Dumb and dumber

Originally posted by raiderup ↑

" You can't tax yourself out of a recession, I thought that was the one big lesson the world learnt in 1929. "

Not too sure if the above statement is accurate at all.
The major problem in the great depression,was a lack of money,been lent.
Hence TARP.

Another important goal of TARP is to encourage banks to resume lending again at levels seen before the crisis, both to each other and to consumers and businesses. If TARP can stabilize bank capital ratios, it should theoretically allow them to increase lending instead of hoarding cash to cushion against future unforeseen losses from troubled assets. Increased lending equates to "loosening" of credit, which the government hopes will restore order to the financial markets and improve investor confidence in financial institutions and the markets. As banks gain increased lending confidence, the interbank lending interest rates (the rates at which the banks lend to each other on a short term basis) should decrease, further facilitating lending.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troubled_Asset_Relief_Program

That the major players sat on their hands in this regard,had nothing to do with taxation.

Its my contention the forgone tax revenue in this country by either Government "approval",or corporate " design ",obviates the need for re-balancing Australia's taxation system.
Why should trust's be taxed at a lower tax rate?,ect ect ect.

One only look to Norway,and how taxation has worked for them.
IMHO Australia has and is been " gamed " in relation to Taxation, a massive and major overhaul of the entire tax system is necessary.
Not just Federally but also states and local government.
One obvious consequence of that is the ridiculous amount of duplication of services throughout the three tiers of government.
Duplication means waste.

IT IS widely acknowledged that Australia's federal system is broken. What we did not know is how much this is costing us. The price tag has now been estimated at $9 billion each year in wasted taxes. This amounts to $1100 per family.
That is a conservative estimate by the Business Council of Australia. It is how much the community pays for the duplication of services and inefficiency that bedevils the relationship between our federal and state governments.
Even this understates the true cost. It is only the amount of extra tax we pay and does not include the money lost to businesses in having to comply with unnecessary red tape or the cost of sub-standard health and education services.
Taking these into account, it has been estimated that the duplication and extra co-ordination costs in the Australian Federation are an astonishing $20 billion a year. This amounts to 9 per cent of all general government expenses or 3 per cent of GDP.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/federation-needs-a-fix/2007/03/20/1174153055140.html

Raider

Expand

Well said and researched. Thanks for the links - I'll add the info to the 'library'.

The holy grail of running a surplus is a nonsense. It is fostered by the right wing to save the wealthy having to pay their fair share of tax. It has devotees amongst the conservative poorer groups who find it difficult to think for themselves because they usually see the national economy as a household where a lack of money and nouse to use the tax laws prevents many from building wealth as they live within their means week-to-week, year-to-year...until they run out of life... Sad, but true!

Menzies and Frazer NEVER had a surplus - Whitlam DID. So what do we learn from that if a surplus is the be-all-and-end-all?

If we had ran surpluses during 2 world wars and the Great Depression, would we have been better off?

If we had run a surplus during the GFC where would we be now?

If the senate had passed the inequitable and recessionary first Abbott budget, how would that have helped us?

How did the deficits during the ALP years ruin our lives? I have asked that many times of LNP loyalists, and I have yet to receive a reply!

"Not too sure if the above statement is accurate at all." it came from the "rooned" one, so how could it be possibly accurate!