perceptions_now
Gold Member
Offline
Australian Politics
Posts: 11694
Perth WA
Gender: 
|
stryder wrote on Aug 29 th, 2013 at 9:15pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29 th, 2013 at 9:06pm: stryder wrote on Aug 29 th, 2013 at 8:46pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 29 th, 2013 at 8:31pm: stryder wrote on Aug 29 th, 2013 at 8:19pm: perceptions_now wrote on Aug 26 th, 2013 at 11:43am: All will become apparent & transparent, IF THERE IS LESS SPIN & MORE REALITY.
Anyone, with other prime examples of SPIN (for any Political Party) &/or REALITY, PLEASE POST THEM HERE!
perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20 th, 2013 at 7:15pm: 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 
Ah, that's what I was referring to here -
perceptions_now wrote on Aug 20 th, 2013 at 4:04pm: 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 233,976http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_national_debtThe 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.htmAs 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??? Perceptions this looks fasinating, I wouldnt know where to start to respond to your argument, maybe i should start by why has the media reported an economic position that was left by howard and Costello contary to what your stating here ??? And why did that go under Labors nose ?????????? can you satisfactorily explain that ? These facts are in the Public domain, :BUT self-interest then takes over & the relevant party's then place their own SPIN on the facts( ! Thats funny because you seem to be doing the same thing here it right to support your argument, you realise facts and you twist it to give it a place to fit in your argument which mean it wont automatically ring true after careful thought., Really?
How have I just done that & what is MY ARGUMENT? I would like to know why hasnt Kevin Rudd being running around not saying "oh the coalition is wrong they didnt leave a 17-20 billion surplus, they left a whopping 60 billion dollar debt all along, they left a debt from a bent for more spending . because thats not the political narritive nor the story, you are spinning something else of your own making from the facts, you think we can spend more money and not worry about the debt labor is accumulating, the debt now ?? Kevin likes to spend, spend, spend and spend ?? Abbott, likes to cut, cut and cut ? so whos right and wrong for now, perceptions? I think you may find that it has been referred to, But you would need to approach Labor Pollies for their reasoning on not raising it more.
That said, I would venture that it would still be a negative, in the eyes of many voters, as they see the Gross or Net Debt under the Libs, as a better outome than the Labs have had, although most would not give proper weight to the circumstances under which both have operated.
In fact, most wouldn't know, nor care about those circumstances. I am simply seeking to say that neither Labors Keynesian approach, nor the Liberal Austrian approach will now be successful, as both could have been in the past, at the correct stage of the Economic cycle! So, from that perspective, BOTH LABOR & LIBERAL ARE NOW, BOTH WRONG! My spinning something else, as you put it, is incorrect, I AM SIMPLY TRYING TO HIGHLIGHT WHERE THE LOCAL & GLOBAL ECONOMY IS NOW PLACED, DUE TO WHAT ARE ONCE IN HISTORY CIRCUMSTANCES, THE REALITIES OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST UNDER BOTH LABOR & THE LIBS AND THE LIKELY FUTURE OUTCOMES, UNDER BOTH MAJOR PARTY'S. As for the future, my estimation is that outcomes will not be good, under either Labor or the Liberals, but under the Libs it is likely to be slightly worse, given their likely policies. Btw, I think the Libs are likely to win the election.
|
Forum
Pages: 
Political SPIN & Reality (Read 26974 times)
