It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Australian Govt releases $42b stimulus package

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by munkey66
 


Not sure if you've missed it or not but from the OP:




the centrepiece of the 72-page plan is $28.8 billion of spending on schools, housing, energy efficiency in homes, community infrastructure and roads, and support to small business to be delivered mostly in 2009-10 and 2010-11. The remaining third of the plan is an immediate injection of $12.7 billion in one-off bonus payments of $950 each for low- and middle-income households and individuals


So $28.8 billion on schools, roads, small business etc.
This is where new jobs can be created and endangered jobs secured. (90,000 in fact)

Only a third ($12.7 billion) is a cash in the hand bonus.

That will pay a small credit card debt, or put new tyres on the family car or like me will cover shire rates.

28 billion on Schools which have been neglected and needed to be repaired anyway, that money will be swallowed up very fast due to overtime ect as work cannot be done on classrooms with children in them, temp classrooms will have to first be errected.
The roads are meant to be paid for from our petrol taxes, they will upgrade a few areas of highway and fix pot holes, again, these road fixes are expensive to do.
They will build a road or bridge and then sell it to a private company who will then charge you to use it.
energy efficiency in houses. They are going to give us a rebate for putting insulation bats in the roof.
So again giving back money for people who wern't smart enough to have already put insulation in.

How is the money going to secure the 90,000 jobs?
Some companies should fail, so why prop up a failing business, they are failing for a reason and giving money to them will just have them failing later rather than sooner.

I am sorry, but I do not see how throwing a bit of money around really helps that much.
As I said, we will still have to pay off the debt, you cant max out the credit card and not expect it to be paid back.
and there will be intersest on that loan.

[edit on 3-2-2009 by munkey66]




posted on Feb, 3 2009 @ 11:19 PM
link   
I just heard on the Radio about an hour ago that The Liberal Party is against the Stimulus Pack, saying it’s irrational and needs to be thought out better.

I will see if I can find this story on the Web and post it.

The more i think about it the less sense it make, there is an economic Crisis, instead of putting our country into more debt they should be tightening their belt and saving our money.
Same as any house hold, if things are tight at home, do you go out and get a loan making your situation worse, or do you tighten to decrease your spending and save some money.??


[edit on 3/2/2009 by wycky]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by wycky
 

Source


The Coalition will oppose the Rudd Government’s latest $42 billion expenditure package because it is not a responsible or sustainable way to run the national economy. We know this decision will not be popular, but it is the right decision. The Prime Minister yesterday demanded that the House of Representatives approve $42 billion in expenditure within 48 hours: almost a billion dollars an hour. We consider that the package is poorly targeted, ill-thought through and irresponsible in today’s economic climate. At this stage we believe a package of between $15-20 billion would be more affordable and appropriate. The objective of any package must be to protect and create jobs, support small business and strengthen our economy. This package will not achieve this. We have said time and again that the most important issue this year is jobs. We look at this package and we see little evidence that it will underpin the jobs of Australians. There is no evidence the Government’s $10.4 billion spending package before Christmas created the 75,000 jobs Mr Rudd promised.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:38 AM
link   
The way I see it, if we're going to face a recession, light the fire now, put the pedal to the metal, and go into deficit so we have something to show for it when it's all over.

Schools, extra cash bonuses, roof insulation (!), social and defense housing, cash for the unemployed returning to training, there's something for almost everyone there.

And as the OP said, it's not going to big business bail outs.

Paying it back however might be another matter, but for heaven's sake, we're not nationalizing any banks...



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by munkey66
 



We're in a unique position in Australia because our banks haven't gotten too big for their boots so they don't need the governments help.



Thats mainly because our property markets have not crashed yet.

Some of these measures are good, others quite bad.
We can only stimulate the economy for so long. Countries are addressing symptoms of the problems, not addressing the problems themselves.

Once these stimulus packages have run their race, we (and most other countries) are in serious trouble.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 01:51 AM
link   
This bailout by the Aussie government is an excellent attempt to try and rally the people out of the coming trainwreck.

I specially like the insulation idea.
What the hell is the opposition doing?

Just because your name says '' oppose '' doesnt mean you have to be against everything and anything for no good reason.

Australia is lucky, we have such a vast landscape full of resources that no matter what happens, we will always have the means to make the money back.

I say put us into debt.

Over a decade we will pay it off through hard work and dedication.
And it will stop the rot quicker than crossing our fingers and hoping for the best!



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 02:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by munkey66
reply to post by wycky
 

I'm here in Cairns and thankfully we still havn't had our water poisoned yet.
but it is coming this year.
But now as Aussies we had a 20 odd billion surplus and now we will have a 20 billion defeceit.


We still have a surplus, the package has not been through the senate yet, stop complaining and actually do some research on what is going on. If we do go into deficit then it is for the right reason, and investing the money into schools, and infrastructure. About bloody time the government did something about education.

Turnbull's tax cut idea's will only give someone earning $30,000 only $150, while someone earning $250,000 will get a tax cut of over $3,000. I would much rather the money going to people earning less than $100,000.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by wycky
 


That's good to hear. If both parties were supporting this insanity it would make me go insane. Say what you want about the Liberals foreign policy but they ran the economy well and put us in the good position we are in to weather this storm. It's amazing Labor is going to squander all those hard earned surlpuses and more in one massive spending binge. They are also increasing immigration to record levels despite the fact that there is going to be loss jobs around, more people plus less jobs = greater unemployment. I doubt Labor cares though because it will ensure more votes for them if immigrant voting trends remain left leaning. I voted Labor last election but even long before this crisis I had buyers regret, at the time I figured the Liberals had been in too long and we may as well give Labor a shot...

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Jacob08]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 05:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jacob08
reply to post by wycky
 


That's good to hear. If both parties were supporting this insanity it would make me go insane. Say what you want about the Liberals foreign policy but they ran the economy well and put us in the good position we are in to weather this storm. It's amazing Labor is going to squander all those hard earned surlpuses and more in one massive spending binge. They are also increasing immigration to record levels despite the fact that there is going to be loss jobs around, more people plus less jobs = greater unemployment. I doubt Labor cares though because it will ensure more votes for them if immigrant voting trends remain left leaning. I voted Labor last election but even long before this crisis I had buyers regret, at the time I figured the Liberals had been in too long and we may as well give Labor a shot...

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Jacob08]


I agree with you 100%
my Concern is why is Rudd is such a rush, Its insane to push something like this trough in 48hours, you can't even get a alone from the bank that fast.

Our expected deficit is 115bn in the next 4 years, shouldn't be we holding spending back??
My other concern is if (or maybe when) we reach the same situation as America and we have to start paying "Bail outs" it makes sense to hold on to as much money as possible.
NSW has only 'just' been making positive figures for the last 2 qtrs, the next qtr is expected to be a negative, 2 qts in a row with negative figures = recession for NSW.



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:12 AM
link   
You don't honestly believe that the Liberals would be any better?

What exactly did the Liberals do for Australia? They created an investment boom?
They were fortunate that the world was growing at an amazing rate, and our resources were in demand.
Introduced the GST, a new tax?

The main economic policies that allowed the boom were completed by Keating in the 80s. From a report from another person, who was brought in by the Liberals (Howard - Treasurer, The Campbell Report I believe?).

So they both played a part in the boom.
However, the boom in Australia mean't other things boomed. If our Real Estate sector collapses, this country is in some serious trouble.

Neither party are good for the country. Both parties would be doing something similar. Both of them have no idea how to handle the current problems.

The only politicians (or ex) who might have a clue (Keating and Costello) are in political exile from their respective parties. I doubt even they have a total grasp on it. We need to start looking towards Austrian economics.

Don't get me started on some of the Labor state governments. Unfortunately, the other side has no more idea than they do.

Don't worry though, the US, UK etc are making similar mistakes to us. (on a bigger scale)



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 06:38 AM
link   
reply to post by realist00
 


Now i have never followed politics, economy until recently i have found it all very interesting, if im saying anything wrong please correct me.

Paul Keating was in power 1991 - 1996
John Howard was in power 1996 - 2007

First of all If Keating was doing a good job he would have been there longer then 1 term.
Howard did 3 Terms.

See the graph below and you will see that our Debt started to Rise when Keating came in to power, and dropped about 1 year after Howard cam into power.









At the federal election on 2 March 1996, the Liberal-National Party coalition under Howard was swept into power with an enormous majority in the House of Representatives. Soon after, and claiming the government had been left with a 'black hole' of debt by Labor, he promised to reduce government expenditure by $8 billion over the next three years. This pledge was to continue guiding his government's economic policies.




[edit on 4/2/2009 by wycky]
Edit: new graph showing 05 & 06 that we are in a Surplus

[edit on 4/2/2009 by wycky]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 02:22 PM
link   
I was referring to Paul Keating the treasurer under the Hawke government. I never said he was a great PM, I said he instituted great reform.

Forget the economic cycles, they have very very little to do with government control OTHER than the way the government allocates its funds (which 'should' have little impact).

All those charts show is that the economic cycle was in downturn, just like it is now. And just like now (although no where near as severe as the current problems), it was largely global.

The Liberals often mention how they paid off the debt of the previous Keating government. The fact is, a government should be in debt by the end of a down cycle (perhaps not this much this quickly though). The way the Liberals paid it off was by selling a public asset (Telstra). Not be 'working hard to pay off the debt'.

Don't believe everything they tell you, most of it is spinning lies and deceit.

Government INFLUENCES the economy via regulations. The idea that government can control interest rates and other facets of the real economy is largely incorrect, and it is something politicians would like you to believe.

As I said before though, they are all no better than each other.

Good times = surpluses (or it should)
Bad times - deficits


[edit on 4/2/09 by realist00]



posted on Feb, 4 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by realist00
Good times = surpluses (or it should)
Bad times - deficits


Not always true. The Bush government managed budget deficits during the same boom periods as did many others around the world (it should also be noted the 1997-2002 period did have global recessionary pressures, the tech bubble burst and Asian financial crisis occured during this period). So having a good government is important. Labor isn't going to even try to keep the budget in surplus and if your not even going to try then there isn't much chance of it happening. Most of the problems we have are due to a slowdown elsewhere and the US economic stimulus, if it even works, is more likely to have a real effect on us then our own. The main thing our stimulus will do is put us in debt and increase the size future budget deficits if the world economic situation gets worse.

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Jacob08]



posted on Feb, 5 2009 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jacob08

Originally posted by realist00
Good times = surpluses (or it should)
Bad times - deficits


Not always true. The Bush government managed budget deficits during the same boom periods as did many others around the world (it should also be noted the 1997-2002 period did have global recessionary pressures, the tech bubble burst and Asian financial crisis occured during this period). So having a good government is important. Labor isn't going to even try to keep the budget in surplus and if your not even going to try then there isn't much chance of it happening. Most of the problems we have are due to a slowdown elsewhere and the US economic stimulus, if it even works, is more likely to have a real effect on us then our own. The main thing our stimulus will do is put us in debt and increase the size future budget deficits if the world economic situation gets worse.

[edit on 4-2-2009 by Jacob08]


The only ways for the current government to put the budget into surplus this year would be:

1 Slash expenditure
2 Raise Taxes

The first measure I support, the second I do not. Both of these would be required to have a surplus in this budget.

The government is going to have a huge shortful on incoming taxation. Companies are expected to provide 40-50% less than the previous budget (mainly mining).

Of course it requires a good government to have surpluses. My point was moreso that the Howard government was able to slash 100billion dollars in taxes and still have the budget in surplus. This shows how strong the economy has been in Australia (outside of the governments influence).

However, a surplus SHOULD be expected in boom times. The reason the US is in so much trouble is because they continue to go into deficit, and have done so basically every year since the fiat currency was introduced in 1971.

The most recent boom in a lot of other countries however, has been on the back of debt. Our country is no different in this regard.

Australia's debt vs GDP is significantly higher than the late 80s and 90s and the 'great' depression. If our property market falls significantly, we are in some serious trouble of our own.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


big businesses and banks should make enough already knob, it's the average aussies who are finding things tough, this is something that should have been addressed years ago. You know the saying, the rich get richer while the poor get poorer..... Well it can't be more than true



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:40 AM
link   
Yup as bad as the package is for adding to the national debt with the world banks etc it will be paying for part of a dental bill and $200 worth of DNB records !!!!!

So bad yet soooo good for the near future fix.... l


I guess it just means my grandchildren will just have to work a little bit harder in the future to pay it off....



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Stimulus Payment Info.

"This year, taxpayers will receive an Economic Stimulus Payment. This is a very exciting new program that I will explain using the Q and A format:

Q. What is an Economic Stimulus Payment?
A. It is money that the federal government will send to taxpayers.

Q. Where will the government get this money?
A. From taxpayers.

Q. So the government is giving me back my own money?
A. Only a smidgin.

Q. What is the purpose of this payment?
A. The plan is that you will use the money to purchase a high-definition TV set or some such thing, thus stimulating the economy.

Q. But isn't that stimulating the economy of China ?
A. Shut up.

Below is some helpful advice on how to best help the Australian economy by spending your stimulus cheque wisely:

If you spend that money at Kmart, all the money will go to China .
If you spend it on petrol it will go to the Arabs.
If you purchase a computer it will go to India .
If you buy a car it will go to Japan .
If you purchase useless crap it will go to Taiwan .

And none of it will help the Australian economy.

We need to keep that money here in Australia. You can keep the money in Australia by spending it at garage sales, going to a cricket match or footy game, or spend it on prostitutes, beer and wine (domestic ONLY), or tattoos, since those are the only businesses that may still be owned by Aussies





posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:39 AM
link   
This money will help pay the bills but i know there are alot of people out there worried about their jobs.



posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   
I heard on the radio a few days ago,
A caller phoned up about his concerns re the Bradford insulation batts they are using are going to be using.
He said: "The batts were dumped in china from the US because they are to dangerous (I'm not sure why) and Bradford Batts is importing the same ones that are to dangerous for the US to be used in Australia!!".

The talk back radio host agreed and back everything he said.

Has anyone else heard of this??
I have had no luck yet but i am trying to find some source's on this one.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 05:32 AM
link   
first of all, they said not to waste it on tv's and crap like that.
but stimulate local business and preferably "buy australian"

secondly, the insulation offer is of insulation of your choosing

if you install now you can claim up to $1600 back. most homes cost a little over a grand so there is flexibility in their offer.

if you wait till july (as i will be) you can ring a number and theyll organise someone to measure and install batts of your choosing

quote from gubmint website:

www.environment.gov.au...


What type of insulation can I get?
You can choose from a wide variety of ceiling insulation as long as it meets the relevant insulation standards for your locality. For further information about standards, please visit your state or territory government website. (Information will also be available in the Program Guidelines, available from 26 February 2009 on www.environment.gov.au/energyefficiency )

For an average sized house, you can expect insulation to cost around $1,200.




i think insulation is a fantastic idea. it reduces energy consumption and therefore loads on power stations during heat waves and such.

my wife and i should get a stimulus, and we have already chosen a local aussie who runs a tree removal company and he will be getting about 90% of both our stimulus cheques...

i stimulate local jobs with the stimulus and get free tree removal and roofing insulation for my home in the near future?


it sure beats the bastard who swore "a gst will not be on my next election agenda" yet swiftly pushed it through first chance he got.


on a side note, i think its pretty obvious how screwed up politics is when new leaders are elected in usa and aus during times of an already screwed economy, yet have fingers pointed at them for it happening on their watch.

this is akin to the titanic hitting the ice berg then the captain realising its doomed looks to the first mate and says "you know how you wanna be captain, todays your lucky day" then blaming the first mate for the doomed vessel sinking.




top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join