with a short period of an arrogant and powerful Head of Staff as long as she helps get the Party into government, but when it comes to putting up with her for 3 years, they start to get shirty.

An indication that Abbott can't make the transition from Opposition to government. Continually blaming Labor for his own mistakes is another.

Credlin has all the hallmarks of a power behind the force. Her hubby ( Federal Director of the Liberal Party) also sat in on the morning star chamber that also comprise Truss, Jules Bishop, Hockey. Pyne, Abetz, Joyce and Brandis that was Abbott's opposition circle of trust.

She is Catholic from the her socks up to her bonce. She controlled her classmates, her teachers, her friends, ... everything. How empowering Tony must feel to be served tea and biscuits by her ... truly he is the apex male with the apex female subservient to him alone.

 

[sptrawler]

Nope not really that simple but nice try.

It was the lack of Australian banks exposure to CDO's / US extreme type housing lending and the like was one big reason we got through with out a mere whimper.....ish SFA to do with low debt.

Remember mining shed 19% of its work force.....just say that again in case you missed it mining shed 19% of its work force. Retail (biggest sector of employment) did not shed labour because.......... pick a number

1. There was no problem
2. Because the Coalition said there was no problem
3. Rudd was a genus
4. Swan was a genus
5. There was no GFC in Australia
6. Ken Henry had seen all this before (go early, go retail, go hard)

If retail shed 19% of its workers what would have a strong banking system done then?

Hint SFA

Well that shows a complete lack of understanding, of the mining business as opposed to the retail business, mindless waffle.

 

[sptrawler]

You are been grossly unfair they were economic genius's sell assets and increase spending.

No, sell assets, retire debt, then spend less than tax reciepts, to build a budget surplus.
Don't let the truth, get in the way of your story.

Labor, don't spend, they give it away, then try to work out how pay for it.

When you spend you actually get something for your money, labor haven't quite worked that bit out yet.

 

[sydboy007]

No, sell assets, retire debt, then spend less than tax reciepts, to build a budget surplus.
Don't let the truth, get in the way of your story.

Labor, don't spend, they give it away, then try to work out how pay for it.

When you spend you actually get something for your money, labor haven't quite worked that bit out yet.

Abbott only seems to know how to cut taxes. MYEFO budget blowout coming soon and the Govt says no need to worry. I suppose this years deficit is still Labor's fault?

Abbott still hasn't worked out how you make up the revenue shortfall without targeting the poor.

 

[IFocus]

Well that shows a complete lack of understanding, of the mining business as opposed to the retail business, mindless waffle.

Think you have missed the point by a country mile time to take those Coalition rose tinted, blinkered, Zaphod Beeblebrox (Coalition branded), short sighted glasses off

 

[IFocus]

Tim Dunlop states the obvious this is just gold


Tony Abbott is not the problem

Tony Abbott is not the problem.

Watching the media, particularly the rightwing media, turn on Tony Abbott over the last few weeks has been a sight to behold, and it didn't get any funnier than this particular piece in The Australian.

Under the headline, "How The Oz belled the cat on Tony Abbott five months ago", they re-ran an article from July, saying:

FIVE months ago, The Australian warned Tony Abbott that he was still behaving as if he was leader of the opposition, locked into the daily tactic rather than a long term strategy with a team characterised by zealous centralised control.

As the Prime Minister ends his first year with discouraging polls and dissent among his MPs, our original article is well worth re-reading.

How bad have things become when the PM's biggest spruikers are suddenly busting to tell us, hey, we actually don't like him either!

And seriously, five months ago? They are boasting that they figured out five months ago that Emperor Abbott is stark naked? (What's their next great insight, that the Beatles are likely to be big?)

I mean, didn't it occur to The Oz at the time of, say, Mr Abbott's interview with Kerry O'Brien in May 2005 - where the then-Opposition leader admitted that he said things for the sake of expediency - that just maybe there were problems with Captain Tony?

Apparently not.

Just this week, Fairfax political correspondent Latika Bourke tweeted wistfully:

Perhaps if PM Abbott hadn't kept ending his media conferences as [Opposition leader] before journos questions finished we might have had time to ask him....

Honestly? You think a few more questions at his showbiz press conferences would've made a difference?

Here's an alternative thought, Latika: maybe if the media had applied the same level of scrutiny and aggressiveness to Tony Abbott that they applied to Julia Gillard they might've uncovered the agenda that only became apparent once his Budget was delivered.

Call me crazy.

That is a painfully superficial reading of the situation. Yes, the PM is unpopular (duh), and is increasingly looking out of his depth, if not incompetent.

But Tony Abbott is not the problem. He's a symptom. Actually, he is more than that: he is a reckoning. He is what you get when politicians lose touch with the electorate and get lost in the echo chamber of the concerns of the broader political class.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-12-11/dunlop-abbott-not-the-problem/5959676