Agree Kingpins, Its a pity that so many posters on these boards...

Agree Kingpins,
Its a pity that so many posters on these boards go for the one item spin
rather than look at the overall budget mix and the revenue take.

There was no problem up to 2008 when we had growing revenue to
meet nominal spending inflation and some left over to deposit in
the future fund or accrue a $20 billion nestegg.

The minerals & energy boom created by China kept us going for another
4 years which warded off recession.

The whole issue now is how to address the revenue shortfall and there
are a few alternatives:
(a) rise more revenue and/or enforce current tax laws so that big business
including multinationals pay their fair share of tax.
(b) cut back on expeniture.
(c) a mix of both.

In the shorter term (c) would seem the reasonable thing to do but the current Government
is hell bent on (b)

Intead of at least maintaining the current tax take when elected the Libs reduced company tax by:
(1) removing the MRRT
(2) removing the CO2 tax
(3) plan to reduce company tax from 30% to 28.5% in July.

At a time of growing Commonwealth debt these 3 measures in retrospect look like Government shooting itself in the foot.
But to be cynical, I guess they are paying back their sponsors/political doners.

If we look at a cut back in expenditure one would expect a reasonable Government to cut back on expenditure
that would have the least economic impact on the economy thereby warding off recession.

Instead, however, the Libs tackle welfare and the aged pensioners ; two areas that immediately impact
negatively on the economy (remember 2008-09 when Rudd gave the welfarites and PAYE taxpayers
the $20 billion payout to avert recession)

The reasonable thing to do would be to cut back on foreign spending which would not impact on our economy
but, conversely improve our balance of trade. But did they do that? tThe answer is no.

We spend (give away) $2.5 billion in foreign aid, some to brutal overseas regimes. Why could this Government say
"Oops, we have a liquidity problem and we have to suspend foreign aid for 5 years until things pick up.
What are we getting for our Foreign Aid which is more important than affording our aged pensioners a decent
standard of living which they deserve.?

Why are we going back into Iraq using up our foreign purchased aircraft and foreign purchased munitions.?
Why are we not asking indonesia, a conservative Muslim country to not send their airforce and warships
to Iraq rather than parading them around a silly island where two Aussies are going o be topped?

This assault on Age Pensioners (first the GP co-payment & now the reduction of the aged pension by $11
a week come 2017) is an easier touch and the tragedy of it is that silly posters here have naively swallowed
the attack, hook, line and sinker.

A society is judged by how it treats its children and its aged and despite the high standards set by the
baby boomers (some of whom are now pensioners) we seem to have recently imported nasty US values of
crass capitalism that would want children and the aged to live in poverty while the 10% rich shun
their tax obligations through Swiss numbered bank accounts or directly vis tax havens.

Perhaps we are watching too many American Soaps.

Have a nice day because I'm missing ye all already.....................Struth!
Moorookamick

PS: Could we have the taxpayers' deposit to the Future Fund back please so that we can
pay down some debt and honour our obligations to the Aged Pensioners and then the
Polls can and the top end of the Civil Service can experience their own imposed austerity.
Poetic Justice ...eh?
mm