nor is there much diff between the largesse of the labor and lib swine than that of this bloke.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
just as shady (greedy) and capitalist as the rest yet held up as some sort of deity.
**** Bob Brown.
Printable View
nor is there much diff between the largesse of the labor and lib swine than that of this bloke.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
just as shady (greedy) and capitalist as the rest yet held up as some sort of deity.
**** Bob Brown.
Have you been hangin with The bobby Brown?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
socialist of course. i see you have focused on the financial side.
I am forming my ideas from reading their policies.
http://greens.org.au/policy-platform
Like it or not the financial side is where the empirical testing can take place.Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk
If spending falls so does income and when income falls the result is unemployment.
What can be more important than understanding that ?
Unfortunately - neither the Greens, the ALP, or the Coalition understand how the national accounting identities work.
Hence, they are all the same and controlled by the plutocrats.
Much the same way as the god squadders invented the devil - the Right created the left.
Same dog different leg action.
Here is an example from the link Hawk Provided about the Greens:
The ALP and the Coalition would each agree with this proposition and yet:Quote:
"9.While government finances must be sustainable over the long-term, it is appropriate to stimulate the economy during economic downturns and save during economic booms. Government financing should be responsibly managed so as to minimise intergenerational debt."
We know that a monopolist issuer of money such as the Australian government and RBA have absolutely no budget / financial constraint in terms of their own money.
Their ability to spend is only limited by the goods and services denominated in that currency available to buy.
We also know that all tax liabilities of the non-government sector are payable only in this same money. This makes money tax driven - not the other way around.
We also know that the government budget is for a fiscal year and so it cannot possibly be a burden on future generations.
We also know that a government does not need to finance its spending nor does it need to borrow - because it has no budgetary constraint in terms of its own money.
Simple maths:
Government Surplus [Deficit] equals Non-Government Deficit [Surplus].
Not ****ing once have the greens accepted that the result of their policies would be mass unemployment and a lot of pain for no gain to anyone other than the one percenters.
If we look at the current Abbott government we will see that in terms of GDP they are the biggest spending government in Australia's history.
And yet interest rates are falling and inflation is trending downwards. [ It's a good result though by accident rather than good management]
The lot of them are clueless.
That is an interesting point. Labor gets growled out a bit for this. Didnt Howard get our deficit right down during his time?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
What do you mean by "our" deficit ?Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk
If you mean the net debt of the private domestic sector then the answer is absolutely not. It actually increased.
If you mean Australian net indebtedness to foreigners [ net income account] then again the answer is absolutely not. Again, it increased.
If you mean did the Howard government force house holds to spend more than they earn then the answer is YES.
All Howard and Costello did was buy back interest bearing alternatives for money from the rich / elite bond traders. They also gave away a shit load of gold holdings for around $400 an oz - which based on the current market prices was a dick move for sure.
People seem to forget that under the rules of double entry accounting all accounts must sum to zero [debits = credits and / or deficits = surpluses].
So: If the current account is in deficit the only way the government can have a surplus is if the private domestic sector is in deficit.
If on the other hand the current account is in deficit and the private domestic sector wish to save [ surplus] then the government are up the shit [in their own terms] because of the Automatic stabilisers such as tax recepts falling and transfer payments increasing as welfare dependence increases.
Governments should never ever attempt to run surplus budgets when the current account is in deficit and certainly not when the private domestic sector wishes to spend less than they earn.
But it's really not even that complicated.
All you need to know is that Spending = Income - beyond that economics is just showing off some very piss poor mathematical skills which would make real mathematicians cringe.
So how close are we to defaulting cause our (part B above) is spiraling out of control
Can't we just print more money?
Please explain.
it's even less complicated than that. Government via arrangements with RBA simply credit one account and debit another.Quote:
Originally Posted by GazFish35
It all happens on a computer screen rather than a printing press these days.
The so called textbook model used by Treasury is not a realistic explanation of how things really work.
Simple example. The so called cash rate is determined by market forces "
Yeah right - that's why the RBA hold a meeting, decide what the rate should be - then go into the market and buy or sell securities to meet the target rate they nominated.
They can have any rate they want and nooooobody can stop them because their ability to maintain that rate can never be challenged because they are the monopolist supplier of the currency.
But don't think in terms of printing money - because it's not an accurate explanation of how things work.
Excuse my ignorance, but wouldn't pumping more money into circulation devalue the $ massively?
Let's talk about the real problem here, chicken twisties
It's a valid question. If the economy is at full employment then it would simply escalate prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfMan
However, if the economy was at full employment there would be absolutely no reason for the government to spend in excess of the economies capacity.
Given how much excess capacity the Australian economy has held for the past forty odd years it's simply not an issue.
Without writing a book the RBA also has a target rate of interest that it wants to maintain.
The banks we use hold what are called exchange settlement accounts with the RBA.
The RBA essentially [for our purposes anyway] increases the liquidity of these accounts to lower the cash / interest rate and decreases liquidity to increase rates.
They do this by offering banks an interest bearing alternative to money which to keep things basic we can call a bond.
So for your example the injection of money into the economy would put downward pressure on the cash / interest rate.
The RBA would not want the cash / interest rate to tend toward zero so they would seek to reduce the liquidity of the member banks exchange settlement accounts by offering the banks interest bearing bonds in exchange for the excess funds.
Banks gladly except the exchange, liquidity is reduced, interest rate rises back to meet the target rate and inflation is not a problem.
Real world example is Japan. Highest deficit spending as a percentage of GDP on the planet and yet they have a zero interest rate, low inflation and a relatively strong currency.
Commodity prices are the big driver of currencies and regardless of domestic fiscal policies if you make / sell things people want to buy then people buy them regardless.
Japan also have for the most part have a trade surplus so their spending habits don't seem to have made people shy away from the goods and services they sell.
What about bacon flavour ffs - they were awesome and the bastards stopped making them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddha
Damn you APD.
You are dead set one of the weirdest dudes I've ever encountered and I mean that in the most respectful way I possibly can.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
Thanks, I actually kind of understand the various factors that can be tweaked now. CheersQuote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
I'd agree with that. I even shake my head sometimes at the shit I blurt out.Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
Attn: snaekQuote:
Originally Posted by pv4
I was given my bill for our private hospital stay.
Private health insurance was 100% worth the value. We "saved" money by going this way, on the birth experience alone. Not to take into account all the other non-birth inclusions it gives us.
This is just a fyi, as I assume you weren't asking the questions with the idea of multiplying in mind. But yeah..
yeah but now you've got a kid and you have to spend all your money on that forever
:oops:
one of my dogs helped himself to his food bag. swelled up like a mofo. overnight vets = $1200 buckeroos :rof:
poor little fker. I do feel sorry for it but fk that is worded well :rof:
I never got a reply back. It's been a month, so I assume he'll never write back :(Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
I did see this in The Herald, although it doesn't mention my local member in any way:
Quote:
Labor's rainbow vision for city - a colourful crossing, 'safe places' for LGBT community
By JASON GORDON July 23, 2015, 10:30 p.m
NEWCASTLE’S Labor councillors have tabled a plan to back same-sex marriage, provide more ‘‘safe spaces’’ for gay and lesbian people and create a permanent ‘‘rainbow pedestrian crossing’’ in a Newcastle street or park.
While the intention has attracted support, the plan has also drawn criticism from others who say the council has more important issues to deal with, and was being tokenistic on issues that have nothing to do with local government.
The plan is being led by Cr Declan Clausen and comes two years after after the Greens failed in their attempt to have the former Jeff McCloy-led council formally back marriage equality.
Earlier that month, in April 2013, the former lord mayor called police to remove people who were chalking rainbow crossings and slogans onto the footpaths outside City Hall.
Titled ‘‘Equality for Novocastrians’’, Cr Clausen’s move contains six key components which he said aimed to promote the city as a welcoming, all-inclusive and tolerant place committed to human rights and equality.
It includes a call for the council to ‘‘support marriage equality’’ and orders council staff to identify a suitable site for a rainbow crossing and prepare a report on what it would cost.
The crossing might be placed in a park, he said, although he’d prefer to see it on a local road in a place that is meaningful to the region’s gay and lesbian community, such as Beaumont Street at Hamilton.
A similar rainbow crossing created a storm in Sydney, where lord mayor Clover Moore spent $75,000 installing one on Oxford Street during the Mardi Gras festival. It was later removed amid controversy and bureaucratic red tape.
The most recent census figures show Newcastle has the second-highest number of same-sex couples in the state, Cr Clausen said.
It was ‘‘absolutely essential’’ that the council provided support ‘‘even in a symbolic way,’’ he said.
There would ‘‘undoubtedly’’ be critics, he said, ‘‘but council can actually walk and chew gum at the same time’’.
‘‘No one is ignoring the big issues. We’re dealing with any number of things at the same time and they’re all important.’’
Liberal councillor Brad Luke said he has ‘‘no issue’’ with same-sex marriage.
‘‘But I do have an issue with putting rates up 46.9 per cent and then spending money and huge amounts of staff time on issues which have absolutely nothing to do with council,’’ he said.
Greens councillor Michael Osborne said such comments ‘‘dumb down’’ the debate.
‘‘It’s great that this is coming to council and that we can have a policy position that stands up and says we value diversity in our city,’’ he said.
‘‘It’s about us standing up for basic human rights, and not just recognising it, but celebrating it.’’
Lord mayor Nuatali Nelmes said the council should ‘‘celebrate all aspects of our community’’.
‘‘We have multicultural charters and we have monuments which recognise other sectors of our community,’’ she said. ‘‘I fully support something that recognises and supports the LGBTIQ community on what is also a very important social justice issue.
‘‘As far as a rainbow crossing goes, I think it’s a fantastic way of symbolising that support and the diversity of our city.’’
Cr Clausen’s move is co-signed by Cr Nelmes and other Labor colleagues.
It further calls on the council to expand the ‘‘Safe Space Charter’’, which has traditionally provided safe and welcoming places for gay and lesbian people.
It also asks the council to formally back marriage equality and ‘‘encourage support for marriage equality bills before the Commonwealth parliament’’.
The matter will be debated at Tuesday’s council meeting.
Yawn
Firstly why exactly are the council thinking that of all the things that are ****ed in Newy this is an important project to be embracing??
Secondly these Safe Places old mate talks about. Maybe I live on a different planet but where are the incessant reports of Adam and Steve getting abused harassed assaulted for being Adma and Steve that show us a need that downtown Newy is a war zone for Adam and Steve's???
Is Newy that dangerous a place that we need a spot where these Adam and Steve can go to hang out with Adam and Steve's ?? Are they not allowed to mix in with society like they already do??
Thirdly this stuff about recognising other sectors of the community.
Where the **** is the Griff the Redeemer statue then???
Fans of the Griff not important enough??
Newy Council dealing with First World Problems.
Thank **** I fit into Lake Macquarie where the councillors are never seen or heard
Shouldn't the goal be to make the whole city a safe place for everyone?
(Except Gypos who somehow get over the border, **** those people).
Newcastle is without a doubt the nastiest place in Australia I have lived once the sun goes down. In my experience it is safer to walk about Cabramatta, Kings Cross, Parramatta, or Bankstown area at night.
The paranoia / xenophobia in Newcastle is something I have never experienced anywhere else. Great place and people during the day but once the sun goes down and the alcohol starts flowing look out.
Doesn't matter if you are gay or straight. Newcastle simply isn't a friendly city after dark.
Council playing the Gay and lesbian card on this issue simply shows how out of touch they are with the reality.
Back onto Politics - Bill Shorten is without a doubt the most piss weak leader of a major party for the last 40 years. He hates workers, hates unions, hates small business, and hates multinationals. Where the **** does he think the votes are going to come from ?
Hearing him talking about Emissions trading schemes was a combination of laughable and downright alarming that someone this stupid could ever be considered to lead the country.
The only way to control emissions / pollution is a system of fines for those that break the rules. Not taxes, not another secondary derivatives market like an ETS - just big ass fines for anyone that breaks the rules.
It's that ****ing simple.
Is the ETS Carbon Tax whatever the **** you want to call it in your opinion about Carbon and the Environment or is it more so to do with the government wanting to raise tax levels and looking for a scape goat.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
To me it is all taxation and the reincarnate of the super mining profits tax just in a different outfit
Neither. It is a secondary derivatives market for the bond traders and other oxygen thieves to speculate and accumulate wealth amongst themselves without actually creating anything useful that benefits society as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by MFKS
These government dopes are swallowing the bullshit these khunts feed them hook line and sinker.
Never looked at it from that angle. Yep will defo happen. The traders out there ain't gonna pass up a gift horse like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
Government though stands to gain by getting taxation revenue increase. They need to raise taxes as they can't continue down the same path or we as a nation are ****ed and ain't clever enough to sort their shit out.
Make no mistake about it they want the extra money and are putting through an extra tax measure to get it. Problem is the dumb ****s between the Libs and Labour keep using the tax in whatever guise as a political football to point score with the voters instead of working together to get the tax accepted
I can not like this post enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
Seriously, I tried, but it's still not enough.
pandering instead of getting important sh1t in order welcome to newyQuote:
Originally Posted by The Dunster
I wasn't sure where to put this..
But figured since it is a bit on the crazy-snake side of things to chuck it in this thread..
Should make tonights FFA Cup game interesting for the Heidelberg GK..
http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/artic...ld-be-deported
griffin is a ****ing idiot.
I like Kevin Airs' request that he remove all mention of 442 from his bio.
Going to boo him all night.
racist, according to the socialist hippies anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackmac79
Interestingly as much as we hated hutch we didnt bother booing for too long. booooring
I love the fact that all these people on Twitter think they are so good at it yet every one of them breaks the very first rule of Twitter.
Which is what?Quote:
Originally Posted by plague
First rule of Twitter: don't tweet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeterpool
The behaviour toward Adam Goodes is an absolute disgrace regardless of anyones political leanings.Quote:
Originally Posted by hawk
If not tolerating racial slurs towards a good person like Adam Goodes makes someone a socialist then I would hope that by that definition everyone is a socialist hippie.