Matey, why don't you (and the others as well) stop playing games. Your statement" "I actually feel sorry for those that are still sucked in by Labor and Kevin Rudd.
The above is very debatable...the pledge involves the same years but that is where the similarity ends. One BIG major difference, Labor has now been promising a surplus for six years, and Labor has not delivered a surplus since 1989. More over they have just enjoyed some of the best terms of trade the country has ever enjoyed in the past 50 years but still could not deliver a surplus.
Conversely the Coalition has a track record of delivering surpluses..."
Now we all know that the company was in the habit of producing surpluses. So what? Surpluses are predominately an outcome of taxes. So we here we have the "low taxing party" being into high taxes. But what makes matters worse is the "BIG major difference" between the two. And it is not as you see it.
With the company it is the lower income Australians who are the ones who are taxed to produce the surpluses. Progressive income tax rates are negated by handouts to the upper middle income earners and the wealthy. The heavy work is left to those who are least able to afford the burden.
Now to go directly to the matter of debt.
When are company fools going to come to realize that if we had not had debt our economy would have suffered. Go examine the alternative. Go do a calculation on the economic cost of having five or six or seven hundred thousand or more Australians out of work and on the dole. When you do come back and present a sensible case for arguing why we should no have gone into debt. In the meantime, stop talking nonsense
