Wayne Swan - Economic Pygmy

[Calliope]

Wayne who???

 

[Country Lad]

Yes from here on it will be a vote buying exercise.

It has always been a vote buying exercise. Forget the economic common sense, forget the long term best interest of the country, it is a case of what can we do to improve our poll results.

The worst thing that has happened to this country is the hung parliament which has ensured that logic and good decision making has gone out the window, to be replaced by pure unadulterated selfish politicking by all sides.

Cheers
Country Lad

 

[sails]

It has always been a vote buying exercise. Forget the economic common sense, forget the long term best interest of the country, it is a case of what can we do to improve our poll results.

The worst thing that has happened to this country is the hung parliament which has ensured that logic and good decision making has gone out the window, to be replaced by pure unadulterated selfish politicking by all sides.

Cheers
Country Lad

And not forgetting that the minority government has had indepents and a labor/green friendly senate to push through whatever legislation they want. Too bad if it isn't in the best interests or wishes of the majority of voters. It seems democracy is insignificant in both upper and lower house.

Under these circumstances, the coalition is pretty helpless to stop unwanted legislation going through. What selfish politicking have the coalition done? I think it was reasonable that Gillard should answer questions about any past association with a slush fund where thousands of union members funds are still missing. She holds the highest office in the land and is spending taxpayer funds at her will - so it seems. I think the public need to know that she is a fit and proper person to hold so much power in this country.

It would seem now that this ditching of the surplus is most likely to start the vote buying. It seems they don't care about the long term effect of massive debt they will leave to us and our future generations.

 

[Some Dude]

SomeDude - do you bother to read anything other people write?

Yep. But I suspect you read far too much into others.

You missed the note on the chart explaining the meaning of the black line and then carried on with irrelevant posts as to what the black line meant.

How terrible of me to ask instead of assuming what that line was when I did not notice and wasn't able to read the small text until I put my glasses on.

Not sure what you meant about irrelevant posts though as I was discussing this:

It really doesn't matter, the change of government or GFC. The exponential government debt shows bad management.

I found the perceived assertion that external factors or inherited trends were irrelevant fascinating so I asked about it. I chose not to assume but to ask. You seem to struggle with that concept?

And did you miss my post with the link below which I have posted twice before in two different threads?

...


So, once again, the reason for the chart is to show either Swan lied or was clueless:

I'm unsure why you think I don't know your conclusion. I'm seeking to understand the mechanics of the premises from which people derive these conclusions because they appear to be views that are, to recast (now that that is acceptable way to change) what moXJO said, a way to simplistically ensure something looks like more of a dud than it is.

My thought process extends a little further than "Ugh, blue under red, smash" and your welcome to join the conversation past that simplicity if you want.

If you read back through my posts on this thread, you should identify the following theme in my posts. How do people assess the economic performance of a government, and is it a sound and valid application that we can use. Prediction vs historical, quality of comparisons, extrapolations and trends, cherry picking and veracity.

If you find these things irrelevant or too complicated, then ignore me and the discussion.

And while we are temporarily on the topic of what people mistake and irrelevant posts, no, I did not vote for the ALP in the last state election. Maybe a discussion about how you derive these and other conclusions would be beneficial to your personnel growth and enlightenment?

 

[sails]

Yep. But I suspect you read far too much into others.

l don't think so as I actually have very little time to dig so deep into posts!

How terrible of me to ask instead of assuming what that line was when I did not notice and wasn't able to read the small text until I put my glasses on.

My apologies - I didn't see that post about the glasses....

Not sure what you meant about irrelevant posts though as I was discussing this:

Probably because I felt you were wanting to try and find something other than the fact that Swan was incorrectly blaming a fall in tax revenue for his deficits.

I found the perceived assertion that external factors or inherited trends were irrelevant fascinating so I asked about it. I chose not to assume but to ask. You seem to struggle with that concept?

Honestly, I don't have time to read so much into everything and the rest of your post is way too deep for me...

My apologies for being abrupt - I see you were looking for deeper meanings and I was only interested in the straightforward message of the chart. I accept we are coming at it from different viewpoints...

 

[Some Dude]

My apologies for being abrupt - I see you were looking for deeper meanings and I was only interested in the straightforward message of the chart. I accept we are coming at it from different viewpoints...

Accepted!

I think there are many real problems (regardless of which brand of government) that genuinely do exist. I understand where you are coming from about straight forward messages. I'm an analyst by nature and profession so my first question is almost always "yeah, how do we know that". I do disagree with many people on this forum about a wide variety of issues, some you will obvious, some not so much, but my intention is to look at the data and try to understand why people draw their conclusions.

I very much appreciate your message. Thank you.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

My thought process extends a little further than "Ugh, blue under red, smash" and your welcome to join the conversation past that simplicity if you want.

Perhaps that is your problem.

You are unable to see clearly because you have so many pairs of glasses on.

What you fail to realise mate, is that as the ALP have done, you cannot spend profligately and wastefully, with money that is not coming in.

The ALP wasted money through poor governance during the GFC.

They furthermore imposed taxes which have scared the mining sector from investing forward in Australia.

And finally because of their inability to achieve a surplus they have stripped departments of money essential for building infrastructure, again denying jobs and taxes.

gg

 

[noco]

Perhaps that is your problem.

You are unable to see clearly because you have so many pairs of glasses on.

What you fail to realise mate, is that as the ALP have done, you cannot spend profligately and wastefully, with money that is not coming in.

The ALP wasted money through poor governance during the GFC.

They furthermore imposed taxes which have scared the mining sector from investing forward in Australia.

And finally because of their inability to achieve a surplus they have stripped departments of money essential for building infrastructure, again denying jobs and taxes.

gg

The Green/Labor socialist left wing government just love credit cards.

Stick it on the bill, don't worry if you can't pay it back, dont worry about the interest on anything over due for payment. Just like when you die with a massive credit card build up, the next generation will pay for it. No worries for Gillard and Swannie they will be long gone.

 

[sails]

Perhaps that is your problem.

You are unable to see clearly because you have so many pairs of glasses on.

What you fail to realise mate, is that as the ALP have done, you cannot spend profligately and wastefully, with money that is not coming in.

The ALP wasted money through poor governance during the GFC.

They furthermore imposed taxes which have scared the mining sector from investing forward in Australia.

And finally because of their inability to achieve a surplus they have stripped departments of money essential for building infrastructure, again denying jobs and taxes.

gg

Well said, GG, and nice to have you back posting again ...

 

[MrBurns]

Well said, GG, and nice to have you back posting again ...

+1...

 

[Some Dude]

Perhaps that is your problem.

You are unable to see clearly because you have so many pairs of glasses on.

My glasses have been the best thing that have happened to me. I spent years with good vision but over the last few years noticed I was getting a lot of headaches which was coinciding with reading. It wasn't until very recently that I noticed that despite being able to see very fine print very far away, my vision was blurring when close. It's just got to the length of my monitor now which puts it in that uncomfortable stage where glasses were on or off many times but my new transitions are great.

The reason for my anecdote? I'm not simply going to take your word for it. I and others should put their glasses on and check the fine print. Some things which seem obvious to those predisposed to a world view suddenly appear less obvious once all the relevant information is considered. As you astutely stated in another thread:

... may I just say that we should await the slow turn of the Law to decide these matters.

Wise counsel for a wide variety of circumstances and reasons.

To the topic at hand.

What you fail to realise mate, is that as the ALP have done, you cannot spend profligately and wastefully, with money that is not coming in.

I'm not sure if you think you are the only person who understands math but math isn't that hard and you certainly don't hold a monopoly on the concept that surpluses are preferable to deficits. While I do have a T-Shirt that states 2 + 2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2, most of my friends get the joke and have conversations of differing opinions without telling me that I fail to realise that an overall positive cash flow situation is better than a negative one. In fact, I'd venture that even the ALP realise that so it shouldn't be too much of a leap to set aside your problematic, and yet possibly enlightening about your thought process, statement and move onto the why you believe what you do and whether it correlates to what we can see.

The ALP wasted money through poor governance during the GFC.

At the start of this thread you cited list of items you believe "economic obscenities" so I assume you believe they should not have happened at all? Should have happened better? Or the money spent on different programs?

They furthermore imposed taxes which have scared the mining sector from investing forward in Australia.

Sources for this? In particular, data or graphs would be helpful to illustrate the fear. Anecdotal evidence I have experienced working in the mining and energy industry does not support this.

And finally because of their inability to achieve a surplus they have stripped departments of money essential for building infrastructure, again denying jobs and taxes.

I'm trying to follow the logic here.

1. According to the graph that sails posted, tax receipts are down.
2. The government has attempted to reduce the level of spending.
3. The tax that would have been collected could have been spent on building infrastructure (A stimulus or stimulus like effect?).

Am I understanding your train of thought correctly here?

I'm also trying to establish causality. If you believe that the graph sails posted is correct, then what do you believe the government did that caused tax receipts to be down? What should they have done?

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

My glasses have been the best thing that have happened to me

You are conflating a simple argument by confusing posters with sesquipedalian contortions and obscure economic arguments, that have no pertinence to present circumstances.

As any householder knows, you need to earn more money than the bills coming in.

That is the nuts of it all.

And the ALP and Wayne Swan in particular have dismally failed in this essential task.

And Wayne Swan now admits it.

gg

 

[sptrawler]

The other thing to consider, some dude, is the government has at its disposal a very powerfull economic modelling programme.
They would have been well aware of the current outcomes. What they could have done differently is subjective. What they did is what is open for criticism and will be what they are judged on.
It may prove at a later date, they chose the right path. Currently they appear have chosen the path that was self serving to the detriment of the economy.IMO
Apart from an increase in the tax base and reciepts, with a constantly increasing deficit, what has Swan got to hold up as a legacy to his tenure, other than political survival?

 

[Julia]

My apologies for being abrupt - I see you were looking for deeper meanings and I was only interested in the straightforward message of the chart. I accept we are coming at it from different viewpoints...

Accepted!

I think there are many real problems (regardless of which brand of government) that genuinely do exist. I understand where you are coming from about straight forward messages. I'm an analyst by nature and profession so my first question is almost always "yeah, how do we know that". I do disagree with many people on this forum about a wide variety of issues, some you will obvious, some not so much, but my intention is to look at the data and try to understand why people draw their conclusions.

I very much appreciate your message. Thank you.

Much kudos to sails and Some Dude for your capacity to extend understanding. It's often difficult with the typed word to pick up the finer nuances which correctly explain what the poster is meaning.
I so wish more of us were able to show the graciousness that you've both demonstrated above.
We could all emulate this unnecessary curtailing of squabbling.

 

[Some Dude]

You are conflating a simple argument by confusing posters with sesquipedalian contortions and obscure economic arguments, that have no pertinence to present circumstances.

Setting aside demonstrating your perspicacity, you raised the items I discussed. If you believe they have no pertinence to the present circumstances then don't state them.

As any householder knows, you need to earn more money than the bills coming in.

Perhaps Sisyphean is a more appropriate word.

And the ALP and Wayne Swan in particular have dismally failed in this essential task.

And Wayne Swan now admits it.

We can discuss the adjective "dismally" if you like? Unless you find your choice of word not pertinent? Otherwise what you say is true. I assume you feel likewise about Joe Hockey's "recast" of the Coalition's pledge?

 

[Some Dude]

The other thing to consider, some dude, is the government has at its disposal a very powerfull economic modelling programme.
They would have been well aware of the current outcomes. What they could have done differently is subjective. What they did is what is open for criticism and will be what they are judged on.
It may prove at a later date, they chose the right path. Currently they appear have chosen the path that was self serving to the detriment of the economy.IMO
Apart from an increase in the tax base and reciepts, with a constantly increasing deficit, what has Swan got to hold up as a legacy to his tenure, other than political survival?

That is what is baffling to me also. I looked at that drop in receipts and thought how do you keep saying you are going to keep a surplus. Seemed like expediency to me also.

What (in people's opinions) should a government do during this part or are people saying that drop was the government's fault?



Further, forget for a moment who the government was. If the government changed the spend rate that much so that it was always in surplus (or near enough), what do people think the effect have been? Are there other countries during the similar (not necessarily exact) time period who did that and how are they faring?

 

[Some Dude]

Much kudos to sails and Some Dude for your capacity to extend understanding. It's often difficult with the typed word to pick up the finer nuances which correctly explain what the poster is meaning.
I so wish more of us were able to show the graciousness that you've both demonstrated above.
We could all emulate this unnecessary curtailing of squabbling.

Thanks Julia. I believe that many times we forget the art of how to conduct a discussion with someone while respectfully disagreeing, even to our core, but sails certainly demonstrated that it isn't a lost art.

 

[sptrawler]

That is what is baffling to me also. I looked at that drop in receipts and thought how do you keep saying you are going to keep a surplus. Seemed like expediency to me also.

What (in people's opinions) should a government do during this part or are people saying that drop was the government's fault?

View attachment 50103

Further, forget for a moment who the government was. If the government changed the spend rate that much so that it was always in surplus (or near enough), what do people think the effect have been? Are there other countries during the similar (not necessarily exact) time period who did that and how are they faring?

I feel the government stimulus packages, post gfc were way too premature. This was probably brought about by an immature government landing in office at the worst possible time. Then copying senior economic strategies from dissimilar economies.
This immediately put the government fiscal policy out of step with our commodity driven economy. Wages and employment was supporting the the retail sector. What was needed was government spending on infrastructure that was labor intensive and reliant on our manufacturing. Instead they jumped on the NBN, slow build, small scale a death by a thousand cuts.
Water and mass movement of it to where it can be exploited, I think was the call of the day. labour intensive, value adding as it irrigates waste land and ongoing positive outcomes.
But it probably wouldn't get the votes high speed download would get.

By the way just read Julia's, sails and your comments about decorum and respect, magic just magic

 

[noco]

Here is Peter Switzers take on Swan.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...esnt-fool-anyone/story-e6frg9if-1226542087687

 

[Some Dude]

What was needed was government spending on infrastructure that was labor intensive and reliant on our manufacturing.

Was there enough labour during that period for that? From memory the unemployment rate at that time was around 5-6%.

By the way just read Julia's, sails and your comments about decorum and respect, magic just magic

Thanks, main kudos to sails though, he took the path more often less traveled.