The Gillard Government

drsmith said:

The government will beat the unions to it.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...n-superannuation/story-fnbkvnk7-1226478848816

Click to expand...

Sigh. Another link only available to subscribers.

drsmith said:

The government will beat the unions to it.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...n-superannuation/story-fnbkvnk7-1226478848816

Click to expand...

Well I think the tax side is a screen for the liquidity side. Pre gfc the all ords was 6700, now it is 4300 and the reports are saying everything is o.k.LOL

There is a huge lack of confidence, that is due to the government IMO.
The pro government press can talk it up as much as they like, but unless that translates into consumer spending or share market rally it's bull$hit.
Middle Australia has no confidence in this government. Get over it.

Here is another classic labor spin.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/flexible-work-bid-stalls-20120921-26cge.html

First paragraph, labor want a better work - life balance. LOL
Increase retirement age to 67 and reduce the amount workers can put into their super, what a joke.
Actually indications would show that labor would like workers to work untill they drop. How ironic is that?
The very reason the labor party was formed, is beginning to look like it is morphing into.

Labor's next tax increase ?

It is hardly unexpected that a large number of superannuation fund members are taking their money and making a run for it by setting up their own self-managed superannuation funds. All the growth is in the SMSF space, with estimates of funds close to $400 billion in SMSFs, compared with $340bn in retail funds and $225bn in industry funds.

Predictably, neither the industry superannuation funds nor the trade unions are happy about the trend towards SMSFs and want the government to do something to thwart their growth. Only last week, we had Tim Lyons of the ACTU, who incidentally is a trustee of one of the large industry superannuation funds, make the "helpful" suggestion that "if you're looking for ways to make the taxation of super more equitable and to make a contribution to the budget bottom line, the SMSFs are the place to look".

Click to expand...

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...e-quitting-super/story-fnbkvnk7-1226479828038

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3596448.htm

SABRA LANE: During the next 12 months until polling day, the economy will be front and centre of the political debate, with the Government keen to do just about anything, to return the budget to surplus - except for one thing - it's giving the impression it won't cut public service numbers, but more on that shortly.

First to this morning's fiscal update. The Acting Prime Minister Wayne Swan and the Finance Minister Penny Wong revealed they were pretty much "on the money" with their forecast in May that the 2011/12 financial year would result in a $44.4 billion deficit.

WAYNE SWAN: Now the underlying cash deficit for 2011/12 showed a small improvement of $661 million from the May budget estimate. This is the smallest variation between the budget estimate and a final outcome for a decade. Good work Penny.

Click to expand...

Yeah, good work Penny.

It's only a $21bn blowout from their 2011/12 budget forecast issued in May 2011.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_40.htm

Despite it's track record, Labor is still banging on about delivering it's surplus in 2012/13.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...t-than-predicted/story-fn59nsif-1226480129745

We'll know when they've given up on that. They'll call an election.

drsmith said:

http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3596448.htm



Yeah, good work Penny.

It's only a $21bn blowout from their 2011/12 budget forecast issued in May 2011.

http://www.budget.gov.au/2011-12/content/overview/html/overview_40.htm

Despite it's track record, Labor is still banging on about delivering it's surplus in 2012/13.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...t-than-predicted/story-fn59nsif-1226480129745

We'll know when they've given up on that. They'll call an election.

Click to expand...

And probably go to great lengths hide the dismal fiscal position from the average voter and then whine like crazy when the libs bring in the necessary austerity measures? About right?

And heaven help us if labor get back in - how will they manage the finances and fund all their promises then?

drsmith said:

Labor's next tax increase ?



http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...e-quitting-super/story-fnbkvnk7-1226479828038

Click to expand...

I wonder why the union run industry superfunds are upset about people removing their money.
I can't guess.LOL

By the way, good pick up Doc.

sptrawler said:

I wonder why the union run industry superfunds are upset about people removing their money.
I can't guess.LOL

By the way, good pick up Doc.

Click to expand...

This is off-topic - but I have always wondered what happens when those who setup SMSFs realise in 10 years that their returns are no better (or probably worse) because they didn't bother to educate themselves properly about investing? I know first hand that the majority of my clients who have SMSFs (and we have 400 funds) either use a financial planner (and lots of "managed funds") or buy blue chip shares or have a commercial premises (that they use for their business) / holiday unit in the fund. Some clients have excellent returns, but you can tell after looking at their balance sheets that they have worked hard at it.

Ves said:

This is off-topic - but I have always wondered what happens when those who setup SMSFs realise in 10 years that their returns are no better (or probably worse) because they didn't bother to educate themselves properly about investing? I know first hand that the majority of my clients who have SMSFs (and we have 400 funds) either use a financial planner (and lots of "managed funds") or buy blue chip shares or have a commercial premises (that they use for their business) / holiday unit in the fund. Some clients have excellent returns, but you can tell after looking at their balance sheets that they have worked hard at it.

Click to expand...

I suppose the main difference is, at the end of the day, if you have a SMSF and you lose the money it is your fault.
It is hard to reconcile your apathy, when you have entrusted your life savings to someone else and they lose it.
How many H.I.H and Storm events are going to happen in the next few years?

Another way of looking at it is, you can put the money in fixed term at 5.5% at least you are treading water, better than -2% plus withdrawls.

Talk about an own goal

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...promises_three_spenders_for_every_one_earner/

"PM promises three more spenders for every earner"

I’m astonished the Prime Minister should think this a reassuring statistic to economists:

The PM was to have told a group of New York economists that Australia’s economy is less reliant on the mining boom than is widely thought, and will predict that in the next four years, three times as many jobs will be created in healthcare, social assistance, education and training as in mining.

That’s not proof of less reliance on the mining boom but too, too much. Mining earns money. Jobs in health care, social assistance, education and training spends it. What Gillard has said is that she may be earning less, but plans to spend more.

UPDATE

Wayne Swan promises the spenders - public service jobs - will be spared the cuts earners are suffering, even as his Budget blows:

Mr Swan vowed to meet what he said was a “significant” shortfall in tax revenue with fresh budget savings.

However, he promised they would be “cuts with Labor values”, signalling that the government would avoid the public service staff reductions that Queensland Premier Campbell Newman has implemented with the backing of Tony Abbott…

Mr Swan said company tax had raised $876 million less than Treasury’s forecast in May and the trend had continued into the 2012-13 financial year…

“It makes it harder to deliver a budget surplus and does mean we’ll have to find more savings.”

Another broken promise:


...the public sector has grown by an average of 0.8 per cent a year over the five years Labor has been in office.

In 2007, Kevin Rudd vowed to take a “meat axe” to the bloated public service in his final address before the election.



More evidence that this Government has already spent the record income that is now evaporating fast - and spent more than it’s ever had:

...the 2011-12 deficit of $43.7 billion is double what was forecast just 15 months ago and completes a run of four historically high deficits. Net government debt has risen to almost $150bn or 10 per cent of GDP…

During the past five years, federal receipts have increased 21 per cent, but payments have grown 46 per cent.

What’s worse than this massive spending is what it’s been spent on - the trash of pink batts, green schemes and overpriced school halls, as well as the fixed costs of extra public servants. The Government has not invested in our future, but spent it.

(my bolds)

Will they ever be able to live within taxpayer's means?

THE Government is being forced to re-write the Budget it delivered just four months ago by a slump in prices for Australia's minerals, Wayne Swan acknowledged today.

The hint of an emergency mini-Budget late in the year came as official figures showed the Government did slightly better than forecast but still had a deficit of close to $44 billion in 2011-12.

Click to expand...

Read more:
Australian Federal Budget deficit for 2011 to 2012 of $43.7 billion forces rewrite of 2012 Budget

sails said:

Will they ever be able to live within taxpayer's means?



Read more:
Australian Federal Budget deficit for 2011 to 2012 of $43.7 billion forces rewrite of 2012 Budget

Click to expand...

It doesn't sound good, they have painted themselves into a corner.
The big problem is they have upped non personal tax reciepts just about as much as they can.
Like we've been saying all along sooner or later someone has to face the music for the binge.

On a side note Lindsay Tanner has summed it up pretty well, he thinks labor will do anything to stay in power.

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/labors-future-bleak-tanner-20120925-26jhp.html

At last a bit of honesty from the labor grass roots, hopefully this gets the rank and file to rise up. Instead of gormlessly watching on as the self servers run the show at the expense of our future.IMO

sptrawler said:

On a side note Lindsay Tanner has summed it up pretty well, he thinks labor will do anything to stay in power.


:

Click to expand...

Like this...

from: http://youngconservativeau.blogspot.com.au/2012/09/exclusive-labor-caught-out-spreading.html


Tuesday, 25 September 2012
EXCLUSIVE: Labor caught out spreading propaganda and hate to school students
Note: If republishing this story, please credit Musings of a Young Conservative blog or youngconservativeau.blogspot.com
The NSW Labor Party have been caught out spreading malicious personal attacks and political propaganda to school students. The party founded a Facebook page called 'Students against school cuts', and have illegally failed to carry an authorisation.

In edition, the party has been caught out pretending the page was founded by concerned students with misleading lines such as 'We don't vote - so we need you to'. Other misleading statements include: 'We've started this page because high school and TAFE students deserve better. As high school students, we want a Government that increases funding for schools - not cut it. Join our parents, friends, teachers and family in supporting and speaking out against these cuts on our page.'

The party is only caught out when you follow the links to the 'Contact Website', which is www.saveourschools.net.au. On the bottom of this website is this text:

Yes. The so-called 'high-school student' happens to be NSW Labor boss Sam Dastyari. And this shameless farce continue, with the Labor party asking for donations:

Back to the Facebook page, and the party is spreading malicious comments and untruths to school students. In edition they are posting these photos:


Here is a most telling image. The image was posted in 'Canberra, Australia Capital Territory.' Why would a New South Wales student opposed to school cuts be in the ACT?


Here the page is posting a like to a site called 'Scumbag Barry', whilst a Labor supporter predicts Mr O'Farrell will lose the next election, despite having a huge majority and being well ahead in the polls:


But here are some of the most shocking revalations of all. The NSW Labor Party took unauthorised and potenially illegal signs into NSW Schools. Here are Newtown Performing Arts School students with Labor Party signs: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.394367077299012.90828.392932850775768&type=1 and here are students of Sydney Girls High with the posters: http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.393306804071706.90497.392932850775768&type=1. Here are students of Pennant Hills High with the signs: http://www.facebook.com/StudentsAga....393991047336615.90719.392932850775768&type=3


The claims made on the page about teachers losing their jobs are hysterical and untrue. No teacher will lose their job, the Government has promised.
For some unknown reason, the page has also published these unflattering images of Mr O'Farrell and Federal Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott:


more here: http://www.facebook.com/StudentsAga....392976140771439.90378.392932850775768&type=3

You would have thought the NSW Labor Party had better things to do than set up vile abusive and juvenile Facebook pages.
UPDATE: Here is an ad flogging the site. These ads cost up to $2 per click. I highly doubt a 'concerned student' would fork out the money on this.

Posted by Musings of a Young Conservative at 07:50
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to Facebook


Typical Labor

This will be a must watch,

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/...monsters_tanner_for_suggesting_labor_improve/

Paul Kelly's take on Lindsay Tanner's decision to speak out,

http://video.theaustralian.com.au/2283660652/Why-trashing-Rudd-hurts-Labor

That was just an extraordinary interview on "7.30" tonight with Lindsay Tanner, who - now freed from the constrictions of being a member of the government - apparently felt free to let fly with his criticisms.

In response, Leigh Sales made her own political bias damagingly clear in her vicious attack on Mr Tanner.

She seems to have decided that the path to success in the top political interviewing slot in the country lies in rapping out sharp questions, the next one coming before her respondent has had a chance to answer the first.
She even talked over Mr Tanner to the tune of several sentences at one stage.

I couldn't help thinking how a government run by Lindsay Tanner, perhaps with Chris Bowen as Deputy, would be a wholly different proposition from the present.

Julia said:

That was just an extraordinary interview on "7.30" tonight with Lindsay Tanner, who - now freed from the constrictions of being a member of the government - apparently felt free to let fly with his criticisms.

In response, Leigh Sales made her own political bias damagingly clear in her vicious attack on Mr Tanner.

She seems to have decided that the path to success in the top political interviewing slot in the country lies in rapping out sharp questions, the next one coming before her respondent has had a chance to answer the first.
She even talked over Mr Tanner to the tune of several sentences at one stage.

I couldn't help thinking how a government run by Lindsay Tanner, perhaps with Chris Bowen as Deputy, would be a wholly different proposition from the present.

Click to expand...

Sales didnt get way with it and looked the fool.

MrBurns said:

Sales didnt get way with it and looked the fool.

Click to expand...

He clearly had her measure and she didn't like it. If she doesn't want to be seen as a tebloid interviewer, then perhaps she shouldn't interview like one.

The version aired on ABC TV was edited as evidenced by the lack of pauses between some of his answers and her next question. This was confirmed by Leigh at the end of the segment.

drsmith said:

He clearly had her measure and she didn't like it. If she doesn't want to be seen as a tebloid interviewer, then perhaps she shouldn't interview like one.

The version aired on ABC TV was edited as evidenced by the lack of pauses between some of his answers and her next question. This was confirmed by Leigh at the end of the segment.

Click to expand...

Lindsay Tanner was very credible and it showed, no pretence there, good on him and I hope he feels better for purging.....

Obviously it is not only Tony that has trouble with nasty women, everybody else does.LOL,LOL
Leigh Sales obviously pulled out the handbag.
Seems like this is labors latest ploy, get the girls to show how nasty they can be, I can't see where that is going.

Isn't it great how on the 26th Michelle Gratten was using Lindsay Tanners comments to bag the government
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/labors-future-bleak-tanner-20120925-26jhp.html

Yet today she manages to get an anti Abbott spin on it.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...e-to-sucking-up-for-votes-20120926-26khv.html


When you're a politician, you run into every person you've ever met in your entire life. In an observation fitting Tony Abbott's experience, Tanner observes that sometimes the politician hopes a person they encounter doesn't remember the ''excruciatingly embarrassing incident'' that happened when they are 19. (Abbott's problem, of course, that all his old acquaintances seem to remember everything

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...p-for-votes-20120926-26khv.html#ixzz27g8LQER3

Well Michelle, doesn't everyone remember Gillard, Thomson's excruciating incidents, obviously your obsessed with Tony's .
I think in 12 months a lot of pro labor reporters will be wondering why they were so hoodwinked.

I would think they are good fodder for a commune or a relegious sect that requires gormless diciples, that is only my opinion and I may be wrong. But I don't think so.
It actually is probably contributing to the decline of newspapers, who wants to pay to listen to someones personal dislikes.