Is this the first of many big-ticket sales to boost short-term revenue and fudge a return to budget surplus? The Libs have a history of it.
Is this the first of many big-ticket sales to boost short-term revenue and fudge a return to budget surplus? The Libs have a history of it.Tony Abbott pledges to privatise Medibank Private in a speech last week.
They would also like Auspost sold, but this makes a lot of moolah for the government. Wasn't that on the agenda at some stage? I think there is a strong case for the postal service to be run by the Government.
Apparently quite true. It was extensively covered on "The World Today" on ABC radio today.Saw a very interesting article the other day...think it may have been on my flipboard (great app btw) that said that AusPost subsidises international parcels into AUFound that a bit rich of them...
Poll shows Tony Abbott now more popular amongst women than Julia Gillard.
http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/...als-abbott-s-popularity-post-misogyny-speech/
Much harder when nominal income growth is lower than GDP, and quite likely to be negative over the next year or two.
drsmith - those figures supplied by the ABC are different to these on the government web site - maybe they are only looking at tax revenue and not total revenue which is actually more than the coalition had - see below:
Why would the ABC do that???
View attachment 51844
http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/overview/html/overview_44.htm
You haven't divided it by a fudge factor.lol
At some point towards the rear-end of the evening, Mark Roberts, director of policy for Tony Abbott, reportedly made unsavoury remarks to former investment banker and lawyer Andrew Penfold, who is head of the Australian Indigenous Education Foundation.
Roberts allegedly told him that a Coalition government would ''cut the throat'' of funding to Penfold's organisation.
When Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced her recent ''crackdown'' on 457 skilled migration visas, it was politely pointed out that her media director, the Scottish-born John McTernan, was on one himself.
When questioned on this sensitive matter, McTernan told a journalist it was ''hardly f**king relevant'', which did little to douse his reputation as a head-kicking Labor hardman.
I'm surprised the lefties heremissed this one,
Then I suppose acting like a goat is not restricted to one side's political staffers,
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/po...tray-from-partys-songbook-20130419-2i5ko.html
Van Onselen on Sky now says the threat was to cut the throat of the organisation, not the throat of its head. As he put it: “I heard him say either slit the throat or cut the throat” and “that extended to the funding”.
Reference was made to slitting the throat of the organisation… It was the cutting of funding that was the reference.
Van Onselen says the staffer then said he “could be a source to me”, but “I can’t remember the exact words”.
Because one set of figures includes revenues passed onto the States and Territories, and one excludes them. Pretty sure that is the reason.drsmith - those figures supplied by the ABC are different to these on the government web site - maybe they are only looking at tax revenue and not total revenue which is actually more than the coalition had - see below:
Why would the ABC do that???
View attachment 51844
http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/overview/html/overview_44.htm
Van Olsen was naughty in the way he initially put it, but then I suspect so was the staffer in what he initially told his boss. Tony Abbott initially stated the actual phrase was denied and that the staffer was counselled. The staffer was subsequently demoted.Hasn't Van Olsen since admitted that he didn't actually hear what was said? There were also words about "cutting funding" so wording could have been mixed up.
The difference between labor and the libs is that the libs are quick to demote or discipline wayward MPs or staff while labor seem very slow to act.
Bold is mine:
drsmith - those figures supplied by the ABC are different to these on the government web site - maybe they are only looking at tax revenue and not total revenue which is actually more than the coalition had - see below:
Because one set of figures includes revenues passed onto the States and Territories, and one excludes them. Pretty sure that is the reason.
THE decision by Woodside and its partners to abandon the $40 billion liquefied natural gas project at James Price Point in north-western Australia signalled the beginning of the end of Australia’s greatest and most extraordinary resources boom…
What of course makes this boom different is that it is built entirely on the extraordinary, utterly unprecedented growth, both in size and speed, in demand from China. And the fact that this coincided with the global financial meltdown and the worst recession in the developed world since the 1930s””with, critically, fundamental and massive economic and financial structural fault lines, entrenched in every major developed economy.
In short, if this boom does come to a shuddering halt, it will be not simply worse than any previous end-of-boom, but both the context and the consequences will be severe and unpredictable.
One thing would be very predictable. A budget which is already in significant and arguably sustained deficit would plunge deep into catastrophic levels of deficit…
Put all those realities and contexts together, and it would not be a good time to be running two””perhaps large””budget and current account deficits. To put it, at its mildest.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?