Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets.
Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:

Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D

yeah we righties no what you mean.. we have just had 6 years of mean and tricky....enough is enough...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Pp8dvrVWI

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:

Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D

and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0?

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0?

you don't think $200B in debt is better than $400B in debt?  :D :D :D

You want to lend some money? I'm offering great rates ....

http://www.thepunch.com.au/images/uploads/hockeyrugby.jpg  http://www.jokefeeder.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/i-can-count-to-potato.png

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:42pm:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0?

Yeah not the point.
Just tell the smacking truth.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth.

Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth.

I would agree about using consistent methodology but be careful before you demand that too often.  labor has been guilty many times of using convenient terminology.   The 'structural deficit' is the classic.  This is how you turn a worlds-best surplus into a deficit by using words instead of numbers.  Im just waiting for some numbskull to tell us that we have a structural surplus now.

consistent terma and methodologies are a two-edged sword so be careful before you try and wield it too self-righteously.

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:30pm:

Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D

Ah, that's what I was referring to here -

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 4:04pm:

crocodile wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 2:03pm: Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 9:00am: # wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:21pm: Maqqa wrote on Aug 17th, 2013 at 3:19pm: Debt under LIBs = ZERO Debt under ALP = $300B GFC You've made the rather common mistake of comparing gross debt to net debt. The coalition never had gross debt below zero. The lowest gross debt was end of 2006 at around 50 bil. Net debt was negative as claimed. If you want to compare debts then you really should either compare net with net or gross with gross. As of today, government net debt is around 180 bil. It ended years ago. Why not blame the Great Depression too???  ::) ::) ::) Gross Debt is/was, as follows - Date (30 June)      Gross Debt ($ millions) 2007      58,284 2008      60,462 2009      101,147 2010      147,133 2011      191,291 2012      233,976 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debt The Net Debt situation, from 1970-now can be found at the following site - http://www.budget.gov.au/2012-13/content/myefo/html/13_appendix_d.htm As can be seen, the Libs picked up a Net Debt on taking office in 1996, which Peaked at some $96 Billion, they then converted that into a Net Credit of $45 Billion on leaving office in 2007 ,just as the GFC was getting under way. The last figures, on this article, shows Labor going back to a Net Debt of around $144 Billion at the end of June 2012. It is also worth noting that Net Debt rose initially when Hawke/Keating won office in 1983. It then fell back to more usual levels, before rising again, which co-incided with the Economic slowdown of the early to mid 1990's. It should also be noted that Hockey actually went urther than Maqqa, by claiming Zero Debt when the Libs left office & that Labor would leave a $400 Billion Debt on leaving office. Given the above, it would seem both Maqqa & Joe have used the Libs Net Debt on leaving office AND both have used the Gross Labor Debt, with Maqqa maybe using an estimate for the end of June 2014 & Joe perhaps using a forward estimate guestimate for 2017???

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:54pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie

the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing.

idiot.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:16pm:

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot.

In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office.

The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion.

And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that -
1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom.

Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times.

That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton.

2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over.

Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way!

It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information!

Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT? 

The truth will set Hockey free...so why does he continue to lie and deceive?
We all know what happens to govts that attain power based on lies and deceptions dont we... :D

The trouble with being wilfully inconsistent to exaggerate a point is that once someone is caught out doing that it sows the seeds of mistrust. If Hockey was a business director doing this on an annual report, he would be charged and convicted for breaching corporation law.

If the debt problem is actually bad, there is no need to resort to such obvious spin and trickery. A simple comparison of like with like will be sufficient.

Like with like, 100% accurate (from ABC Online's Fact Check):
Gross debt - $59 billion (2007 election) to $268 billion (2013 election).
Net debt: net assets of $31 billion to net debt of $184 billion.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:16pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot. In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office. The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion. And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that - 1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom. Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times. That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton. 2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over. Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way! It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information! Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT?

it should be noted that he $144B net debt is a figure from a year ago and is likely top be notably higher.  After all, those deficits don't fund themselves.

Anyhow, using these net figures the picture is an embarrassment of epic proportions.  $45B in the bank in cash and a mere 6 years later we are $200B+ worse off.  It is hard to look at that as anything other than an epic fail.

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:53pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:16pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot. In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office. The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion. And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that - 1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom. Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times. That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton. 2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over. Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way! It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information! Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT?  it should be noted that he $144B net debt is a figure from a year ago and is likely top be notably higher.  After all, those deficits don't fund themselves. Anyhow, using these net figures the picture is an embarrassment of epic proportions.  $45B in the bank in cash and a mere 6 years later we are $200B+ worse off.  It is hard to look at that as anything other than an epic fail.

That is correct, the $144 Billion figure was the last official figure that I recall, from 30/06/2012.

That would be incorrect! When viewed with the relevant Economic times & the absolute disasters incurred by most other countries, Australia has held up reasonably well, thanks both to the Libs & Labor, although both could have & should have, done better!

adelcrow wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:52pm:

The truth will set Hockey free...so why does he continue to lie and deceive? We all know what happens to govts that attain power based on lies and deceptions dont we... :D

What ? It got the Howard government 4 terms ?????

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:15pm:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. I would agree about using consistent methodology but be careful before you demand that too often.  labor has been guilty many times of using convenient terminology.   The 'structural deficit' is the classic.  This is how you turn a worlds-best surplus into a deficit by using words instead of numbers.  Im just waiting for some numbskull to tell us that we have a structural surplus now. consistent terma and methodologies are a two-edged sword so be careful before you try and wield it too self-righteously.

My demand is not party specific & frankly it's a demand we all should have.
Unemployment is another classic example of bullsh!t.

And as the video points out the 400/217 figure is for 2016/17 FFS
At the current poll Tony will have been in and maybe even re-elected
Cold fushion may have been discovered and harnessed.
Make a prediction, you've got a 50/50 chance ;)

When aren't the libs lying? There whole strategy for the last 3 yrs has been to lie, exaggerate and obstruct. Hockey behaving this way is nothing new.

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 7:41pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:16pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot. In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office. The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion. And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that - 1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom. Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times. That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton. 2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over. Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way! It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information! Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT?

I think you will find it is ounces not tonnes Perc!!!

:) :) :)

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/reserve-banks-gold-sale-cost-us-5bn/story-e6frg6nf-1225985231872

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20^th, 2013 at 6:48pm:

longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth.

Okay, the truth is Labor has no freaking idea when it comes to the budget, economy and all matters relating to finance. Time and time again we see Labor overspend, borrow without a plan to repay the debt and generally trash the joint. This leads to a Coalition government making hard choices to fix up Labor's mess, some of which are unpopular. This generally leads to Labor getting back into power within a couple of terms and the cycle repeats itself. Labor are economic vandals, plain and simple. They can't balance a budget, can't manage their programs and as we've seen with Rudd's reckless changes to the FBT, they have no freaking idea how the market and industry operates.

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 21^st, 2013 at 7:50am:

Okay, the truth is

;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D


Armpit actually thinks he knows the truth ...

;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D

Armchair_Politician wrote on Aug 21^st, 2013 at 7:50am:

Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Okay, the truth is Labor has no freaking idea when it comes to the budget, economy and all matters relating to finance. Time and time again we see Labor overspend, borrow without a plan to repay the debt and generally trash the joint. This leads to a Coalition government making hard choices to fix up Labor's mess, some of which are unpopular. This generally leads to Labor getting back into power within a couple of terms and the cycle repeats itself. Labor are economic vandals, plain and simple. They can't balance a budget, can't manage their programs and as we've seen with Rudd's reckless changes to the FBT, they have no freaking idea how the market and industry operates.

Yet Robert Menzies presided over 17 consecutive budget deficits?
Yet Paul Keating was the 1st Australian Treasurer to achieve a budget surplus?

You have well and truly swallowed the bullsh!t puddle

http://images.sp@m.com/polls/000673583/polls_sheeple_4115_860073_poll_xlarge.jpeg

philperth2010 wrote on Aug 21^st, 2013 at 7:17am:

perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:41pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 7:16pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:54pm: Dsmithy70 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:48pm: longweekend58 wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:42pm: adelcrow wrote on Aug 20th, 2013 at 6:30pm: Hockey has again been caught out using net debt figures when referring to the Coalitions past budgets and gross debt when referring to Labors budgets. Yep ..just what we need... another mean and tricky Coalition govt  ;D and net debt makes it look better??  $200B net debt vs $0? Yeah not the point. Just tell the smacking truth. Over 80 billion dollars of debt left by the Howard govt is closer to the truth..0 debt is a lie the facts don't support that however.. but you never let that get in the way, do you?  But ironically here you are doing EXACLTY what you deride Hockey for doing. idiot. In fact, the Howard Libs left a Gross Debt of about $60 Billion and their NET Debt was actually a Credit of about $45 Billion, when they left office. The current Gross Debt is about $260 Billion & Net Debt is about $144 Billion. And, before those on both sides start their SPIN, it should be noted that - 1) The Howard years (1996-2007) were Peak Global Economic years , due to the Baby Boomer Boom. Whilst these were Peak Economic years, credit should go to the Libs, as they clearly out performed most other Politicians from around the world, who did little to nothing to take advantage of the Boom times. That said, quite a bit of the Libs Debt pay-down of Debt did come from asset sales AND they sold a whole bundle of gold at around $250 a ton, which is now worth around $1,400 a ton. 2) The Labor years (2007-2013) have seen the GFC commence, which is 2nd only to the great Depression & it is certainly far from over. Whilst Labor has had a torrid Global Economy, they haven't gone overboard with increasing Debt, as did many other countries, BUT they certainly did create a few sizable errors (cock-ups), along the way! It is appropriate that, Politicians from both major party's should be forced to use factually correct information! Perhaps, IF they fail to do so, THEN THEY COULD BE SENT TO THE "NAUGHTY CHAIR" FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT?  I think you will find it is ounces not tonnes Perc!!! :) :) :) http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/reserve-banks-gold-sale-cost-us-5bn/story-e6frg6nf-1225985231872

Correct, thanks Phil, too much rush yesterday!