Ignore the pre-budget spin and the denials to the contrary. The document unveiled by Wayne Swan tonight is every inch a pre-election budget, just not in the traditional sense of the word.

Wayne's economic miracle: the Treasurer in Canberra today. Photo: Ray Strange.

It has none of the handouts and give-aways traditionally used to entice voters in an election year – there’s no money left to pay for that kind of extravagance anyway, and there are plenty of niggly little cuts to offset the impact of the stimulus splurge.

But this budget provides a clear rhetorical blueprint for the looming election campaign. And it’s framed around a sense of pride, almost cockiness, at the performance of the Australian economy versus the rest of the western world.

Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan have clearly decided that attack is the best form of defence in terms of their economic performance. The Government has taken a hammering in every major poll, with voters marking the government down for its backflips and broken promises, and the wisdom of its stimulus strategy with increased debt and a ballooning deficit.
The message from this budget is: there is method to our madness, look at the scoreboard, the stimulus strategy has worked. We are outstripping the rest of the world’s advanced economies in terms of economic growth, job creation, and are now on target to return the budget to surplus three years’ ahead of schedule, in 2013.

Reading through Wayne Swan’s speech and examining the Budget Overview, you can almost imagine that, however alarming the polls currently are, the Treasurer and Prime Minister spent their budget preparations high-fiving each other at the Lodge while listening to Queen’s We Are The Champions.

Many voters clearly think otherwise but according to Wayne Swan Australia has just emerged from the best period of economic management in almost 20 years.

“Of Australia’s 18 years of continuous economic expansion, Australians can be proudest of the one just passed,” the Treasurer said in his speech last night.

“Together Australians have defied global economic gravity, not by accident but by choice.”

It was heady rhetoric, backed up with any number of charts showing that while Europe and the Americas have plunged into darkness, Australia has swatted away the GFC away like an irritating fly.

A big part of that success story is obviously the performance of the mining sector. And without the mining sector there would have been no 2010-2011 Federal Budget, as all the major spending measures in tonight’s document are framed around the imposition of the new Resource Super Profits Tax following the Henry Tax Review.

As far as budget strategies go, this is a fairly audacious three-way gamble.

Firstly, it’s a gamble for the Rudd Government to presume that the mining tax will pass the Parliament.

It’s also a gamble to assume that the mining companies, who vary only in the degree of their anger at this new tax, will simply fold their tents and abandon their campaign to force a government re-think.

And the biggest gamble of all is to presume that the voters will support the new tax. This tax has turned into a slow burn for the government. It received limited mainstream attention when it leaked ahead of the Henry Review, and at first blush was regarded by many voters as a fair attempt to redistribute the mining sector’s mega-profits towards tax cuts for small business, reduced company tax, a more generous superannuation scheme and a $5.6 billion investment pool for skills and infrastructure. But now, for every voter who has been swayed by the Government’s quaint nationalistic posturing about mining profits being sent off shore to the big multinationals, others are asking a more sensible question – if it’s the mining industry which has helped keep our economy chugging along, why weaken it with an enormous new tax which threatens jobs, expansion and investment?

If that question takes hold in voters’ minds – and the mining industry has the deepest pockets in the land and will be hammering that message over the coming weeks – it has the potential to undermine the economic arguments which Kevin Rudd and Wayne Swan are putting for winning a second term.

But the triumphalist deliver of tonight’s budget has been a dry-run for the economic message the Rudd Government will carry through until polling day. They have a big sell job ahead of them. And their biggest challenge may yet be that the PM has lost his Kevin 07 mojo and at present could not sell icy-poles in a desert to an increasingly jaded voting public.

104 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Paul says:

      07:43pm | 11/05/10

      is anyone still listening? they are empty vessels - and I voted for them.  A friend of mine put it best after they put up the Super Contribution to 12% and lathered the announcement with portentous drivel about its significance: “This lot have modelled themselves on the Keating Government, just without the…everything”.

      Still, it hasn’t been a total loss:  they made Tony Abbott electable - that alone is an achievement I thought unimaginable 3 years ago.

    • Seano says:

      09:48pm | 11/05/10

      You voted for Labor and now the policy vaccuum that is Abbott is suddenly electable…yeah ok.

    • Against the Man says:

      11:04pm | 11/05/10

      Why not switch from a labor to a liberal voter? Politics is about supporting the party that is able to deliver the results.

    • Seano says:

      12:40am | 12/05/10

      The attached rhetoric gives it away…the labor supporter who’s seen the light has been done before and I’m sure it will be done again.

    • Paul2 says:

      09:42am | 12/05/10

      Yeah Seano, Its a bit like the low-level party functionary who trolls chatrooms and such looking for oppotunities to pimp the party line, and put down potential arguments in advance.  Everyone does it.  The shill thing actually started under Mussolini with fake interjectors “breaking in” to Italian radio shows, only to be cooly put in their place by the announcer.  It didn’t fool many people then either.  These days the Israelis are masters of it (google “megaphone”)

    • Andrew says:

      10:22am | 12/05/10

      Seano,

      So lets get this straight. Anyone who considers this government has failed and now can’t vote for them and wants to vote for Abbott is lying. Never really voted labor and just posting to try to undermine Labor?

      Have I got it right?

      I guess that means all the recent polls are BS.

      To bad you’re so rusted on Labor you can’t recognise a paradigm shift when you see it. I fear the results of the next election will come as a great shock to poor old Seano.

      You just keep on drinking Chairman Rudd’s cool ade.

    • Jane says:

      12:45pm | 12/05/10

      ‘Labor’ and ‘fiscal conservative’ have become a contradiction in terms. They have proven the concept that the two are in any way compatable to be laughable.

      They can CLAIM whatever they want and bank on mythical future predictions that support their figures all they like - the precedent has been set though that Labor ‘say’ alot but ‘do’ nothing near it. Ergo, they are full of it.

      The govt have rightly copped a hiding on being fiscally inept and wasteful putting us into such huge UNECCESSARY and indiscriminant debt. This renewed ‘responsible’ pretence now is just a political response to negate that perception and yet again dupe the public before another election. I guess it worked before.

      Pretending now to be ‘careful’, ‘responsible’ and ‘miserly’ is an utter joke considering what they have already done and the historical squander and wastage that has occurred and is STILL occurring. It’s a huge contradiction.

      Fool us ( well some of you) once but not twice.

      They talked up/milked the GFC as a ‘problem’ for them to solve and claim credit for if we didn’t do as bad as THEY predicted. They lower expectations.
      Truth is the GFC was NEVER going to effect Australia to the degree that THEY scaremongered on.

    • Seano says:

      01:37pm | 12/05/10

      @Paul2 - I know well what a shill is champ. If fact that was kinda my point. But thanks for the history lesson. I’m sure Paul will appreciate the background information. Btw whilst it is true that I have complete contempt for Abbott and his idealogies I doubt you would find many “low-level party functionaries” who have stuck it into Labor over the NBN, My schools, handling of refugees etc or such a “troll” roundly castigating NSW State labor. Perhaps some research in future would make you look less silly.

      @Andrew - I do like the way conservatives like to make up your arguments and then respond to them.

      Of course people can change their minds. Where exactly have I said otherwise?

      I once supported Labor in NSW but as I’ve said many times on this blog I am now looking forward to them being removed from power. And if by some miracle O’Farrell offers us a small L style Liberal party and keeps the religious zealots and far right wing in check then I will vote for him (otherwise I’ll probably vote Dems).

      You can believe that or not champ. However what I was actually saying was that this guy is claiming to have voted Labor whilst spouting standard liberal party rhetoric, he’s quite obviously a “shill” (thanks Paul2) and I’m glad I was able to bring it to your attention.

    • Andrew says:

      02:57pm | 12/05/10

      How’d you know I was the Champ?

      BTW not supporting NSW Labor after 2 decades of abject failure doesn’t exactly make you conservative, it merely proves you’re not completely insane.

    • Seano says:

      04:16pm | 12/05/10

      Again you make up your own points and reply to them. Typical windy conservative.

      I have not suggested and neither am I pretending to be a conservative. I consider myself centre left economically and a bit further left socially. Unlike most conservative “:shills” however I don’t feel the need to blindly support my prefered side, especially when they are getting it wrong as they obviously are in NSW. It’s just a shame that the Liberal party in NSW have yet to mount a viable opposition, something their federal counter parts seem determined to mimic.

      The whole point here is that Paul the conservative “shill’s” argument against the government are so powerful that he has to very transparently manufacture a history as a Labor voter to prove that he has seen the light.

      The idea that someone could be idealogically opposed Abbott but suddenly see him as an electable alternative PM is not only an “unimaginable” leap of faith it’s laughable.

      PS. If you choose to respond “champ”, perhaps you could respond to what I’ve actually said instead of what you’d like to pretend I’ve said.

    • Seano says:

      06:22pm | 12/05/10

      @Andrew. Perhaps you could read what I’ve wrote and actually respond to that instead of making it up.

      I’ve never claimed to be conservative. But I’m not completely blinkered unlike many conservatives. Nor do I feel the need to pretend to be a converted supporter. That someone who has been idealogically opposed to Abbott can now find him suddenly electable is not just an “unimaginable” leap of faith it’s laughable.

    • Arios says:

      11:14pm | 12/05/10

      Paul old mate, why didn’t you listen to Arios and keep Howard in when you had the chance. It was nice guys like you who were bored with Howard, thinking he was too old and over the hill etc. Well Howard was in a whole different league than these clowns. Despite the commonly held view that Costello was arrogant (which I disagreed with - he just had a cheesy smile due to his teeth), the worst case would have been that Howard stayed in OR we got Costello. Both of them 100x more productive than the current Labor Gov.

      Once again thank you Paul and to my other great fellow Australians just like him - don’t be so naive next time “you don’t know what you got ‘til it’s gone”.

    • John A Neve says:

      09:51am | 13/05/10

      Arios,
      Said “Howard was in a whole different league than these clowns” and so he was. The man lied through his teeth and took this country into “war” not once but twice based on lies.

      Rudd has cost us in money terms, Howard cost us lives.

    • julia says:

      08:56pm | 11/05/10

      The smartest guys in the room. I saw that movie and I love the parallels between Rudd, Swann, Gillard et al and the Enron team.

      But think about what the guys at Enron did. They hoiked up prices of power after systematic blackouts which hurt both the man on the street and business alike.

      They lied to investors and investment writers - only a few saw through the spin and smoke and mirrors.

      They left a system of empty shell companies, but managed to extract huge sums of money to fund their extravagant lifestyles. Well, funded until they had to go to prison.

      So yeah. Comparing Rudd’s team to the Enron pricks is about right. I just wanna know on what charge we could get Swan for misleading the Australian people about the GFC and Rudd for being just inept.

    • Cynic says:

      01:39pm | 12/05/10

      Sounds more like Tony Sage of Cape Lambert, who claimed last Monday that his company would suffer horrifically from the super profits tax, and surprise surprise, the share price plummeted. Then last Wednesday, he bought 1 million shares in his company at the new lower price. True story - he declared his new shareholdings to the ASX last Thursday.

    • GJ says:

      09:20pm | 11/05/10

      A clever budget politically - it tells a good story. No recession - the fiscal stimulous clearly successful. But a relevant qst is at what cost? No mention of course re policy delivery failures etc.
      BTW, David,  a number of errors in analysis in above opinion - suggest a course in Economics 101 would help!
      Paul, unfortunately nothing can possibly make Tony Abbott electable!!

    • julia says:

      09:29pm | 11/05/10

      Hi GJ

      Are you one of the smarter guys in this chat room?

    • RW says:

      08:18am | 12/05/10

      You seem easy to convince, GJ.  Most voters aren’t looking for a “good story”.  David’s analysis seemed pretty spot on to me but the idea of Economics 101 sounds a good suggestion. Perhaps something for Krudd to do in his free time. And if Krudd was able to be sold as ‘delectable’ - as he obviously once in a past life (‘07) -  then Tony Abbott will cruise in.

    • Rover says:

      01:30pm | 12/05/10

      “Delectable”. Gold!

    • James says:

      09:34pm | 11/05/10

      The elephant in the room in this budget is the fact that everything in it is predicated on taxation from the miners, but Rudd has buckley’s chance of getting it through the Senate.

      Its smoke and mirrors stuff.

    • Sherlock says:

      09:39am | 12/05/10

      Yeah. Introduce a new tax that going to supply at least $12 billion dollars a year and then crow how you managed to balance the books. It’s really schoolboy stuff. A ten year old can make up new taxes without considering the consequences of implementing them.

      I’m astounded that anybody could possibly praise this governments economic credentials. I mean what have they done except the typical labor strategy of spending money you don’t really have like drunken sailors then introduce new taxes so you’ll can spend even more money you don’t have.

      After the last election Swan and Rudd were telling us that “the inflation genie was out of the bottle” and inflation would be our biggest problem. I’m sorry but what has the inflation rate been for the last two years? Weren’t we actually looking at the possibility of deflation at one point.

      How many times were we told how the economy was going to get much worse before it got better? Rudd, Swan and Gillard said it over and over like some new government mantra. Which one was it that told us we were looking at 8% plus unemployment? Gee wrong again. It didn’t get worse. In fact it got much better very quickly and did unemployment go over 6%? If it did it was only just and it was nowhere near the predicted 8%.

      Everything they have said was wrong yet now their claiming to be geniuses? Yeah right.

      People are saying it’s wonderful management that the economy will be in surplus 3 years early. Well I’m asking how could you misread economic conditions so badly. I think if someone gave me a report that was so negative and obviously so wrong he’d be one of those unemployment statistics.

      This government threw money at the GFC because it’s the only strategy it knows. It was uncontrolled and ill disciplined spending that we will still be paying for decades from now. Unfortunately though we won’t have to with decades for the consequences.

      Go back and read the political blogs before the 2007 election. We predicted everything we see now. We told you that electing a Labor government would lead to massive spending, budget deficits and enormous new taxes. Look how right we were.

      Well here’s another prediction for those with mortgages. You’re having trouble with interest rates at 7.5%? Well how are you going to go with the 10-12% or even higher that you’ll see in 2012 or 2013?  We were right before and we’ll be right again. Good luck people. You’re going to need it.

    • Polywatcher says:

      10:38am | 12/05/10

      James,.. If the miners super tax is blocked in the Senate will Krudd and Swannie have the intestinal fortitude to call a double dissolution?  They wouldn’t be game - they know they are politically on the back foot.

    • persephone says:

      10:49am | 12/05/10

      Polywatcher

      there’s now no need to call a DD - by the time this tax hits the Senate, an ordinary election will do just as well.

      The mining council will be encouraging the Libs to pass it as quickly as possible. They know Labor will get back in, and the Greens will have control of the Senate.

      The mining companies were the ones who originally suggested this tax - with Clive Palmer saying it should be at 40% - so they’ll back down very quickly.

    • Ryan says:

      11:29am | 12/05/10

      @persephone : “The mining companies were the ones who originally suggested this tax - with Clive Palmer saying it should be at 40% - so they’ll back down very quickly. “.. how do you say, just because you believe it, doesn’t make it true. I am going to call you on this one, evidence please.

    • Andrew says:

      11:48am | 12/05/10

      Bit of wishful thinking their Pers. I was at dinner with some senior miners on Saturday night and they intend to roll out a very strong campaign against Rudd Labor. Wait til you start seeing the ads of ordinary “working family” shareholder superannuants decrying this tax.

      In their word, “Rudd is about to have his own version of workchoices”.

      I wonder how the CFMEU will take it when their members start marching against labor. LOL.

      BTW have you heard the new term for a person trying to project false credibility? It’s called Krudability.

    • Sherlock says:

      12:23pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew Says: ” Wait til you start seeing the ads of ordinary “working family” shareholder superannuants decrying this tax”

      How true. an 80 year old great grand-dad being taxed 40% on the BHP shares he’s had for 50 years. A higher tax rate than somebody earning $180,000 a year.

      That will go down a real treat.

      Economic Geniuses my ear!

    • mintxx says:

      01:55pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew you clearly haven’t heard from the CFMEU? Just heard their boss say on the radio that he would be very surprised if any jobs were lost or anything changed since the profits were massive regardless

    • Ryan says:

      02:32pm | 12/05/10

      @persephone : from what I understand there was that the minerals council was asking for a scrapping of the state royalties in place of a profit sharing type of deal. Has the government agreed to scrap state royalties then?

    • Andrew says:

      03:02pm | 12/05/10

      Not talking about the union head honcho’s I’m talking about the rank and file. Go to the mines and see what their thoughts are on (a) A tax that might even have the slightest chance of hurting their employment & (b) their union chiefs. You may well find the answers enlightening.

    • persephone says:

      03:16pm | 12/05/10

      Ryan

      it can’t without their agreement; it has agreed to refund that payment to them, effectively abolishing them.

      Sometimes the Federal constitution means governments have do do silly things to get the results wanted.

    • iansand says:

      09:39pm | 11/05/10

      How dare they be good economic managers.  It’s Unstrayan

    • Seano says:

      12:42am | 12/05/10

      I know. Hockey said they should be able to get it back into surplus in 3-4 years and they’re doing it in 3….bloody show offs.

    • Andrew says:

      10:27am | 12/05/10

      Um, correct me if I’m wrong but this government hasn’t done anything it said it would (except apologise and ratify Kyoto) so i wouldn’t be banking on them getting this right.

    • Ryan says:

      11:33am | 12/05/10

      @iansand : or what could happen is the mining companies scale back considerably or even shut up shop here sending the economy into a downward spiral with a huge debt which will grow twice as large due to the lack of mining taxes.

    • Seano says:

      01:38pm | 12/05/10

      Considering none of the mining companies have announced plans to the stockmarket regarding scaling back operations I think we can put that scare to rest Ryan.

    • Seano says:

      02:35pm | 12/05/10

      Have announced it to the stock market Ryan?

      Sabre rattling at it’s best.

    • Andrew says:

      02:54pm | 12/05/10

      Seano, under the ASX listing rules listed companies are not required to lodge documents shelfing projects unless the information is market sensitive. Further, the ASX yesterday denied a chairman of a mining company lodging details of his AGM speech because they did not consider it the appropriate forum to criticise the gov’t. I think the story was in the SMH today.

    • Seano says:

      04:06pm | 12/05/10

      You’re saying shelving billions in projects is not market sensitive? Really?

      “ASX yesterday denied a chairman of a mining company lodging details of his AGM speech because they did not consider it the appropriate forum to criticise the gov’t”.

      And your point is?

    • Ryan says:

      04:39pm | 12/05/10

      @persephone : fair enough, I guess it didn’t have the same media punch.

    • Seano says:

      06:22pm | 12/05/10

      I wonder how that is possible Ryan when so many conservatives complain of the left media bias?

    • Trent says:

      09:52pm | 11/05/10

      Isn’t the budget just one giant spin job where the deficiencies are in fine print and it takes weeks to figure out where the government has plastered all the bandaids? :p

    • Against the Man says:

      11:01pm | 11/05/10

      The budget is a dud. It shows them afraid to do more then necessery because they have spent themselves silly. Look in the details and you will see things are not what they seem. Saw Swany on ABC this evening, the nervous bloke did not come across as a convincing and reliable individual.

    • Christian Real says:

      06:28am | 12/05/10

      The Liberal whingers commenting in here are all duds, they ridicule this budget and yet it has been been the thumbs up by David koch and other financial experts.
      Typical Liberals, who sit behind their keyboard and think that they know better than any of the financial experts.
      A couple of extracts from a news item online reads:
      ““So two years of astonishing economic outperformance has brought forward the budget surplus by three years. and if it hadn’t been for the Coalition coup late last year that made Tony Abbott opposition leader and meant the emmissions trading scheme had to be deferred, there would have been quite a sizeable surplus in 2012-13, rather than the bare $1 billion in today’s budget.”
      “That deferral of the CPRS has cost the budget $15.3 billion over three years between 2011 and 2014 and it meant that even with Australia’s incredible economic turnaround last year, the surplus could have been brough foward one year - not enough on which to base a winning election campaign.”
      ‘But then just days after Tony Abbott became opposition leader and the CPRS was effectively killed, Ken Henry delivered to the government a solution: his Future Tax System Review contained the proposal for a 40 per cent resource rent tax on the miners.”
      This was found at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/11/2896630.html?site=thedrum
      The bottom line is that ,Tony Abbott is big noting himself by blaming the government for not taking notice to the review by Ken Henry, and they are also attacking the government for the 40% Resource Rent Tax which the Government has proposed , and yet it is Ken Henry’s Future Tax System Review that contained the proposal for the 40% mining tax which the Government has taken onboard.
      It is time for Tony Abbott and his Liberal colleagues, and the Liberal supporters that echo Abbott’s diatribe in these blogs to take of their blinkers so that they can see the full picture and not have just a narrow minded view .

    • watty says:

      08:48am | 12/05/10

      Christian"Get” Real.
      Hendry delivered his own ambition to tax the mining industry in 2009.
      It has now been used to replace Rudd’s other failed attempt to scam business,theCPRS, which you estimated would have raised $15 billion.

      I give you my simple analysis of Labor’s Budget using the mining “Super Tax” as a given and a definite income

      I am going out to buy a multi-million dollar property this week as I MAY JUST WIN LOTTO next year.

    • Sherlock says:

      10:26am | 12/05/10

      That’s right watty.

      Rudd simply replaced the $12 billion a year CPRS slug on every Australian with a $12 billion a year mining tax slug on every Australian.

      Presently a lot of people think it’s an other people tax. i.e. a $12 billion daoolar impost on big business. When the realise that will be coming out of their pockets they will get angry.

    • Andrew says:

      10:32am | 12/05/10

      David Koch is a Rudd cheerleader. The BS dorothy dixers he throws at Rudd during his infomercials on Sunrise are a sad indictment of the shallow left leaning lazy fourth estate in this country.

    • ABC says:

      12:11pm | 12/05/10

      Christian,

      If you are relying on David Koch as a barometer of sound and sincere enconomic analysis credentials then you really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

    • Frank says:

      12:59pm | 12/05/10

      The mining tax is an interesting one. Remember when the GST got introduced? The millions of ordinary taxpayers just shrugged their shoulder and just took it. Can’t remember anyone threatening or actually leaving the country. Now we have a handful of mining execs and they seem to have the power to hold the whole country to ransom and scare the public into a quivering mess.

    • Mark says:

      01:53pm | 12/05/10

      Koch and expert and mutually exclusive terms.

      Koch, sycophant, light weight, ambulance chaser, pretend journo, Labor cheerleader.

      Now the above words all go together Christian. If telling us The Budget is super dooper because Kochie and the air head Mel said so then you have more troubles than I think you have.

      Trust me CR they don’t hold much in the way of credibility in the real world.

    • stevie says:

      11:55pm | 11/05/10

      They both have brains the size of thimbles - the Australian public is awake to this kind of budget manipulation by Swann and the even more feeble Rudd.

    • Saskia says:

      10:48am | 12/05/10

      Stevie you are way way overstating it.  Rudd and Swan are both pin heads with barely a synapse between them.  Sadly for us it is the synapse for sly, sociopathic cunning that is a hallmark of these creeps who will say anything to hold power for power’s sake.

      A forecast based on predicted record economic growth, and based on a huge tax on our best industry that has not even been passed yet.  Anyone that falls for the spin is a simpleton.

    • John A Neve says:

      06:11am | 12/05/10

      When you put aside the party bias and look at the facts. This is the ideal budget in the circumstances.
      Sadly even David’s article has a high degree of bias, but he hasn’t not put his finger on any real fault with this budget, rather he talks of what if?

      I have no wory with any form of tax, provided it is spent wisely. I also doubt the mining companies will leave our shores.

    • Christian Real says:

      06:45am | 12/05/10

      David
      “The smartest guys in the room” is certainly not these liberal bloggers who infiltrate these blogs with the diatribe they write.
      But what could one expect from Tony Abbott and his Liberal colleagues,and from these Liberal followers, who echo the mantra and diatribe that is Liberal party policy.
      Tony Abbott, would be a disaster should he ever get elected to the top job, simply because he has no ideas, no policy and no direction in which to take Australia and Australians.
      The fact that Tony Abbott has deceitfully used the proposed 40% Resource Rent Tax as a weapon to attack the government with, when it was one of the proposals contained in the Ken Henry tax review, simply shows that Tony Abbott does not have any idea or clue about what he is raving on about.

    • Andrew says:

      10:38am | 12/05/10

      Why are liberal bloggers “infiltrating”? Are you suggesting only non aligned voters or labor zealots such as yourself be “allowed” to comment? Perhaps you could have a talk to Conroy about it.

      Its narrow minded, rusted on, lefty socialist, achievement haters like you that contribute nothing to the political debate in this country that make people like me want to become more politically involved.

      So you think Tony Abbott “would be a disaster”. Well Rudd and labor already have been.

      You really should try to mount a cogent argument before you spew you vitriol. You just don’t have any credibility.

    • Mark says:

      02:02pm | 12/05/10

      Christian,

      I can read all of your words.

      I found a sentence or two that was sort of literate when taken in isolation.

      For the life of me I have no idea what you are saying.

      Are you claiming that the mining tax was Ken Henry’s idea and therefore not the Labor governments so thus we can’t blame Labor for bringing it in?

      Is that what you are really saying? Ken Henry sets the monetary and fiscal policy for Australia so to “blame” Labor is unjust.

      Pass the dutchie dude. That stuff you are smoking must be awesome.

      Run back to class and when you get another idea think it through before posting for the love of God. You are making yourself appear to be, at best, incompetent at worst stoned. Damn I hope you are stoned. Would explain a lot actually.

    • Christian Real says:

      02:55pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew,
              I do not belong to the left faction, I am,and always have been with the right, and another thing, I am not a socialist.
      And may I ask you Andrew what have you achieved, or think that you have achieved?
      As for not contributing nothing to the political debate in this Country, you are wrong again on that account.
      I have been on numerous committees both State and Federal,and in two different States, I have been a campaign manager, and also a candidate for local council, I have received several literary awards,and I have spent almost a fortnight in Washington DC, in 2000, at the request of my publishers.
      As for credibility, I probably would have more than you Andrew.

    • Christian Real says:

      03:07pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew ,
                Perhaps the next time I run into Conroy, I could bring your suggestion up, last time I ran into him was at the 2004 Federal Election.

    • Andrew says:

      03:22pm | 12/05/10

      Snap snap snap .... you really are an angry self important little ant. If you think being on a “committee” is contributing you really are just what I thought you were. As for belonging to the right ... yeah ... um ...sure, ok, you’re about as right as Hugo Chavez. Nobody hates like the left.

      In any event as they say in the classics, only a fool argues with an idiot.

    • Adam Diver says:

      07:12pm | 12/05/10

      “I have received several literary awards” this has to be the best piece of spin on the punch to date. I have never ever seen a post by christian with the slightest resemblance of intelligence. At least other left wing bloggers such as pers and chong make you think.

      Either this is
      a) out and out lie
      b) PC gone mad
      c) Spin on a third grade spelling award you got for participating

    • Mark says:

      01:15pm | 13/05/10

      Ahh I see.

      Christian was Lathams public relations and social activities coach.

      I see where it all went wrong now.

      (I especially love the bit about literary awards. Hahahahah)

      On a serious what the hell did your post mean. Seriously I am intrigued it makes no sense what so ever. I got drunk, high, bent, medidcated, took uppers downers inners and outers last nigh in attempt to get “the vibe” of the thintg but alas no luck.

      I had a good time but desperately need closure now on the great mystery that is your post. I mean it sounds funky and I want to get the groove too!

      Enlighten us oh you of the literary prizes please.

    • Christian Real says:

      07:03am | 12/05/10

      Stevie, take a look in the mirror at yourself, your brain appears to be smaller than a thimble.

    • Aitch B says:

      07:30pm | 12/05/10

      Ah…. another “Christian Classic”. Revert to personal abuse.

      Did you feel ‘big’ spending a fortnight in Washington at the request of your publishers?  Wow…. what an achievement!!

    • Gary Cox says:

      07:48am | 12/05/10

      Yawn. I’m getting tired of Swannie patting himself on the back for ‘defying’ the GFC which is now obvious was an Atlantic Financial Crisis pretty much just affecting Europe and the US. The ‘stimulus’ was nothing but a vote buying exercise and was a massive over reaction in hindsight which we will pay for for years. I’m also getting tired of Swannie banging on about returning the budget to surplus in three years. Budget forecasts have the same credibility as long term weather forecasts and long term market and currency forecasts. No one knows what’s in front of us in the next three years so I think Swannie should stop taking credit for something which ‘might’ happen three years from now.

      As for your headline, I think it should read ‘the smartest bloke in the world’ as I reckon Kevin Rudd honestly believes he is.

    • John A Neve says:

      08:58am | 12/05/10

      Gary Cox,

      Says this was an “over reaction in hindsight” and I’d agree. However, what would you have said Gary, if the government had done nothing and our economy had fallen over?

      Based on all I’ve read and heard, both major parties would have had stimulus packages, the only difference would have been the size.

      As they weren’t in power, who knows what size the oppositions package would have been?

    • Andrew says:

      12:27pm | 12/05/10

      Not bothering to read the article Pers because its probably just another one of your sad links that don’t say what you say they say BUT, did you every think that most if not all of the countries that went into recession did so because they already ran deficits and their debt as a % of GDP was 10x plus Australia’s. Oh of course not. To do that you’d have to give some credit to the previous government not our tax and spend Labor economic idiots.

      BTW you do understand this budget depends on:
      1. Australia having its best economic year next year for 60 years!
      2. A super tax that purports to know the commodities market for the next 10 years.
      3. Everyone not realising that the government has to find $27b for their share of the proposed NBN.

      Its a joke. It should take less than a week to realise that once again the emperor is doing a nudey run.

    • Sherlock says:

      02:10pm | 12/05/10

      persephone’s sending us to Crikey for justification on a Labor initiative.

      Hang on while I find a link to Andrew Bolt to prove that Tony Abbott is a great leader.

    • persephone says:

      03:29pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew and Sherlock

      how sad that you can’t deal with the argument so you criticise the source.

      That’s what being narrow minded is all about; you don’t even want to look at alternative arguments and engage with them, you simply want to keep believing what you want to believe.

      Thinking hurts, doesn’t it?

    • Andrew says:

      04:16pm | 12/05/10

      Hello Persephone Kettle it Andrew Pot, just calling to let you know you’re black.

      BTW, I didn’t criticise the source, I criticised your form in providing “absolute” references.

      If you’d bothered to read what i read you might have understood what I was getting at but thinking about it would be a bit hard wouldn’t it!

    • persephone says:

      07:50pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew, saying you’re not going to look at an article because you know -without looking - that it doesn’t say what I said it does, is just weak.

      There’s a couple of posts above this one where I’ve suggested people read certain links, and when they have, guess what? They find the articles are saying exactly what I said they did.

      Sorry, but if you’re the only one who can’t understand them, maybe it’s not me who has the comprehension problems.

      I don’t think it’s that at all. I think you don’t like your ideas challenged, so avoid reading information which might do that.

    • Super D says:

      09:05am | 12/05/10

      The way that we dodged a recession and have achieved speedy return to a balanced budget is a resulty of economic stimulus and outstanding economic management.  All Australians should be overwhelmed by the ability of the Chinese government to manage their economy.  We should be under no illusion. It’s all down to China.  We can get away with having economic incompetents at the tiller and it basically hasn’t cost us that much.  Long live the Chinese communist dictatorship and their economic miracles!

    • watchingwithinterest says:

      09:19am | 12/05/10

      We need to look at the big picture.
      Whilst the Rudd government did steer us through the global financial crisis, how did they do it.  they used the large surplus left to them by the previous government, raided the future funds and borrowed to the hilt.  they spent the money on program that have essentially ruined previously prosperous industries - anybody for insulation, and paid and continue to pay BIG business for school buildings that don’t provide value for money (Lend Lease, Bovis, Reed Group).  They haven’t provided budget cuts when they should be to ease pressure on interest rates all they have done is raise taxes. 30 billion of them to offset their new spending initatives.  This budget might be a no frills budget but it does not demonstrate the the Labor party has the ability to stop spending and make hard decisions in the interest of the long term benefit of Australia

    • persephone says:

      03:35pm | 12/05/10

      The future fund is still there, it hasn’t been ‘raided’.

      There is no evidence that the BER isn’t value for money.

      There are plenty of cuts in the budget - there’s even a Punch article outlining them.

      And let’s look at the big picture: international financial experts like Standard and Poors praising the budget and Australia’s economic situation; lowest unemployment and lowest debt/deficits in the developed world; one of the few countries in the developed world not to go into recession (and the others in the group had similar stimulus packages).

      And I don’t think economic theory says that lowering taxes means lower interest rates - I would think it would be quite the opposite, as lower taxes create demand and high demand drives higher interest rates.

      But anyway, higher interest rates are a sign of a healthy and growing economy, with a good employment rate and high earnings.

    • Andrew says:

      04:20pm | 12/05/10

      Oh Pers, apart from all of the BS you’ve have sprouted, can you really believe “There is no evidence that the BER isn’t value for money.”?

      Seriously, a stretch, even for you.

      Either you’ve drunk the coolade or you are smoking something very strong.

    • persephone says:

      07:53pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew, as usual, you resort to personal comments rather than engaging in argument.

      Look, there’s plenty of statements I made in the post above that can be challenged, using evidence. I could even do it.

      Why don’t you have a go?

      Try a bit of constructive input, for a change.

      You might even enjoy it.

    • Sherekahn says:

      09:57am | 12/05/10

      After two years of false initiatives and blunders and ignoring old advice, such as that of Britain’s Harold Macmillan, perhaps Kevin Rudd has at last found the rudder!

      From “Month” magazine 2008.
      Harold Macmillan’s once spoken words, of politics as being about “events, dear boy, events”.  For this version of the life of politics, Rudd has nothing but contempt. Unlike the Liberal Party, Labor believes in action and reform. There is simply no point in holding power if it does not lead to a commitment to change.
        Although he supports all sectors of industry, it is clear from his speeches that he has a special eye to the future of manufacturing. “When Kevin Rudd said he wanted Australia to remain ‘a country that actually makes things’,” Carr told a group of manufacturers who met in Geelong earlier this year, “I cheered.”

      Has he at last recognised the past wasted two years? 
      Has he also recognised Bob Carr’s words about mass migration to pay for future health as, “a great ponzi scheme?”
      The 25% rise in tax on the Mining sector is a road to Beijing revelation.  Indeed a stroke of awakening common sense.
      Wayne Swan’s budget would seem to suggest that there are better ways of building up infrastructure without planting the seeds of future problems connected with mass immigration.

    • Andrew says:

      10:55am | 12/05/10

      Very nicely written. However where oh where in this budget or anywhere else does this Labor party encourage manafacturing? How exactly is Australia expected to compete in manafacturing against the likes of Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand. Particularly when a number of Chinese manufacturers are already moving to those countries because they are cheaper.

      If there was money to be spent on real infrastructure development to support increased production of sustainable resources (primary industries), I would applaud, but there is nothing.

      This Labor government has successfully done what most labor governments try to do. It has redistributed wealth (although it initially did so quite inefficiently).

      Simple process:
      1. Spend more than you’ve got.
      2. Idenitfy profitable/productive areas of the economy which are not widespread in their ownership or are owned by a minority group you can pick on (in this case you convince everyone mining companies are foreign owned and hope like hell everyone doesn’t realise their super funds are now paying for the governments extra tax).
      3. You convince everyone that companies that have risked capital and developed resources are actually getting a free ride and “bludging or stealing” something that every Australian owns.
      4. You convince everyone that any profit greater than the long term bond rate (approx 6%) is a super profit and ought to be taxed higher (if that’s not socialism I don’t know what is).
      5. You tax it, you spend it (or waste it by handing everyone who earns below a certain amount $900 to buy a new plasma from China)
      6. Hey presto, stealth wealth redistribution! Tah Dah!

    • Willy K says:

      10:36am | 12/05/10

      As the man voted by British Political Experts as the best British Prime Minister of all time said:

      “Attempting to tax the nation into prosperity is like a man in a bucket trying to lift himself up by the handle”

      Swan’s budget was the most fraudulent and sly budget delivered in any of our lifetimes.

    • Andrew says:

      10:58am | 12/05/10

      Spot on. They just don’t have any credibility left.

    • Henry says:

      11:08am | 12/05/10

      Nail on the head.  How good would it be if we had our own Churchill.

      Come back JWH!

    • Sherekahn says:

      10:32am | 13/05/10

      Just wait and see.  The miners should have built towns not too far from the mines, with trains running to and from, for miners to have their families nearby.  At least we must hope this mining tax will pay for the increasing infrastructure needed to upgrade the efficiency of delivering the ores to Ports etc.

    • Randal says:

      10:51am | 12/05/10

      It is a do nothing budget based purely on best outcomes, it is a budget that makes no tough decisions to actually cut government spending. It contains the largest deficit since the war of $40 billion and trumpets an event that has not, and may not happen, in forward estimates of a hopeful surplus in 3 years.

      So what happens to this surplus if the single driving force of paying off the debt, China and trade terms go south??

      What will occur if the sovereign debt crisis in Greece, spreads like a virus to Spain, Portugal and the rest of Europe, causing a double dip global recession??

      Well that would make these forward estimates worthless and if history tells us anything, the forward estimates are rarely accurate.

      So this document should be judged on what it delivers now, a massive debt with no measure to curtail it, an attack upon the industry that they are relying to pay off the massive debt that the government created through its reckless spending and confirmation of what is well known, that Australia survived the GFC because of one sector - the resources sector - without it we would have gone down the gurgler like Europe and the USA.

      So how does the government reward this sector? - It tries to destroy it with a ‘Great Big New Tax’ that will inevitably send investment dollars overseas and hike prices locally, putting further pressure on inflation and interest rates.

      Economic irresponsibility lies at the heart of this budget and it is typical Labor, no spending cut’s just the invention of new taxes to pay for their largesse and when the Senate blocks the RRT and the Tobacco tax (as they should) it will be in tatters, with a massive black hole and a deficit heading towards $55 billion.

      This is what they trumpet as something to be proud of and it is this arrogance and incompetence that has destined this government to one term in office.

    • Pete says:

      10:52am | 12/05/10

      Seven interest rate rises in two years, massive debt levels that are increasing every day, $9Billion wiped off the mining sector shares in one day after the announcement of the super profits tax .... yes, these idiots have a lot to bleat about don’t they.

      And let’s not mention the pathetically run and incredibly wasteful Insulation Scheme or the BER or the lies and waste on Health. Surely no one is going to buy into this rubbish.

      And the key question remains - where is this budget when the super profits tax fails?

    • Bryan says:

      12:23pm | 12/05/10

      It’s rather convenient that most of the big ticket items promised will only come to fruition in 2 to 3 years. When in all probability Rudd and Swan will not be around. How many times have we heard the working families line over the past 2 years? Do we really have to be reminded? Last year what were the budget forecasts? And this year what is the reality? Really, what does Rudd and Swan take the electorate for?

      Here’s the reality – if Rudd and Swan had taken better care of Taxpayer dollars over the past 2 years we would have been substantially better off than we are now. How much money has been wasted on giveaways, home insulation the BER and who knows how many other things that have yet to see the light of day. If Rudd’s greatest policy back down – the CPRS - had been brought in where would we be now? Was there really a long term plan? Or was the Tobacco tax and the Resources super tax idea cobbled together just in time for Budget 2010? A great indicator of future performance is past performance!

    • Chris says:

      12:29pm | 12/05/10

      David,

      I would be careful with your title. The last time this was applied to a bunch of people was Enron and look how they ended up?

      Good article though.

    • Michael says:

      01:18pm | 12/05/10

      There is a lot of crap going on about the Super Profits Tax.  When a previous government introduced the Petroleum Resource Rent tax, the oil and gas industry said the sky would fall in, that there would no exploration etc etc.  What is happening now!!  Exactly the same.  The CEOs are only concerned they will lose their bonus.  The mining companies suggested that we move to a Resource Rent tax but only on future projects.  The government and the industry will negotiate and we will find it will be similar to the Petroleum Resource Rent tax.  Mining companies should pay for the minerals they dig up, as they are making huge profits.  Yes they pay tax, but th minerals in the ground are not theirs, they belong to all Australians.  A lot of these companies are foreign owned or have significant foreign ownership.  The profits are not necessarily staying in the country, so we need to ensure we get a benefit for all the tax concessions, roads, rail infrastructure that we all pay the mining companies out of our taxes.

    • Eye4anEye says:

      03:27pm | 12/05/10

      Big difference in the scenario there is that the PTTR tax starts after 11% profits and the mining money grab starts after 6% - I suggest if the mining tax started at the same rate of 11% and as with the PTTR tax did’nt apply to existing projects the response would be somewhat different - at least if that was the case I’d consider it a thought out policy and not totally unfair tax grab (which I currently think it is - for some reason labor has the worst case of tall poppy syndrome I’ve ever heard of).

    • Andrew says:

      03:45pm | 12/05/10

      Michael, do you mind getting your facts straight. The PRRT and the proposed mining “super” tax are very different.

      Here’s a little lesson for you son:
      1. The PRRT kicks in at a rate of the long term bond rate + 5.5% (which equates to a medium to high cost of capital formula).
      2. The proposed SUPER PROFITS TAX (SPT) kicks in at the long term bond rate + ....... nothing. The long term bond rate is the cost of capital to the most secure instutions in the world that is the cost of AAA rated sovereign debt. Usually those bonds are 5 years.
      3. Most mining projects are amortised over 20+ years. Accordingly the cost of capital is quite high (11 - 12%) because the risk is considered fairly high.
      4. Australia depends on foreign capital for the vast majority of its projects. So now we should shun that capital because they expect a return on their investment?
      5. The proposed SPT appears to be aimed at EBITDA stage of profits. If that is the case the tax would kick in effectively at around 2-4% profit margin. Given inflation runs at between 2-3% that effectively means the SPT kicks in once a company make 1% profit.
      6. This proposal applies to existing ventures. Under the circumstances what happens if you have modelled for a return of $x and now it is significantly less. Let me tell you, you become a risk and the reason you became a risk is sovereign risk.
      7. oops, now all those nasty foreign investors pull their cash out. Sell down shares, bankers withdraw funding and they move to where they can get sovereign certainty like Canada, South Africa or even Equatorial Guinea.
      8. Hey they’ll come back when those place run out of resources. China needs everything they can get their hands on. Really, they call it a boom for one reason, it doesn’t last forever.
      9. Let’s say they do come back because we get rid of this tax, the damage is done, Rudd & Co. are long gone and now we have a budget hole where that SPT was supposed to be. Whatdya do then sunshine?

      Oh and if the mineral wealth belongs to all Australians thats fine. Why didn’t all Australians invest to dig it up? In fact given we all share a planet why don’t the resources belong to everyone in the world? In fact why doesn’t all the land belong to everyone equally??

      Finally on the question of infrastructure. Rail is generally built or paid for by the miners, in fact in terms of freight, commuter rail would not be able to operate without the subsidies it receives from freight rail.

      BHP and RIO built their own rail in the Pilbara and FMG have also built rail. These guys have also built many roads and ports or upgraded capacity.

    • Tim says:

      04:33pm | 12/05/10

      Andrew,
      1% profit?
      Evidence please.
      BTW, nice attempt at a scare campaign but I think i’ll trust the estimates of the treasury department over your good self.

    • Badger says:

      01:56pm | 12/05/10

      Thats it Slug the Mining Companies because they MAY make a profit of 9 Billion !!!!.

      Would any one like to invest Billions of dollars , maybe Trillions, to make 9 Billion with a return of only a very small capital gain on your Very Risky Investment, I don’t think so,( that is a Labor Government type of Investment).
       
      Get real will all of you please, otherwise we will loose a lot of Risk Capital Investments in Australia, and they will go off shore for sure.

        Swanny has no Idea what he is up to, or is being poorly advised, if at-all, could be just off the top of his head.

    • persephone says:

      03:39pm | 12/05/10

      They don’t get taxed whilst they’re in the exploration and development phase - in fact, there are incentives offered for exploration, so quite the opposite.

      And then their taxes would be lower than they are at present until they reach a profit margin of over 12% - scarcely a poor return for investments.

    • Andrew says:

      04:27pm | 12/05/10

      Where do you get the 12% from Pers? That is not what Swann and Rudd are saying they say once it gets past the long term bond rate (currently 5-6%) and that is at EBITDA. So ,therefore not taking into account depreciation or amortisation.

      Given inflation runs at 2-3% that means the tax cuts in at around 1% cash profit. If you know otherwise please put the evidence forward. Otherwise get your facts straight.

    • mintxx says:

      01:59pm | 12/05/10

      ‘The profits are not necessarily staying in the country, so we need to ensure we get a benefit for all the tax concessions, roads, rail infrastructure that we all pay the mining companies out of our taxes.’

      absolutely correct!

    • Saskia says:

      02:12pm | 12/05/10

      Socialism 101.  Listen to yourself.

      Ahh the Xenophobia.

    • Andrew says:

      03:16pm | 12/05/10

      Soooo .... does that mean if your super fund invests in a company that has projects in Africa then you’d be happy to pay more tax if South Africa suddenly put their resource tax up to the highest in the world or do you think maybe, you might just tell you super fund to invest in something else? Sovereign risk to high. Invest in Canada. Now poor old S.A. can’t deliver on its projects cause no “nasty nasty” foreign capital is being introduced to pay for development. Now substitute Australia for S.A. and you have the laughing stock of the world in terms of how to stuff up foreign capital inflows.

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      03:04pm | 12/05/10

      What I find strange is that people won’t put their full names to their ‘sincere’comments! Why? This budget is like everything else the Rudd-Gillard-Swan ALP Government has done. It is all smoke’n'mirrors. Their entire budget is predicated upon their, arrogant, assumptin that the new, additional 40% Tax, yes that 40% is in addition to all the tax the mining companies already have to pay, will be passed by the Federal Parliament!
      Swan is being so “goody-goody two shoes” when he says this is not “an election budget” Of course it is! That is why he has hidden all the nasties like cuts to programmes, funding etc. in the small print. The billions they say they will be pouring into Health may, for all we know, be reduced, altered then shelved and eventually abandoned like so much already has been. Given Rudd’s record on reneging on promises, his abandoned death-dealing insulation programme, rorted school building prgrammes, the billions being squandered on conducting investigations into his ill-conceived, fatal and fatally flwaed programmes we should set no store in his and Swan’s newest proposals.
      Rudd is now increasingly unpopular and distrusted. Abbott is at about the same level. Does this mean that Australia, come the November Federal Election, will, just like the UK, get a Hung Parliament. What fun!

    • John says:

      04:35pm | 12/05/10

      The budget should have been entitled ‘all smoke and miners”

    • AC says:

      04:48pm | 12/05/10

      Sick of all you bloody whingers about money going offshore. Where do you think the capital to build these mines and dig up the resources come from? If you’re not prepared to put your own dollar down to invest in mining, why the hell should you get anything? Mining is a very capital intensive sector and it is only in the recent years when their profits are soaring. Its like slugging your lottery winnings with a 40% tax but not letting you deduct the cost of your tickets as an expense.

    • H of SA says:

      05:04pm | 12/05/10

      The biggest problem for each party at present is its leader. Rudd has had such a bad month he is nearly as unpopular as Tony Abbott.

      My guess is that the advantages of incumbancy (like the ability to hand down a budjet) will get the government over the line - unless the Liberals are willing to start bringing out their own policies

    • Saskia says:

      12:52am | 13/05/10

      Keep up the ALP party line.  No one is listening to you anymore.  Spin is dead.

    • Doug says:

      03:26pm | 14/05/10

      Did any of you lot who are bagging Labor return the $900… I thought not…

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

Sorry ex-premier, I'm not paying for your lunch. http://t.co/Kg0G8PBl

ToryShepherd

SA. It's the middle bottom bit. (PS I think I heard that phrase on @triplej, apologies for nicking!) http://t.co/YOhdLSlj

Lucy Kippist

Complimentary packing, free childcare & convenience aplenty. Thats what i want from the supermarket. How about you? http://t.co/FV4tgjji

Daniel Piotrowski

#Thomson will never get brothel tapes, CCTV-in-brothels experts tell the ABC. http://t.co/7YFORBBJ

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Deep down we’re all unionists, even the haters

Deep down we’re all unionists, even the haters

Bill Kelty made a memorable speech last week. Addressing the ACTU Congress Dinner in Sydney, the legendary…

Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia…

Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia…

Speaking of yourself in the third person is usually a sign that you’re suffering from delusions…

South Australia. It’s the middle bottom bit.

South Australia. It’s the middle bottom bit.

If South Australia had just arrived in the world, red and wrinkled and mewling, what would we call it?…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

241 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter