Kevin Rudd doesn’t want you to have your own money

steve says:

08:37am | 02/07/09

No labor lackie and damn, I want to keep my own money.  I’ve paid more than enough tax for the past few years but I’d be more than happy to keep most of it (or even half of it) and promise to embark on a personal stimulation of the economy. 

But the hole in your argument is that I don’t think the left outright reject the notion of people taking out health insurance.  I think they reject the notion that the govt help fund the taking out of health insurance.  Now I know its not a simple position and by paying into private health, there is some offset on the public health system, but as a simple argument its too simple. 

Where I see my money going out the door is with the CPRS.  For example, i read that electricity is predicted to increase by 30%-40%.  Electricity is already a large part of the household budget, despite taking strong measures to reduce the use of it.  As I read it, most of the money we will pay in this scheme will actually go back to the folks who are less able to pay the additional tax, in the form of rebates.  So we’ll be taking more from Pam to give to Paula, under the guise of the CPRS.

Don’t get me wrong, I think we need to implement measures to decrease GH emissions, but I’d rather see the bulk of my new environment tax go directly to funding the research needed to produce cleaner (and cheaper) energy solutions, which will provide the way forward.  We need energy sources, we can’t go back to caves.  It may be scribbling in the margins and simple semantics, but instead of taking the money from Paul and giving it to Paula under CPRS, just exempt Paula in the first place so at least those that can pay see their money go to the right place to tackle GH emissions.

Shane from Melbourne says:

08:46am | 02/07/09

Or it could be the reason that neither party can manage the economy very well- the Liberals wasted a boom period and Labor can’t manage a bust.

Colin says:

08:46am | 02/07/09

Jamie, with all due respect, your statements concerning debt, household wealth and independence vis-a-vis the Howard years is grossly misleading.  The Coalition repeat ad nauseum this mantra about “paying off the Labor debt” and “left the nation debt-free” ... but this is misleading weasel words. It is Labor-style “spin” (ie, LIES).

The Coalition paid of Federal Govt debt. That’s all. And there’s no kudos in that… it’s exactly what any responsible Govt should do.

I suggest you be honest about the real debt situation for Australian households over the Howard years. Take a look at the RBA stats - household debt to income went from 69% to 160% under the Coalition. We The People have never bcome so indebted (thus slaves to the banks) as under the Howard Govt.

Please spare us the baloney. The Howard Govt set the stage for financial disaster and loss of independence in this country. Rudd Labor are simply adding the final touches by indebting the Fed Govt too, having indebted all the states while the Coalition busy encouraging Australian households to be financially irresponsible (baby bonus, FHOG, etc) for a decade.

BTW, I’m a conservative-leaning voter.

A says:

09:37am | 02/07/09

I’m a swing voter but I do find it a bit rich that your opening paragraphs refer to Labor being responsible for “rising job losses, record spending and historic debt levels” , considdering that the GFC is largely responsible for job losses (I have been made redundant myself on one occasion this year) and thee fact that the spendng on stimulus packages kept us OUT of recession according to AFR…

David C says:

09:39am | 02/07/09

Colin yes the Howard government paid off Federal debt, but who put it there in the first place? And as far as personal debt is concerned…. who’s fault is that ??? Are you really going to blame Howard for that one?

Shane from Melbourne says:

09:49am | 02/07/09

David C, considering that the Howard government sold off Telstra to pay off the Federal debt and made a mess of it (not separating infrastructure and retail for example), it’s not an achievement I’d crow about.

Patricia C says:

09:55am | 02/07/09

Jamie may be drawing a long bow in places but I have been wondering some of the same things. I was thinking it was because the left believed in some overarching ideology but all the time it is just about power.

Marty says:

09:57am | 02/07/09

Re Shane , your comment rings true for the majority of middle class Australians that i know. They’ve blown the opportunity they had to get ahead in the good years and the bad times are just an inconvenience. I am gen Y and have paid my house off at 37. Most off my circle of friends live week to week. Make lowest repayment possible on their house and blow the rest on servicing, DVD’s newer cars, home theatre etc… hardly sensible, conservative, or responsible economics.

Re Colin “real Australian household debt” blah blah. As with most things in this world people need to be responsible for their own actions. Howard never held a gun to the head of “working families” and said go and get yourself a 99 inch plasma TV that you don’t need, and hock yourself to the eyeballs to do it.

Modern society is full of retail temptation that most Australians can’t resist. Take the stimulus package. I was sceptical, thinking that the average Joe, realising that they were heading for some tough times with the “R” word looming, might pop the 9 hungy under the bed for a rainy day. Instead JB Hi Fi shares have doubled in value in the 6 months after november’s stockmarket “correction”.

Modern society dictates buy now, pay later, interest free, make no sacrifices, must have at whatever cost.

Some years ago a gentleman by the name of Jeff Kennett was faced with the problem of a debt of unserviceable proportion. He didn’t have the luxury of a mining boom to dig his way out. Instead all Victorians made a sacrifice or two to fix it. Some of these sacrifices i don’t necessarily agree with, with the value of hindsight, but it had to be done. This upset plenty of people and Rudd and Swann are not willing to put us through the tough times and do the hard yards to sort our current problem out ( a fair reflection of the mentality of the voting public… )

MR says:

10:21am | 02/07/09

This comment, alone, deserves special mention: I have been at a loss to understand how a group of people who promised us in the lead up to the last election that they were “economic conservatives” who “believed in surpluses” could turn a low unemployment surplus economy into one with rising job losses, record spending and historic debt levels.

Jamie is unable to draw any connection at all between the Global Financial Crisis and the Australian economy.  Unable to see how one could impact the other.

Quick - lets get this guy into a position of power.

Jeremy says:

10:55am | 02/07/09

Rudd throws us carelessly into debt, knowing he can use GFC as his excuse. But he won’t be able to do that forever. Further along he will have to make his own decisions without having GFC as his excuse. Not that he will make any decisions that would harm his popularity. He’ll be able to blame his advisors, or the previous Government I suppose. It’s all about POPULARITY with Rudd. What ever we want he will throw our way….. keep those polls up there Rudd, and forget about making tough decisions even if there not popular. Most important;y for you is that camera and staying forever popular. Where’s your back bone mate.

Sandy Downer says:

11:19am | 02/07/09

Jamie, love your revisionist summary of “The Howard Years”. When is the book and the movie coming out?

Steve Shannon says:

11:30am | 02/07/09

It took Bernie Madoff 15 years to make $80 billion dollars disappear, Kevin Rudd has managed to blow more that 3 x that amount in 1 year, not a bad effort. Im sure NY Bernie described himself as an economic conservative, now blames everything on the GFC and was very popular in the beginning too.

JohnB says:

11:44am | 02/07/09

Patricia C says: I was thinking it was because the left believed in some overarching ideology but all the time it is just about power.

Patricia it seems mostly when you get down to it with Rudd it comes out something like this

The Prime Minister of Australia on Islamic teachings on wife beating and rape.

“Under no circumstances is sexual violence permissible or acceptable in Australia - under no circumstances.”

“Australia will not tolerate these sort of remarks. They don’t belong in modern Australia, and he should stand up, repudiate them and apologise.”

The Prime Minister of Australia on Catholocism and children sexually abused and raped by Catholic clergy.

“This is a matter for the church and I respect the internal judgements of the church. I don’t stand outside the church and provide them with public lectures in terms of how they should behave…”

Australia does not tolerate these sort of remarks. They don’t belong in modern Australia, and the Prime Minister should stand up, repudiate them and apologise.

There is no excuse for sexual abuse according to our law and government. We are told we are all equal before the law.

The exceptions are found when you have been sexually abused by Catholic clergy.

“This is a matter for the church and I respect the internal judgements of the church. I don’t stand outside the church and provide them with public lectures in terms of how they should behave…”

Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of Australia, 17 July 2008.

http://www.pm.gov.au/media/Interview/2008/interview_0363.cfm

Paul says:

12:29pm | 02/07/09

Yawn Jamie. Too obviously biased, people switch off straight away. You need to become much more sophisticated in your arguments. You live in an electorate of highly education people. We are not going to swallow this trash talk. Keep trying.

David H says:

12:37pm | 02/07/09

Jamie is quite right of course.  As someone who actually has to live by producing something to export, employ people, and raise a youngster within JB’s electorate, thank god we at least have somebody in Canberra putting these messages out there.  If I ran my business with the reckless abandon shown by Rudd and Swan over the last 12 months we would have gone broke a long time ago.  The position that Labor has taken on the ridiculously premature and unwarranted CPRS, the so called Fair Work Act (read let’s crucify small business bill) and the so called stimulus package (read “let’s throw the baby out with the bathwater” bill) will leave this country back into the economic dark ages after a decade of what can only be described as diligent and sound management of the country’s finances and general economy.  Wake up Australia and kick Rudd the Dudd and Swan the Goose out before we have nothing left to hand over to our kids and grandkids….....

Marcus says:

12:45pm | 02/07/09

Marty, if you’re 37 you’re not generation Y, you’re generation X.  Micallef has taught me that much…

pete b says:

12:49pm | 02/07/09

Jamie, I laugh when I hear journos saying the parrot phrase ‘low unemployment’. ABS statistics show 1.7 million plus currently unemployed.Why dont you check what is was during Howards years Jamie? Is it more accurate to say we’ve gone from high unemployment to higher unemployment?

G says:

01:06pm | 02/07/09

Pete b - I’ve been trying to point out this guy isn’t a journo he’s a Liberal MP (obviously biased). 

Matt says:

04:04pm | 02/07/09

If you can’t see that the global economy has changed since November 2007 you do not deserve a seat in our Federal Parliament. Don’t insult our collective intelligence.

Treating Australians as gullible didn’t work when you were an architect of workchoices and it won’t work now.

You need to offer more than a right of entitlement mentality if you and the libs want to get in power in the next decade.

The party that “loves debt and they love having Australians in debt because it increases reliance on the State.” is whackjob stuff. It’s as insulting as some of the more extreme Howard hating stuff that used to be thrown around.

It was a Labor government that introduced compulsory superannuation. The most significant savings and welfare reducing measure in Australia’s history.

Instead of wasting your time with polemic base-political pieces, why don’t you try writing real policies and arguments to move our country forward. Instead you give us this US Republican inspired dribble that does nothing but attempt to divide us .

Just as an aside you deride the “‘left” 7 times in your article. If they’re so bad they shouldn’t be controlling our education policies in NSW. You should tell Barry O’Farrell to stop voting with them!.

Jason says:

04:21pm | 02/07/09

Jamie,  while I believe you are correct in your assessment of the ALP’s philosophy - (ie. dependance on the state, successful people are selfish scum rather than smart and hard working, remaining relevant through making people less self sufficient - I have a lot of very left wing friends with this same belief), you have ruined your whole argument by putting the Howard government on a pedestal.

Better to focus on the many things the current government is doing wrong and clearly articulate the consequences than pretend the Howard administration didn’t make some serious errors themselves.

Jamie Briggs says:

04:36pm | 02/07/09

Yeah thanks Matt for that hard hitting advice!  Maybe one day you will have enough heart to run yourself or at least use your last name when giving your advice! 

More seriously, thanks to all of those who have made comments, the piece highlights the difference between Labor and Liberal on their attitude to the economy.  This isn’t a bad thing, people often say that there is no major differences between the two major parties these days.

Of course I recognise there has been a downturn in the world economy, the issue is how the Australian Government deals with that downturn.  Spending our way into massive debt with cash bribes is not the right approach.  The Howard Government did manage the economy well and left it stronger and in a better position than all comparable international economies.

Finally to ‘G’, you don’t need to tell people I am a Liberal MP, that is what my by line says!

Keep punching.

Jay says:

04:47pm | 02/07/09

Jamie, as you can see from some well worded and well thought out comments form fellow readers, this argument does not wash with the Australian public anymore. Whether your lying to us or lying to yourself about the state of the nation and recent political history is largely irrelevant. The sooner you let this line of attack go the better for all concerned.

Rob Silva says:

05:04pm | 02/07/09

I for one am quite perturbed by the Rudd govt’s response to the GFC. I remember something called an “Intergenerational Review” which has gone completely out the window. It will be my children and grandchildren who are going to have to pay for all this debt. Yes, the govt reminds us we’re still in a much better position than the rest of the world - but that’s where we started, so it should be our minimum expectation that we remain in that position.

This “temporary” deficit is projected by politicians to last 6 years - what will that mean in reality? And we should not forget that getting back into surplus doesn’t just suddenly mean the accumulation of debt suddenly disappears - so its going to be at least 6 years before we can even *begin* to pay off the debt.

If I had any confidence that Rudd/Swan/Tanner knew what they were doing, I might feel differently about it. But I don’t.

We Love Ha HA says:

05:16pm | 02/07/09

Australia wide brown land of the MEGA MORTGAGE MUGS the easiest people on Earth to Mislead, Misinform and Manipulate.

You STILL Fooled by the Dudd?

Ha Ha….

Amanda says:

05:46pm | 02/07/09

Jamie - I absolutely agree. I’m just waiting for the rest of Australia to wake up and see through the spin.

Mondo Rock says:

05:59pm | 02/07/09

Jamie in his article:

I have been at a loss to understand how a group of people who promised us in the lead up to the last election that they were “economic conservatives” who “believed in surpluses” could turn a low unemployment surplus economy into one with rising job losses, record spending and historic debt levels.

Jamie after the inherent silliness of this statement is pointed out to him:

Of course I recognise there has been a downturn in the world economy

Hmmm - a tad dishonest the first time around perhaps Jamie?

Chris says:

08:43pm | 02/07/09

I must admit. K Rudd has been somewhat of a disappointment.

Jarrod says:

09:38pm | 02/07/09

To Colin, I had both my eyes closed when my family was on a Keating Government welfare program. Those were the heady days when my family lived on welfare and there wasn’t a need to look for jobs. I vowed to vote only Labor. When Howard won Government in 1996, he kicked us out of the welfare system. My family worked hard and took advantage of the opportunities provided. We will never vote Labor again. Our eyes are wide open.

Brian says:

09:48pm | 02/07/09

Jamie your byline might inform the reader that you’re a Liberal MP but nowhere in this article does it mention it. In fact it is not even mention on this webpage.
The fact of your employment should at least be appended at the bottom or start of the article preferably in italics. You certainly have the right to put forth your ideas and view, but it is extremely disingeneous to not inform the casual reader of the basis of your clear bias.

thevoiceofreason says:

02:55am | 03/07/09

Jamie your parties dishonesty is why people don’t vote for you. ‘email scam’ ring any bells. How about we have an honest debate one day or do your lot have not real policies. I am very disapointed we pay people who cannot debate in good faith, we should throw the lot of you out and put in a crew prepared to make a difference.

Geoff says:

06:58am | 03/07/09

You really ought to say ( at the bottom of your biased rant ) what your ” job ” is. A MP is it?

G says:

11:27am | 03/07/09

“Finally to ‘G’, you don’t need to tell people I am a Liberal MP, that is what my by line says!”
Mr Briggs - I did feel the need to tell people that you are a Liberal MP as it doesn’t appear on the article (not only that but you were a senior advisor to Howard) - you may like to think that people are interested enough in who you are to click on your bio link but I’m affraid most people wouldn’t bother.  I now have comments from Brian and Geoff supporting my complaint (I’ve written to the moderators regarding this omission).  I felt it was a misrepresentation to pass off your writing as journalistic opinion and do not believe that it would be difficult to include your background as a byline at the bottom of the article.

Shaun says:

12:30pm | 03/07/09

“Of course I recognise there has been a downturn in the world economy, the issue is how the Australian Government deals with that downturn.  Spending our way into massive debt with cash bribes is not the right approach.”

Of course it isn’t Jamie. The Liberal party is loving this aren’t they? Either have a stimulus package on the advice of Treasury and have us criticise you for going into debt, or don’t spend the surplus and have us criticize you for the higher rate of unemployed that would cause. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t for Labor and win-wiin for Liberal.

I think these days though, you are only catching the less informed with such rubbish. Try harder Jamie.

“Finally to ‘G’, you don’t need to tell people I am a Liberal MP, that is what my by line says!”

Oh really? And where does it say that on this page? Oh yeah it doesn’t. And not everyone does click on the link to see whose opinion they are swallowing. However, since the entire article is pitched at the uninformed, and these are the one who wouldn’t check, I guess that works out pretty well for you.

Shaun says:

12:53pm | 03/07/09

Dear oh dear, copping a bit of a spanking in the comments there Jamie

alan cotterell says:

01:01pm | 03/07/09

Jason,  Forget your poisonous approach to politics it’s too negative
Your comment clearly show s the problem with the LIberal Party:
‘Better to focus on the many things the current government is doing wrong and clearly articulate the consequences than pretend the Howard administration didn’t make some serious errors themselves. ’
It appears the Libs are bereft of ideas, no vision!
It’s not about what the Rudd government is doing wrong, but how the LIberal Party could do things better!  When you guys begin to think constructively you’re in with a chance.
For example tell us how you’d maintain our economy in stable condition without borrowing?  Tell us how we can have private health cover and not be stuck with a big bill every time we go to any hospital?  What’s the plan Man?  Have you really got something to offer?

HS says:

07:04pm | 04/07/09

Yes, as others have pointed out before me, this is written by a Liberal MP and is just Liberal party spin - and fairly typical of The Punch too.

My son was severely injured in an accident last year and received first-world treatment, first in our Western suburbs hospital Cas department then at the eye and ear hospital, including multiple tests and surgery.

If we lived in the US we would be putting out house in the market about now. Young libertarians, you have no idea of what life can throw at you. Thank goodness our society still has some remnants of social democratic justice.

Tim says:

04:55pm | 08/07/09

Jamie, i have never seen a more misleading and ridiculous article.

Australia is now the fastest growing economy in the OECD, with the lowest level of Federal Government debt, one of the lowest unemployment rates and possibly the best long term economic prospects of any developed country in the world.

I guess you have never heard of the Keynesian-style economics deficit-stimulus-spending that catapulted the world out of the great depression. This economic theory is now being used around the world to help in the Global Recession; nowhere more effectively than this country.

I would like to see what you and your party’s alternative economic policies and alternative levels of debt are?