Watching Kevin Rudd exhort the nation to work harder to deliver greater national productivity reminded me of a university attack that humanities students used to level at graduating students in the engineering faculty.

Illustration: Peter Nicholson of The Australian

Arts students used to mock engineering graduates for what they claimed was an inability to communicate beyond formulas and equations. 

They used to assert engineers would say on graduation: “Last year I couldn’t spell enganeer, this year I are one.”

Kevin Rudd’s achilles heel has always been his lack of economic experience and nous.

And like some illiterate engineering student attending a Shakespeare festival, Kevin “economic conservative“ Rudd has finally woken up to the fact that as Prime Minister he has to steer us through one of our greatest economic challenges – demographic change.

He’s urged us all to work harder for longer in a bid to wring more out of the economy as the workforce starts to inexorably shrink.

But in finally acknowledging what serious policy makers have been working on for years, he has ignored the inescapable fact that that his own policy decisions have worsened the productive efforts of the country.

And the problem is that, as a result,  taxpayers and their kids will have to foot an even greater tax burden for longer.

Wind the clock back to the pre-election environment of 2007. At that time, Rudd came under fire because it was discovered that he didn’t know what productivity actually was.

He fell apart when a leaked economic briefing exposed him over the issue of productivity, which he wrongly claimed was declining.

This lead to questions being asked about his understanding of the drivers of productivity and their effects on the economy.

He ducked them and, in the immediate aftermath of the gaffe, hid by appearing only on soft FM radio stations. Nevertheless, he continued his gratuitous attacks on the then government’s policies which were aimed at actually increasing productivity.

In particular, he decried exactly what he’s now trying to achieve by denigrating the so-called Welfare to Work reforms, which he labelled : “work until you drop.”

Now he’s asking people to do just that.

I’m sure there would be many who would argue that Rudd was merely attacking the Coalition as a tactic to winning in 2007.But that would ignore the fact that the first two years of Rudd’s government have been littered with policy decisions which have actually damaged the country’s efforts to increase productivity.

Untargeted spending on pink batts, for example, has driven the country deeper into debt than necessary and done nothing to improve our economic capacity or productivity.

When Rudd refers to budget deficits widening, taxpayers can thank him for the huge debt servicing costs which are now accruing. This is largely due to his haste to repaint schools and knock down serviceable buildings to build others.

Net debt is forecast to rise to $153.2 billion debt by 2013-14.  Already debt servicing cost have risen from zero in 2007-08 to $7 billion in ‘09-10 and will rise to $13.9 billion by ‘12-13.

That’s money which will end up in the hands of overseas lenders when it could’ve been put to better use improving the productivity of the economy.

The unwinding of workplace reforms to suit the union movement will also cost the economy. Measures designed to promote flexibility have been dismantled and union control reinstated, making it harder for employers to attract workers.

The Government’s decision to replicate existing broadband services with an unaccounted for $43 billion slush fund without any cost benefit analysis must surely be the most egregious example of nonproductive madness.

No-one knows what the NBN service will cost the end user, although most calculations have it far in excess of the current provider’s internet charges.

The big beneficiaries of the NBN will be gamers and big households with multiple simultaneous users – hardly a key to future national growth.

To be sure, the country has an enormous demographic challenge as the population ages and costs to service that ageing rise – all off a declining number of workers.

Greater productivity is one way of meeting that challenge. If the workforce does not become more productive, the required funds to maintain a decent quality of life for all Australians will have to be made through additional taxation, or services will need to be rationed or cut.

The golden rule of government has always been, firstly, to do no harm. Labor cannot say that its economic policies have contributed to the overall productive efforts of the country.

In fact, in addition to other non-productive spending,  introducing new environmental taxes and regulation will reduce Australia’s competitiveness and wealth at a time when the economic outlook is highly uncertain.

In this regard, taxpayers and their children will now need to work harder to overcome the damaging economic inefficiencies as a result of poor policy. Rudd needs to practice what he preaches.

He can’t ask people to work harder when he has not had the discipline to impose sensible productive reforms on the economy.

It’s easy to imagine the Prime Minister in the depths of night wondering just how he is running the country’s economy as an economic conservative when he was at a loss to grasp fundamental economic policy just two years ago.

“Last year, I didn’t know what productivity was,” he would say to himself in an honest moment. “Now I’m telling everyone to do it.”

110 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • John A Neve says:

      08:07am | 27/01/10

      Michelle @1214hrs on 26/1/10.

      Why does the world need “a superpower”?
      As I have stated previously, nationalism along with religion are divisive institutions. What is required is a world amalgam and it’s comeing.

    • John A Neve says:

      09:33am | 25/01/10

      Michelle @ 0921hrs,
      I think you paint a fairly accurate picture and one that is a natural proggression. Financially, socially, industrially and culturally the world is moving in one direction.
      We can either go with the flow or fight it. Sadly it’s a fight we cannot win, there is an old saying “you either fight them of join them”, to fight is to lose.
      Rudd’s big mistake is in not trying to take Australians with him, by telling them the truth. This is not helped by the opposition trying to turn back the clock, which cannot be done.
      We are 21 million people living on top of the world’s largest mine. Accept it and benefit, to deny it is to die. Evolution is all part of life, we all know what happens to creatures that fail to evolve, don’t we?

    • Michelle says:

      11:14am | 26/01/10

      Fatalism is not a policy, it is an affliction. The “natural progression” and “one direction” that you speak of leads to the economic and military supremacy of China. Does anyone in their right mind think China can be trusted to replace the USA as a superpower? The world belongs to those who will protect their place in it. China will steamroll those who “go with the flow”. We don’t have to revert to full-bottle protectionism, but we do need at the very least to stop financing the military rise of China through trade. Evolution is for those fit to struggle for their place, not for fatalists, and not for the Kevin Rudds who think that global talkfests can tame China. There are political parties rising all over Europe who reject various aspects of globalisation. I even saw one sprout in the USA in the last few weeks. The same will happen here too, if we can get over our apathy and fatalism.

    • John A Neve says:

      12:11pm | 25/01/10

      Phil @ 1255hrs/ 25/1/10,
      As I have previously stated (don’t you read), I have no intention of doing your research for you. I bet you used to crib of the other kids at school,
      not improved have you?

    • Phil says:

      11:55am | 25/01/10

      John

      Still waiting for your answers above mate!

    • Michelle says:

      08:21am | 25/01/10

      It is a mistake to view Kevin Rudd through the prism of nationalism. Regarding productivity, you can’t get blood out of a stone, even Kevin Rudd knows that. So why did he propose a dud solution to our shrinking workforce? Why did he suddenly become concerned with productivity when previously he worked against it? Simply to look like he tried the domestic solution before resorting to the global solution. Simply to look nationalistic when really he is a globalist. Rudd’s real solution to the shrinking workforce is to open our borders to unprecedented levels of immigration. When productivity fails to rise in the future, he can then justify increased immigration. It is consistent with Rudd’s push to dissolve Australia’s borders into an Asia Pacific Community. Joel Butler explains:

      “Free trade means free movement. Kevin Rudd’s proposal to implement an European Union-like organisation in the Asia-Pacific region is nothing short of insane… One of the basic structural processes operative in the EU is the free movement of people within the EU’s member countries. In this day and age, free movement of people is a necessary underpinning for “free trade” ...

      A European Union based model in the Asia Pacific region that allows free trade by allowing the free movement of people between member states would mean the end of Australia as we know it. It would be completely and utterly unworkable because it would see mass-migration of overseas workers into Australia at a level so completely unmanageable as to lead to the breakdown of the economy and the social infrastructure ...

      Using the very crude equivalent measure of Poles moving to the UK after its accession to the EU with these figures, an EU-type organisation that included Australia and these three Asian countries (leaving aside all the other proposed members) would see a migration to Australia of about 21.256 million people.”

      http://onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7488

      You heard that right: 20 million Asians/Indians headed this way. Rudd is paving the way for the free movement of labour across our border. That’s why Rudd welcomed the population forecast of 35 million by 2050: “I actually believe in a big Australia I make no apology for that”. And that’s why: “Senator Evans says Australia’s immigration policy needs to be more responsive to Australia’s skills needs. He’s predicting a ‘great debate’ on the idea of bringing in more unskilled migrants.”

      That’s why Rudd is not concerned with the comparatively piddly number of boat arrivals. That’s why, when Rudd announced his Asia Pacific Community, he said: “In the 1950s, sceptics saw European integration as unrealistic. But most people would now agree that the goal of the visionaries in Europe ... has been achieved. It is that spirit we need to capture in our hemisphere. Our special challenge is that we face a region with greater diversity ... But that should not stop us from thinking big…”

      Rudd is a big thinker. It is a mistake to view Rudd through the prism of nationalism. His actions can only be understood by seeing him as the globalist that he is. The debt-causing stimulus spending was an effort by globalists to maintain confidence in economic interdependence, rather than retreat into protectionism. Rudd’s current push for productivity is just a precursor to justify increased immigration/globalisation whilst maintaining the thin veil that he is a nationalist. So, rather than pointing out Rudd’s naivety, we should be pointing out his deceitful and dangerous erosion of Australia as a distinct, socially-cohesive entity.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      12:51pm | 25/01/10

      “Rudd is a big thinker” – for the nation or himself?  I’d suggest the latter.  Compared to Hawke or Keating who were “big thinkers”, we have a PM with “L” plates – a pretender.  He is opportunistic and will seize on any opportunity to promote himself and not the nation. The “Friend of the Chair” thingo is unfortunately a classic.

      As for immigration - I wonder the “typical voter profiles” of these people. And the other stirringly piece of deep thinking the PM shared with us not so long ago – reducing the voting age to 16. I wonder what type of voting profile a 16YO or 17YO would have?  Who would these two groups typically vote for?

      The EU has its own set of challenges due to the free movement of people within the EU and that’s why I would suggest that their law enforcement agencies look more like SAS than police.  And let’s not mention the deep cultural, social and political upheavals and dislocations that have and continue to be experienced in that part of the world.

      As for boarder changes - we can learn a few lessons from the UK when it became part of the EU, it did so on its own terms when it for example quite rightly held onto its currency.

      There is no need to fight change or progress, but we do need to make sure that it is done on our own terms and that we do not just blindly “do it” because someone else did. For this to be a success, we need to have a leader who will put the interests of the nation first and foremost.

    • Jan says:

      09:33am | 25/01/10

      Michelle, splendidly put. 

      Aussies don’t yet quite see what KRudd has planned for us. 

      Diversity (divisive) has ruined our country, sidelined Australianism and degraded our previously safe and unique culture.  In fact we now have no culture at all.  We facilitate and encourage everything foreign, while devaluing everything Australian.

      KRudd should get his backside out of carbon polluting aircraft, get behind his desk, and manage this country for the people who gave him that job.  His G-20 Copenhagen-style grandstanding, his efforts to sign Australian citizenry into inherently worrisome, irretrievable globalised everything, his UN aspirations, and his ambitions to lead some international outfit or other that would provide more opportunities to pontificate, are nothing short of frightening.
      And yes, “work till you drop”.  That’s the latest (contradictory ) tune.  He doesn’t seem to have much, so plucks some topic or other out of mid air to provide the media with some chatter, gives it a good going over and meanwhile…

      My biggest concern is that KRudd will devolve Australia’s autonomy to external controls.

      No-one outside his favoured group “working families” rates a mention.  Too bad if you are a single worker, a retired worker, a working couple, a single/married elderly, or someone reliant on government assistance.  That means you don’t fit his “working families” category so in the eyes of his government, you are a non-category nobody.

    • Steve Mount says:

      08:22am | 24/01/10

      The claim that the workforce is starting to shrink is nonsense. Our major problems are twofold. One is underemployment, witnessed in those at the beginning and the end of thier working lives. The other is a pitiful pay rate for the same people, The reality I see is one of employers dismissing the beginning workers on the basis of lack of experience, and dismissing the older ones as being beyond use. In either case when a willing participant does get work, the wage maxim is “take it or leave it”. When people confont this regularly, it is hardly surprising that they become disengaged. This is a social problem that any governmant is powerless to address, short of severe legislation, but one that requires employers, in a broad sense, to look beyond the high productivity years of 20s to 40s. The core of the problem is not a loss of workers, but a shrinking of viable employment, and I speak from experience. The cosy terms “workplace reform” and “increased productivity” are actually covers for “reduce the wages of the marginalised even further”. The question is “how to get more people into viable employment whilst paying a decent living wage?” Answer that and you’ve solved the problem.

    • Shaun says:

      12:57pm | 23/01/10

      I Think with this article, the cartoon at the top was a pretty good indicator it was going to be another exercise in Rudd bashing, and an opportunity for the faithful to write all sorts of comments on how bad he is.

      And of course the classic “I’m an economist, so I should know” even gets trotted out. Really? Well I’m a f***ing neurosurgeon. Prove that I’m not!

    • Shaun says:

      12:51pm | 23/01/10

      @Brian. That’s real clever stuff isn’t it? All Labor voter are dole bludgers aren’t they? So that is what passes for intelligent debate on this site?

    • Ricky says:

      12:50pm | 23/01/10

      It is truly scary John E Neve that you still think Rudd is doing a good job. He is useless & a total failure at everything he has touched, & it is rusted on labor imbeciles like yourself that are keeping this moron in power to Australias woe.

    • Darryl Price says:

      10:06am | 23/01/10

      While sewing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old Aussie farmer,

      who’s hand was caught in the gate while working cattle,

      the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man.


      Eventually the topic got around to Kevin Rudd and his role as our Prime Minister.


      The old farmer said, ‘Well, you know, in my opinion, Rudd is a ‘Post Turtle’‘.


      .

      Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him, what a ‘post turtle’ was.


      The old farmer said, ‘When you’re driving down a country

      road and you come across a fence post with a

      turtle balanced on top, that’s a ‘post turtle’.


      The old farmer saw the puzzled look on the doctor’s face so he

      continued to explain.


      A story from one of the more amusing viral emails - havent seen it on here yet’
      Kevin Rudd described as a “Post Turtle” accompanied by a picture of a turtle sitting helplessly on top of a fence post.

      You know he didn’t get up there by himself,

      he doesn’t belong up there, he doesn’t know what to do while he’s up there,

      and you just wonder what kind of dumb bugger put him up there to begin with.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      12:08pm | 23/01/10

      @ Saskiash 2.43pm Umm…..federation, conduct of policy during World War II, floating of the australian dollar, dismantling of tarriff barriers all happened under ALP government. Learn australian history, son.

    • Kon says:

      07:00am | 23/01/10

      At the end of the day it doesn’t matter what you say or do as long as you deliver results - rudd has delivered nothing,........a big fail

    • Are an engineer says:

      11:37pm | 22/01/10

      It is a bad example as an engineer wouldn’t make the mistakes that Rudd has. From this example an engineer would get the economy right, but would not be able to sell it to the general public. Rudd is the opposite, he tries to sell incompetence as success, while not understanding the economic processes.

    • iansand says:

      03:30pm | 22/01/10

      Should we have maintained the surplus, at a time of economic collapse, as a memorial to the wise financial management of Howard and Costello?  What should we have done with it?

    • Darryl Price says:

      01:33pm | 23/01/10

      Not bought every household a plasma TV?

    • TB says:

      02:17pm | 22/01/10

      “The Government’s decision to replicate existing broadband services with an unaccounted for $43 billion slush fund without any cost benefit analysis must surely be the most egregious example of nonproductive madness.”

      Wow, that’s a rather ignorant thing to say. The goal of the NBN (if the bloody thing ever gets off the ground) is to provide levels of service which are simply unobtainable with the existing telecommunications infrastructure. And if you see the NBN as only benefiting gamers and big households, then you’ve got some serious research to do.

      As to the cost of broadband services, to my knowledge there are two major factors:

      1) The metaphorical monopolistic elephant in the room (Telstra)
      2) Overseas bandwidth

      The first point can be addressed through legislative means - yes, you can put me in the “structural separation” camp, although I believe that the idea proposed by analysts at Deutsche Bank for Telstra’s network assets to be acquired and subsequently utilised in the NBN has some merit. The second issue can be addressed as part of the NBN - Pipe International’s PPC-1 cable to Guam is a good start (personally, I’m already reaping the benefits), and one that must be built upon if the NBN is to be viable.

      I also find AdamC’s reasoning that it’s pointless to build the NBN because it’ll be obsolete when it’s complete to be rather laughable. Our current infrastructure has been obsolete well over a decade, and I am curious to know precisely what technology will render fibre-optic cable obsolete within the next 10-20 years.

    • John A Neve says:

      02:17pm | 22/01/10

      Saskiash @ 1443hrs,
      I’ll assume (yes I know that’s dangerous), that your post is aimed at me.
      But those “unions” are made up of your fellow Australians. As are those “rabble-rousers”. As for those “bloated public service maggots” they are your neighbours. Regarding those “wefare bludgers” I can only hope you never become one.

      But I stand behind what I said before, Labor has done more for this country than those that followed and done it for longer.

    • persephone says:

      01:42pm | 22/01/10

      Carl, have a look at the debt incurred by other nations.

      Look at it any way you want to: per head, % of GDP, whatever.

      Australia’s borrowings are miniscule in comparison.

    • D'oh says:

      08:43am | 25/01/10

      @ persephone

      Umm, FAIL

      The reason Australia’s borrowings are miniscule in comparison is because they stood on the shoulders of Howard & Costello with respect to teh economy.

      Rudd & Swann are like Paris Hilton, inherit daddy’s money and then go on a binge.  If something does not change soon I guess Australia is just going to have to learn the hard way i.e. when the credit card payment is due.

    • Phil says:

      08:20pm | 24/01/10

      Persephone

      Comparing our debt to the Americans, Britains etc, and stating cause we arent that bad we only are going to owe 153bn and rising is like saying Milton Orkopoulos only drugged and screwed a few boys so he isnt that bad.

      Wake up and smell the roses. They sure have implanted you with the good old labor DNA (read bullshit chip)

    • John A Neve says:

      10:00am | 23/01/10

      Randa @ 1806hrs on 22/1/10,
      “National Debt” when the coalition took office was $700 billion, when they left office it was $3.2 trillion.

      Australia’s public sector debt as a % of GDP has been the lowest of all comparable countries since 1992. As Persphone has stated our debt is miniscule in comparison to other nations.

    • persephone says:

      10:06pm | 22/01/10

      Randa

      the world’s economy did catch cold. That’s the whole point.

      To stretch your analogy further: the rest of the world has double pneumonia, Australia’s escaped with a light cough.

      And, in the future, we’re still ahead of the eight ball, because the other developed economies have far far higher levels of debt than we do and far higher levels of unemployment (which will generate further debt for them, as well as other complications).

      To suggest that Australia has somehow weakened itself comparitive to other countries shows a dismal ignorance of what’s happening elsewhere economically.

    • Randa says:

      05:06pm | 22/01/10

      Near record national debt in relation to GDP is not minuscule by any stretch of the imagination peresphone.

      The facts are they took office in 2008 with government debt at -3.8% of GDP and we are tipped to tipped to reach over 23% (and rising) of GDP by 2014, when you consider private debt is over 100% of GDP this is a very scary position to be in.

      Now if the world’s economy sneezes we will catch cold as the buffer they were gifted by the Coalition is gone, and what a devastating cold it will be, one that will see our nation drowning in debt up to it’s eyeballs and there will be little government can do and they will have to watch the whole thing crash.

      That will be the Rudd legacy, the worst recession in this nation since, well of course the last time Labor where in power good old Mr “The Recession we had to have”.

      Just for the record, when was the last time debt was this high in relation to GDP, yep you guessed it 1995, and who was in power the good old money spending ALP!

      Will the nation ever learn?

    • persephone says:

      03:15pm | 22/01/10

      Gee, my answer is because we got in early with the stimulus, it was targetted properly and the banks were given the guarantees they needed to keep operating.

      Thus we didn’t have a massive loss of jobs to begin with, which meant we didn’t have the drain on resources this would have created and did maintain an ongoing revenue stream.

      We also didn’t have unnecessary foreclosures of debt or a drying up of borrowings, as banks had the confidence to keep loaning money.

      All of this - maitenance of present jobs meaning less strain on social services, a steady flow of taxation income for the government, and no need to spend money assisting those who lost homes - meant we didn’t have to borrow as much as other countries, or even as much as we expected.

    • Colin says:

      03:02pm | 22/01/10

      persephone, I think you’ll find that Australia’s household debt as a % of GDP is now up there with the top handful - 112% I seem to recall reading recently.  There’s all kinds of debt and different ways of looking at it to keep all the argumentative-for-the-sake-of-it types happy. But this is the foundational reality - Australia is over it’s eyeballs in debt. Whether you’re talking Fed, state, or household debt… we’re all underwater. All of our various govt’s can no longer bail out the household/consumer sector by spending/handouts (ie, Keynesianism), without digging themselves deeper into debt. It’s all well and good to subjectively claim that “Australia’s borrowings are miniscule”.  But the simple facts remain… no government generates wealth, only individuals. So, when every single part of the economy is in debt, and households collectively owe more than the entire economy generates p.a., that is an extremely precarious position for the individual, the states, and the nation to have placed itself in.  There’s no buffer left against any black swan or other events whether “external” or internal, or even just against human error, for that matter. The odds very strongly favour a serious economic crash here in Oz too… just like in every other heavily-indebted nation. As usual, Oz is just running a few years behind everyone else.

      No one person or entity is to blame for this dangerous situation. We all are.

    • D'oh says:

      02:20pm | 22/01/10

      “Australia’s borrowings are miniscule in comparison.”

      And the reason for that persephone is…...

    • John A Neve says:

      01:41pm | 22/01/10

      Chris @ 1420hrs,
      If I accepted what you have said and I don’t.  You are saying the electorate is easily fooled !! In which case they deserve all they get.
      It keeps coming back to the fact that in a DEMOCRACY government is the face and voice of the people. If this government is as bad as you seem to think !!!!! What does that say for the people?

    • iansand says:

      12:37pm | 22/01/10

      I was speaking to the CFO of a business with UK, US and Australian connections a couple of weeks ago.  They are looking at floating it in Australia in the next few months.  Why?  Because the others are “fucked for the next ten years”.  I think “fucked” is a technical financial term.  He is, incidentally, British based.

      Make of that what you will.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      01:18pm | 22/01/10

      Yep, we will also have that technical term applied to us if we continue to rack up debt on the national Crd Card.

      Somehow I think that the other two had a big hand it that thing called the GFC…... That could explain a thing or two.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      11:35am | 22/01/10

      Scary $0B to $7B to $14B.

      “Net debt is forecast to rise to $153.2 billion debt by 2013-14.  Already debt servicing cost have risen from zero in 2007-08 to $7 billion in ‘09-10 and will rise to $13.9 billion by ‘12-13.”

      I hope these projects meet or exceed the payback benchmarks. Somehow, I don’t think they are.

    • Saskiash says:

      11:27am | 22/01/10

      John A Neve

      “This ongoing debate as to which government handles money better is B***S***. A political and media beatup, if you look haed enough you can find fault with any government.”

      You are joking right?  Look at the stone cold hard rolled-gold facts of Coalition vs ALP govts in both state and federal level.  The Coalition handles finances consistently light-years better than Labor!  In our lifetimes for a start we have had Labor govts bankrupt 2 states SA & Vic, attempt to bankrupt us Whitlam, leave one hell of a mess and debt Hawke/Keating and now with KRudd we have the biggest debt ever in the history of Australia.  You need to get real.

    • Phil says:

      08:15pm | 24/01/10

      John

      We are waiting for your answers?

      OK Gough other than trying to bankrupt us did some infrastructure, hospitals etc.

      Keating and Hawke did some good reform, but took with the other hand and sent more businesses to hardship than the GFC.

      Please list in detail what Labor have done for the Country, other than be corrupt, criminals, who are known to abuse their power for personal gain, or send their state bankrupt, all the while carrying on like randy rabbits who could not control themselves.

    • John A Neve says:

      04:24pm | 23/01/10

      Wayne that is the trouble with people like you and Ricky, you don’t read. You see what you want to see, no where have I ever supported the Rudd government. So you slagging off at me is a waste of space.

      But dream on boys, just follow the words with your fingers, it gets easier with time, it’s called reading.

    • John A Neve says:

      07:46am | 23/01/10

      Marie & Brian @ 22/1/10,
      You both have a very cycloptic view of our parliament. As stated earlier there is no point in my doing your research for you, as you only see what suits you.  But i’ll repeat once again, any objective review of Australian politics would support Labor’s contribution over it’s opposition.

    • Brian says:

      04:40pm | 22/01/10

      Go back to Centrelink and benefit from Labor’s contribution to Australia - you have too much time on your hands and not enough information.

    • marie says:

      04:04pm | 22/01/10

      John A Neve. What are those things “Labor has done more for this country than those that followed and done it for longer?”

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      03:40pm | 22/01/10

      Thought you were a union stooge John A Neve and I guess I was right hey. Boy has Saskiash got your number. Picked you a mile away. That’s why you are so blind and loyal to the cause no matter what the cost.

    • Saskiash says:

      01:43pm | 22/01/10

      Name any of their contributions that have outweighed anything that the Coalition has done?  The number one priority is to set up and manage a productive economy so that citizens have wealth, security and jobs.  All the rest is way down the list.  Am utterly useless sorry uttered in a few seconds, or ‘free’ education (that lasted for about 15 years before even the ALP had to end it), or a dodgy deal with Unions where the union bosses are paid kick-backs so that they don’t rabble-rouse strikes - do not constitute worthy contributions to this nation.  I have studied politics in this country back to front - and to be brutal, I’ll be f*cked if I know of anything of merit any Labor govt has ever left Australia with.  Sure they hand-out our taxes to welfare bludgers and bloated public servant maggots like chicken feed - that is why the ‘mob’ votes for them - surely you are not saying you are part of this mob?

    • John A Neve says:

      01:12pm | 22/01/10

      Saskiash @ 1227hrs,
      I am not into party politics, but I am into politics. A review of Labors contribution to this country as opposed to the parties that have followed, would suggest their contribution far outways their opposition. Do a little research, the facts speak for themselves. I won’t go into the good or bad of either party, it’s all on record. But the facts are facts.

    • Brad Coward says:

      11:24am | 22/01/10

      @John A Neve….“look hard enough and you can find fault with any government”.  Mate….you clearly have not taken so much as a cursory glance at this lot, have you ?

    • Harquebus says:

      11:23am | 22/01/10

      KRudd is a religious nut and as such, is not capable of making a sane or rational decision. The worlds biggest danger, peak oil, is only a few years away and so far, I have only heard two politicians mention it. KRudd is not one of those.

    • John A Neve says:

      12:24pm | 24/01/10

      Andrew @1204hrs,
      I am glad we agree that “we’re a debt country”, which we are at all levels, see earlier post.
      But I certainly would not compare plasma TV’s with the Snowy Scheme,
      but each to his own.
      As to being ever out of debt, sorry never since the ‘70’s, Howard left office with a larger “Nationa Debt” than he inherited.

    • Chris says:

      01:20pm | 22/01/10

      John, you said that if you look hard enough you can find fault with any government, the problem with the Rudd government is that you dont have to look hard at all to find fault. Not in the ideas Mr Rudd took to the last election, but on his ability to deliver on these. Instead Mr Rudd has bamboozled us all with his made up phrases and managed to do not much else apart from convene committee after committee after committee to review the previous committee’s findings and recommendations. Mr Rudd has squandered a huge opportunity to act, not pontifcate

    • Brad Coward says:

      11:18am | 22/01/10

      Another day….another little bit of problematic specificity for Mr Rudd and his troupe of economic carnival performers !  Look….here comes another political cartoon waiting to happen !

    • persephone says:

      11:11am | 22/01/10

      CSallen

      Obviously it’s possible to be really cool and NOT be Julia Gillard, but thank you for the compliment anyway.

      The advice I refer to was Henry’s at the start of the GFC - go hard, go household, something along those lines - which meant we were ahead of the eight ball when it came to dealing with the GFC.

      And of course Swannie was worried, Mitzi. A good Treasurer would be.

      Part of Rudd’s - and Swannie’s - problem is that the advice was so good, we haven’t suffered (much) from the GFC, so people here can underestimate its effects.

      Other countries know better.  The media (alas) doesn’t dwell on the praise Rudd receives overseas in the way they did when anyone said anything at all vaguely nice about Howard, but a quick google shows how much esteem he’s held in.

      But don’t take my word for it! (Indeed, never take my word for anything. Do your own research. Just don’t take people like Gazard’s, either).

    • Damo says:

      11:08am | 22/01/10

      I wouldve thought the penny on Rudd would have dropped back when he couldnt read the productivity report. He was bogus then, and still is bogus now. I blame the media for giving him a soft ride into the chair. Without the media, there is no hope for Rudd, he certainly cant point and say - look at the scoreboard.

    • Brad Coward says:

      11:07am | 22/01/10

      Just nominate how much more productive we can be this year and double that prediction for the following year.  Put a bit of spin on it and we can appear to be one of those great disasters from Mao’s China known as the collective farm.  Go on, we can do it !  Anyhing that the Great Leader asks is not out of the question !

    • Aaron C says:

      11:05am | 22/01/10

      The thing that worries me the most about Krudd is that he seems to speak and act before he thinks with no due dilligence or any thought of the consequences what so ever. As some other commentors have pointed out, some basic cost-benefit analysis would come a long way.

    • CSallen says:

      10:48am | 22/01/10

      Persephone- can you please elaborate on which advice Swan and Rudd have taken and acted on?
      Just curious.
      By the way- are you actually Julia Gillard?
      Because that would be really cool.
      And explain a lot.

    • CSallen says:

      10:47am | 22/01/10

      Persephone- can you please elaborate on which advice Swan and Rudd have taken and acted on?
      Just curious.
      By the way- are you actually Julia Gillard?
      Because that would be really cool.
      And explain a lot.

    • persephone says:

      10:18am | 22/01/10

      We don’t - or we shouldn’t - expect our politicians to be experts on everything. Obviously, they can’t be.

      Very few (if any) of our past PMs and Treasurers had any economic credentials before they came to the position.

      What is important is their willingness to listen to and weigh up the advice they’ve been given.

      Rudd and Swan have shown that they’re prepared to listen to and take advice.

      John A Neve is correct: if my grandchildren are going to be using the school halls being built today, I don’t see why they shouldn’t pay something towards them.

      All major businesses run on debt; they recognise that borrowing money to invest in present necessities pays off in the long run. And most Australians go into debt to buy a house, recognising that it’s economically wiser than renting.

      Most of the debt has not gone into the two stimulus handouts, which saved jobs - which prevented further debt. Most of the borrowings are for school buildings (see above) and for infrastructure which will help our economy.

      As for a ‘recession that was never going to hit Australia hard’ - please cite the economists who say that. I haven’t read of any.

    • persephone says:

      10:12pm | 22/01/10

      As I said, no PM or Treasurer in living memory has had much economic cred coming into office.

      Howard was a solicitor, Costello a lawyer, Keating was self educated, Hawke was a lawyer, etc.

      The quality of their economic decision making was determined by the quality of the advice they were given and their willingness to listen to and implement it, not because of any economic understanding they had coming to the job.

      Of course, most of them picked up some understanding of economic principles, but the point is that it wasn’t in their backgrounds, as it isn’t in Rudd’s.

    • Manik says:

      05:57pm | 22/01/10

      They may not be experts in everything but they bloody well need to understand the core of a society is its economy because from that pool everyone eats. You have to have a fundamental understanding to make it work. Keating once said he was pulling the levers of the economy. This is quite possibly the scariest post on here.

    • Brian B says:

      02:37pm | 22/01/10

      “Rudd and Swan have shown that they’re prepared to listen and take advice”.

      I had to read this twice to be certain it wasn’t tongue in cheek Persephone!!

      Rudd only listens to Rudd, asks himself a question and then answers it with meaningless technobabble.

      The man is the worst Prime Minister in my long memory.

    • Brad Coward says:

      11:14am | 22/01/10

      I agree with you completely, persephone !  Our politicians can’t be expert in everything.  If only Rudd, Swan, Gillard and company were expert in something….that would speak volumes !  Silly, bloody me !  I forgot how expert they are in wasting vast amounts of taxpayers money, taking overseas trips, chasing after celebrities and putting spin on top of BS !

    • Toddzilla says:

      11:01am | 22/01/10

      I’m an economist who Persephone and I said that all along. In fact, I predicted the global financial crisis down to the month of onset in 2007 (my boss still has the email to prove it).

      As for those who were stupid enough to believe the stimulus package worked, as yourself this question: Why didn’t the exact same policies work in the dozens of other countries that implemented them? If the stimulus actually was the key factor it would’ve worked wherever it was used, but it didn’t. There was a key difference in Australia and that was the economy the ALP inherited from Costello. That is the one and only reason why we avoided the worst of the downturn.

    • DT says:

      10:17am | 22/01/10

      Would you employ either Rudd or Swan to manage a business?

    • Phil says:

      08:07pm | 24/01/10

      DT

      Not a hope in hell. Thats why most of them are ex trade unionists, or public servants. Very few labor pollies could get a fair dinkum job in the real world. Hawke, Keating and probably Tanner aside, unless labor are still in power then they will all become lobbyists to the government. Isnt that the labor way.

      Mind you Persephone might employ them

    • John A Neve says:

      10:12am | 22/01/10

      Toddzilla @ 1037hrs,
      How can you say “a recession that was never going to hit Australia hard” !! Come on, you can see the future can you?
      Every generation has paid for past generations building, a good example is of course the Aged Pension, another is war debt. If you build some thing eg
      the Snowy Scheme why shouldn’t future generation contribute to the cost?

      “Most of the debt came in the form of useless handouts to people in order to avoid recession”. If it avoided recession I would argue it was money well spent.

    • DT says:

      09:04am | 24/01/10

      John Australia avoided a recession because unlike the other developed nations we had twenty two years of major economic reforms implimented, a banking regulator (APRA) created by the previous government in 1998, previous federal Labor debt repaid, years of budget surpluses and funds invested for the future etc. However, if Australia had entered a shallow recession would we have been worse off than avoiding one by less than 1.0% growth and spending the surplus and borrowing an enormous amount to handicap economic prosperity for decades to come? Rudd is Whitlam heavy.

    • persephone says:

      10:11am | 22/01/10

      Adam

      Well, as far as education goes, we’re consistently one of the highest ranking nations in the world, so we’re doing something right at primary and secondary level.

      We seem to lose out at tertiary (although again, we punch above our weight, quality wise) - where we don’t train enough of the kind of professionals we need and thus have to import brainpower from overseas, doctors being the obvious example.

    • Dingo_aus says:

      10:07am | 22/01/10

      Well put.

      Funny how the detractors to this article don’t seem to be using any facts in their attacks?  Feel free to point out Mr Rudd’s commercial experience or Mr Swan’s experience in the productive (non-government) sector of society.

      You can’t because these facts don’t exist, just spin does.

    • Toddzilla says:

      09:37am | 22/01/10

      This is just another example of Kevin “Goebbel” Rudd’s philosophy of inverting the rhetoric on any topic. Who knew that PM stood for Propaganda Minister. Rudd’s got no clue on economics: he thinks the best way to keep glaziers in work is to smash windows.

      @ John A Neve: “As to leaving debt to our children !!  If the assets are still there and they use them, why shouldn’t they contribute to the cost?” Seriously??? Most of the debt came in the form of useless handouts to people in order to avoid a recession that was never going to hit Australia hard. There ain’t no assets around that the kiddies should be forced to pay back.

    • Phil says:

      09:37am | 22/01/10

      Id rather get a local surgeon or tale the flight/drive thanks.

      How much are you prepared to pay for this.

      Say your average household bill for data is $ 99 per month, fastest speed and 25gb per month. How much do you think they will need to charge to get a return on investment.?

      Further given that its only to the road/gutter what do you think it will cost to have installed?

      Given Mr Rudd;s prefered method is to have committee after committee why announce such a blaze policy without cost benefit analysis. FIrst 4bn now 43bn, recon by the time its done if labor are true to form it will cost 100 bn

    • persephone says:

      09:22am | 22/01/10

      Fair crack of the sauce bottle, Adam C, the Coalition has also said that they’ll keep present industry subsidies going.

      It’s a bipartisan thing.

      Lots of infrastructure spending in useful areas - the NBN being one - but also big expansion of rail, for example.

      And education is constantly identified as one of the biggies when it comes to productivity - helps if we don’t have to import brain power, as we do at present in many fields - so investment there is also investment in productivity.

    • AdamC says:

      09:42am | 22/01/10

      Alas, Persephone, you are right. The Coalition also has form on industry assistance policy.

      Mind you, you are definitely wrong about the NBN. Something that is likely to be obsolete (given its fixed-line nature) as soon as it is completed is unlikely to be worthwhile infrastructure.

      And I agree re education, but constantly despair. How can we improve educational standards, especially at the primary and secondary levels?

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      09:00am | 22/01/10

      Well done Shaun, you is a smart one hey….can’t fool you.
      Rudd IS out of his depth and we don’t need any paint for that one…and spin is something the Rudd government does as matter of course.

    • Shaun says:

      09:00am | 22/01/10

      Specious reasoning is necessary when one is writing rhetoric

    • AdamC says:

      08:57am | 22/01/10

      This is all true, though the post goes at Kruddy from the wrong angle. The PM’s real problem is that, for reasons both political and perhaps philosophical, he cannot countenance any measures that boost ‘productivity’ beyond building things.

      Infrastructure – the ALP’s magic word du jour – is useful, but it is not really productivity-boosting as such. Infrastructure projects are investments in economic capacity: they have a cost and they yield an economic return in the form of increased economic activity. If the benefits exceed the costs, then they are worthwhile. Governments have to be disciplined and ensure projects have genuine value. In the case of the under-analysed NBN, probably the most useless and egregious monument to an ego since the pyramids of Giza, the benefits and costs almost certainly do not stack up.

      Meanwhile, Kruddy baulks at anything that would actually give a free-of-charge fillip to productivity. Specifically, a modern industrial relations system, free trade in books and weaning legacy industries off the government teat have all been sacrificed to appease union deities.

    • Wayne Hutchins says:

      09:22am | 22/01/10

      Swan is out of his depth Margaret! The more he has less to say then the less chance there is of him making a goose out of himself. Did that make any sense?

    • Margaret Gray says:

      08:56am | 22/01/10

      Does anyone know who the treasurer of Australia is?

      After almost daily stimuli missives in early 2009, it’s been literally months since I’ve heard from anyone in authority?

      Everyone else appears to have an opinion and comment on the economy except the person in charge of it.

      Can anyone help me out?

    • Evan Findlay says:

      08:41pm | 22/01/10

      Yes Margaret, For twelve years Costello wandered the halls of Canberra and made no impact on economic reform at all. Did you ask the same question of him? A man that oversaw 326 Billion dollars of tax revenue and squandered it on cash splashes and unsustainable middle class welfare. Did we hear boo from you then? At least people still have jobs and families are still paying their mortgages, excessively high after the previous Governments ridiculous FHG policy. What a brain explosion that was!

    • Brad Coward says:

      05:27pm | 22/01/10

      @Mitzi…I remember that day well.  Mr Swan must have thanked his lucky stars that he’d decided to wear his brown corduroy slacks to the press conference to hide his concerns !

    • Colin says:

      02:47pm | 22/01/10

      Teenagers book, ‘eh tc?  He’ll be needing to borrow our glorious PM’s foul tongue for that, then.

    • tc says:

      01:33pm | 22/01/10

      I think he’s writing a teenagers’ book

    • Brad Coward says:

      11:27am | 22/01/10

      @ Mitzi….I remember that day well.  Mr Swan must have thanked his lucky stars that he’d decided to wear his brown corduroy slacks to the press conference to hide his concerns.

    • Mitzi says:

      11:00am | 22/01/10

      I’ll never forget Swan’s face when the GFC hit. He tried so hard to appear undisturbed at not knowing what to do. But his eyes always give him away. And of course what did he & his Kaiser do….SPEND! Throw money around & hope for the best. What they didn’t tell us was that our kids will be paying that spending spree off for years to come. and even more shameful very few in Krudd’s Army, aka the media, told us either.

    • Luke says:

      08:55am | 22/01/10

      Shaun - and what is the problem seeing it from a Liberal supporters view? Libs want to start to spin things? OMG how dare they. Labor surely would and never have done such things? We have had nothing but Labor spin and rhetoric for 2 years. Bout time Libs and supporters got some air time at last.

    • Shaun says:

      08:45am | 22/01/10

      OK, So I started out reading this article prepared to give it a go. As I got further into it and it descended into every single Liberal talking point I realised that the author was far from unbiased. I then checked who he was and found out he has worked for both John Howard and Peter Costello.

      So the only thing I got from that is that the Libs want to start to spin things with the help of such mouthpieces to regain the mantle of “better economic managers”. Step 1 - paint Rudd as out of his depth.

    • Nigel says:

      08:59am | 22/01/10

      My apologies John.  You wrote ‘This country lives on debt, personal, state and federal and it has done so for many years’ and I only addressed the federal debt and state debt parts.  I agree that personal debt is also too high.

    • Macca says:

      08:53am | 22/01/10

      @Shaun, far enough, it is an opinion website and Mr Gazard has presented his side of the coin (and that side only).

      However, re: Step 1. You can confidently say Rudd isn’t?

    • Margaret Gray says:

      08:36am | 22/01/10

      At least he’s not as stupid as Bob Brown, proposing A$20 BILLION dollars worth of carbon taxes at A$23 per tonne that would be worth just US$87 MILLION on the Chicago Climate Exchange (@US$0.10/tonne).

      Are these the economic geniuses that are running the country?

    • Maq says:

      08:33am | 22/01/10

      “The Government’s decision to replicate existing broadband services with an unaccounted for $43 billion slush fund without any cost benefit analysis must surely be the most egregious example of nonproductive madness.”

      Some research would have revealed that a big-four accounting firm is currently undertaking an implementation study, announced about 5 months ago, for the NBN… but then, the point wouldn’t have had as much force with, you know, some research.

      “The big beneficiaries of the NBN will be gamers and big households with multiple simultaneous users – hardly a key to future national growth. “

      Wrong. The “big beneficiaries” will be Australian businesses that require first class communications channels (there are many, many of those) that _are_ “a key to future national growth”. The teleconferencing, telecommuting and data transfer possibilities are just amazing - you could have a surgeon in Melbourne remove a tumourous growth from your brain while you’re still in Sydney.

      I could go on – the specious reasoning you’ve demonstrated here is just amazing.

    • Manik says:

      05:48pm | 22/01/10

      The point is Rudd announced it BEFORE doing any analysis….where is the commonsense in that?

    • Rich says:

      04:16pm | 22/01/10

      So we should adopt a practice of paying for things and then work out if it was a good idea afterward?

      If you agree with that, I happen to own a bridge you might be interested in buying. I’ll even get some research to confirm whether it’s a good idea or not, but not until you’ve committed to the purchase.

      Telecommunications in this country is outstanding, and our mobile network is competitive and the envy of most of other countries.

      Backhaul to regional areas is required to break existing bottlenecks to regional and rural areas. However maybe some research would have told you that there are already fiber networks specifically developed for hospitals and schools.

    • iansand says:

      08:30am | 22/01/10

      Morbid fear of debt has always puzzled me.  Any well run corporation has a mix of debt and equity so that its assets are utilised most efficiently.  If I had shares in a company that had not borrowed to develop future projects my financial adviser would mutter stuff like “lazy balance sheet” and tell me to get my meagre wealth into something that utilised its assets more efficiently.  If eschewing debt has meant that we do not have modern, efficient infrastructure someone, somewhere has made a dumb economic decision.

      My theory is that this obsession with surpluses is more about selling a simplistic message than rational economics.

    • Andrew says:

      11:17am | 24/01/10

      Here’s my problem with taking away the obsession with surpluses and morbid fear of debt. If you open the door to the govt to run a deficit you end up with a Ruddite govt out of control. (I was going to say Whitlamite, but Whitlam would be rolling in his grave at the thought of a 6% budget deficit.)

      If your company borrowed to buy plasma TVs like Australia Ltd did, your advisor would mutter “stupid wasteful debt binge” and tell you to spend only your vast income and no more because you can’t be trusted. If we take on debt and have NO net infrastructure to show for $300bn (net-net, we knocked down 1 school building to build 1) someone somewhere has made a dumb economic decision. (I hope you’re not referring to the NBN, which is another $42bn debt not yet in the forecasts, as “productive infrastructure”?)

    • iansand says:

      12:27pm | 22/01/10

      It’s not always about party politics.  Perhaps you should take your blinkers off and read what I wrote again.

    • Phil says:

      09:33am | 22/01/10

      iansand

      Please explain what part of the borrowings of the federal government are being utilised to develop future projects. Of the entire cash splash, bugger all so far has gone on productive long term infrastructure projects that had not been earmarked or started prior to the sky caving in financially around the world.

      If they borrowed to build infrastructure like hospitals, roads, parts etc, most liberal voters would see that as great, but not pull down perfectly good halls just to rebuild them again not mich different at higher than locally available costs, just so the building companies can backhand the unions to pay them back for assistance with the last federal election.

      Yes my business had debt. I on a car and two on goodwill. The goodwill gives a return of about 25%.

      What does the current debt on wasted money bring to the table cept for vote buying.

      Had Howard and Costello not saved and put the country in a good position rather than rack up debt we would have not had any capacity to stimulate the economy.

    • AlexG says:

      07:59am | 22/01/10

      The gulf between the Prime Minister’s rhetoric and his actions remains as large as ever.  Meanwhile, as the economy transitions to entirely resource and service based, there will still be jobs for engineers and arts graduates.  One designing coffee machines, the other using them.

    • Colin says:

      07:55am | 22/01/10

      “It’s easy to imagine the Prime Minister… would say to himself in an honest moment…”

      Imagine. Rudd. Honest.

      (...crickets chirping…)

      Nope, sorry, that’s beyond my imagination.

    • DT says:

      12:46pm | 22/01/10

      Of course Rudd is honest Colin, he did sleep in that car and he did not meet with Brian Burke [fingers crossed].

    • Paul says:

      07:54am | 22/01/10

      David we also have to work harder to fund Labor and Liberals ‘Work for Welfare’ - the exponential rise in middle class welfare! A trend championed by Chairman Howard. Another proud ‘economic conservative’. Not.

    • MikeH says:

      07:34am | 22/01/10

      My son, a recent engineering graduate earns a six figure salary, my daughter an Arts graduate, can’t find work. I have an arts degree and a masters in business. The business degree provides me with my income. Careful who you insult! You may need a job from them!

    • MPK says:

      11:27pm | 22/01/10

      @Macca: Information Systems is technically an engineering subject, and industrial relations and political economy are not pure arts…
      Mechanical engineers have more use then simply manufacturing, it shows your ignorance. They tend to have no problem getting much higher paid jobs than an arts degree will give you.  I bet you work for the public service as an assistant to an assistants assistant. Engineers can get private sector jobs.  What do you contribute to the economy?

    • Tom says:

      09:12pm | 22/01/10

      @Macca, what use is political economy? Most employers out there in the real world recognise that the USSR collapsed 20 years ago, and that the purpose of that faculty is only to keep the old Marxists who wouldn’t survive in the real world employed.

    • D'oh says:

      09:53am | 22/01/10

      That little anecdote put a smile on my face too!

      The funniest thing I ever saw written at uni on a toilet cubicle wall was a note over the paper roll with the words:

      “Pull here for arts degree”

      LOL

    • Macca says:

      08:48am | 22/01/10

      Now Now, I got my arts degree last ago and am doing just fine with my grad job. As are most of my mates. Maybe because we studied subjects with potential career uses, such as Industrial Relations, Political Economy or Information Systems.

      @Mike, Granted, if your Daughter studied Philosophy or Gender Studies, she may be struggling… much like a mechanical engineer in a country that can’t competively manufacture anymore

    • Sahara says:

      08:16am | 22/01/10

      Yeah I found that hilarious as well. I’m sure the engineering students were deeply concerned by being mocked by arts graduates - not.

      I know what I say to people with arts degrees, “no, I don’t want fries with that.”

    • Nigel says:

      06:15am | 22/01/10

      A very well written argument David.  The longest lasting legacy that this government will leave our children is not the school halls it is the crippling debt. It won’t be just a debt of $200 000 000 000 or $300 000 000 000 that really hurts it’s the debt servicing costs that come straight off the government’s already tiny disretionary expenditure and it is that discretionary expenditure that allows governments to institute its social reform agenda.  Rudd has hobbled himself in his first and hopefully only term as PM.

    • Phil says:

      07:57pm | 24/01/10

      John

      Its all about you isnt it. I am glad im not your child with an opinion such as yours. Bet your a bona fide member of the SKI club. Spending the Kids Inheritance.

      I for one want to leave a better future for my children and headstart than I had. I paid off my dads business debts and increased his standard of living before starting on my own future.

      To simply borrow like Bernie Maddoff without the getting value for money is stupid, and a mentality that will send us down the same track as Britain and the US. Bankruptcy.

      The wastage on the Stimulus and Vote Borrowing was not bang for our buck, unless you are Gerry Harvey, Boral or a Chinese Manufacturer of Pink Batts.

      You are correct, personal debt is too high, but you would only borrow if your going to get a long term benefit for that borrowing. ie own a home, business will grow. Julia Gillard Memorial Halls are hardly going to long term benefit the economy like a hospital.road/bridge or port would, neither are Kev Plasmas.

      We are saddling our children up for a huge bedt long term. To state labor have a plan to pay it off is like Denis Ferguson saying he has changed. No one will believe them, cause they have never done it before.

    • Andrew says:

      11:04am | 24/01/10

      John, you’re right. We’re a debt country. The only tiny exception was a few months under a Lib govt when they put a line through “Federal” in your comment with a net zero debt and even net savings in the Future Fund. Now we’re back to situation normal, projecting an all-time record debt.

      You’re also right in that it’s BS to debate which govt handles money better. The Libs paid off the crippling Keating-Beazley debt and will again be asked to start on a far more crippling Rudd-Gillard debt. There’s no debate here.

      I have to disagree with one thing you said though - Chinese made plasma TVs (the major legacy of the first Rudd govt) are unlikely to survive long enough to be passed on to future generations of Australians. The debt will though.

    • John A Neve says:

      08:28am | 22/01/10

      Nigel @ 0901hrs,
      You obnviously don’t “understand your (my) argument”. I never said anything like that or inferred it.

      What you have suggested is the way this country has gone for some many years now. I believe personal debt is at it’s highest level ever !!!!

      Why don’t you try to address what I wrote, rather than going off on a tangent?

    • Nigel says:

      08:01am | 22/01/10

      So if I understand your argument John, you think we should borrow like there is no tomorrow, spend like drunken sailors and let future generations pay for all this?  Obviously you went to the same school of economic conservatism as our PM.  The elephant in the room is the staggering debt that has been built-up by Labor State governments.  It’s no wonder that they squabble over GST income, cannot live without pokies or stamp duty and still fail to provide better that third world standards of public transport or health services.  I know, I know it’s silly of me to use facts to support a purely philosophical argument but after all I am simply taking the lead of our PM and using evidence based decision making.

    • John A Neve says:

      06:51am | 22/01/10

      Nigel @ 0715hrs,

      This country lives on debt, personal, state and federal and it has done so for many years.

      As to leaving debt to our children !!  If the assets are still there and they use them, why shouldn’t they contribute to the cost?

      This ongoing debate as to which government handles money better is B***S***. A political and media beatup, if you look haed enough you can find fault with any government.

    • iansand says:

      06:11am | 22/01/10

      On message.  Tick.

      Carry on.

    • Ken says:

      05:55am | 22/01/10

      KRudd tried to sell himself as the James Bond of economic management but we have now found out he is more of a Gomer Pyle in this area. Enough is enough, deliver or resign.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf

Daniel Piotrowski

@apiotrowski I feel your pain #workingtheweekend

Daniel Piotrowski

@apiotrowski You sounded testy at 11. I can only imagine...

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

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

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter