Home Articles Forum Wiki Poll Garden Contact

 
 
 
  
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
 
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

  Australian Politics Forum › General Discussion › Federal Politics › Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy (Read 4382 times)
crocodile
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #45 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am  
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:01am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:31pm:
Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:03pm:
Quote:
NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord is calling for a doubling of the Medicare levy to help cover the multibillion dollar shortfall in health funding faced by NSW under cuts to Commonwealth payments in the federal government's 2014 budget.


Both the increase to the GST and now this support to double the Medicare levy are only the result of the federal Liberal governments budget cuts.

The better solution is to force the feds to give the money back and to stop them from forcing the states into asking for tax increases to cover up for federal government nastiness and incompetence.



Deficit? Debt?  Heard of those?  Your leftly-losers gave us that and a sinking economy to make fixing it harder along with a senate that insists on being part of the problem.


In reality it is all brinkmanship. They really don't matter as much as our dear leaders carry on about. Every surplus budget creates dollar for dollar deficits on the private side of the ledger anyway.



Good old theory once again. Deficits don't matter, surpluses don't matter.  Your real-life experience appears to be deeply lacking.


Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.
Back to top
 
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #46 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:00am  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


I'm assuming you mean if tax was lower the people would have kept more income. Clearly this is by definition.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mariacostel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #47 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:14am  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:16am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 7:59am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:17pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:53pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:33am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:36am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:50am:
Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:08am:
Redmond Neck wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:53am:
Halve the private health refund and use that income on Medicare


Wouldn't people pull out of private cover?

It would hardly be worth it for them and that would put a strain on an already burdened public health system.


Absolutely brilliant as a vote buying carrot while the punters think they're getting something for nothing.


Sometimes you come across as a theorist with zero practical experience. This is a classic example of that. Health Fees DROP????

Try again.


If they start losing customers the fees will come down quick smart. It's only mandated legislation that keeps them high. The good ol' supply and demand situation works every time except when legislators, monopolies and rent seekers get in the way and distort the market.



I would love to think it was that simple and so would the government and health funds and everybody else. Of course you will be unable to show a single example of that working because it never has. Your economics knowledge is undeniably substantial but entirely theoretical. I sense not a single real-world modification of any of your ideas.


Not so sure about the substantial bit. It may appear theoretical sometimes. Mostly that is deliberate in order to avoid the relativism argument. Economic theories aren't generally hypothesised to form some predictive outcome. Instead they are generally formed after collecting past data, analysing and modelling it and then looking for explanations. The theory is based on past events so if something turns up that has a new set of parameters the theories aren't of much help.

The case of falling demand and it's effect on retail prices is already well understood. However, markets can be skewed by the actions that have been stated. In the case of private health, with the removal of subsidies it is given that demand will drop. Retailers have little choice but to reduce entry costs in a market without other interventions.

Of course there are possible interventions that may prop up the cost such as concerted effort and bullying tactics from the medical professional bodies. This form of rent seeking is not new as demonstrated by the AMA 30 odd years ago when Brendan Nelson still had an earing.


Even this reply is almost entirely theoretical. Healthcare costs would NOT drop as you say they would. If that were the case don't you think the millions of economists and politicians struggling with rapidly rising health costs might have tried this out?


The rebate has been derided by just about every economist on the planet. It is still in place because like most subsidies the political fallout from it's removal would be catastrophic.

The rebate is not the only factor that drives health care costs either. The work of the AMA and College of Surgeons in keeping tight wraps on their numbers ensuring supply is always short and prices consequently inflated can't be underestimated.

The uncompetitive structure of doctors' insurance programs doesn't help either.



Every economist on the planet? Firstly, you cant even make that claim about every economist in Australia nevermind the rest who don't give a crap about Australia anyhow. And that is before we talk about how reliable economists are in the first place.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
crocodile
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #48 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 11:50am  
Kytro wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:00am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


I'm assuming you mean if tax was lower the people would have kept more income. Clearly this is by definition.


In a nutshell, yes. It's amazing how this rather simple accounting measure is not understood more widely. The effects on savings, private debt and investment is important. If you are really interested then google "sectoral balances". There you will find that long runs of government surpluses effectively decrease private sector savings and add to private debt. There is little point in looking only at the government debt levels without consideration to the level of private debt.

This is a medicare thread so its probably the wrong thread to carry on. Suffice to say that the 10 years of surplus simply moved the debt from the public sector to the private sector. Great for electioneering but the nation is actually still carrying the debt but privately. The reality is that small deficits should be the ongoing default position.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Nov 3rd, 2015 at 12:02pm by crocodile »  
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.
 
IP Logged
 
crocodile
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #49 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 11:52am  
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:14am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:16am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 7:59am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:17pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 5:53pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:33am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 8:36am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:50am:
Ex Dame Pansi wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:08am:
Redmond Neck wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:53am:
Halve the private health refund and use that income on Medicare


Wouldn't people pull out of private cover?

It would hardly be worth it for them and that would put a strain on an already burdened public health system.


Absolutely brilliant as a vote buying carrot while the punters think they're getting something for nothing.


Sometimes you come across as a theorist with zero practical experience. This is a classic example of that. Health Fees DROP????

Try again.


If they start losing customers the fees will come down quick smart. It's only mandated legislation that keeps them high. The good ol' supply and demand situation works every time except when legislators, monopolies and rent seekers get in the way and distort the market.



I would love to think it was that simple and so would the government and health funds and everybody else. Of course you will be unable to show a single example of that working because it never has. Your economics knowledge is undeniably substantial but entirely theoretical. I sense not a single real-world modification of any of your ideas.


Not so sure about the substantial bit. It may appear theoretical sometimes. Mostly that is deliberate in order to avoid the relativism argument. Economic theories aren't generally hypothesised to form some predictive outcome. Instead they are generally formed after collecting past data, analysing and modelling it and then looking for explanations. The theory is based on past events so if something turns up that has a new set of parameters the theories aren't of much help.

The case of falling demand and it's effect on retail prices is already well understood. However, markets can be skewed by the actions that have been stated. In the case of private health, with the removal of subsidies it is given that demand will drop. Retailers have little choice but to reduce entry costs in a market without other interventions.

Of course there are possible interventions that may prop up the cost such as concerted effort and bullying tactics from the medical professional bodies. This form of rent seeking is not new as demonstrated by the AMA 30 odd years ago when Brendan Nelson still had an earing.


Even this reply is almost entirely theoretical. Healthcare costs would NOT drop as you say they would. If that were the case don't you think the millions of economists and politicians struggling with rapidly rising health costs might have tried this out?


The rebate has been derided by just about every economist on the planet. It is still in place because like most subsidies the political fallout from it's removal would be catastrophic.

The rebate is not the only factor that drives health care costs either. The work of the AMA and College of Surgeons in keeping tight wraps on their numbers ensuring supply is always short and prices consequently inflated can't be underestimated.

The uncompetitive structure of doctors' insurance programs doesn't help either.



Every economist on the planet? Firstly, you cant even make that claim about every economist in Australia nevermind the rest who don't give a crap about Australia anyhow. And that is before we talk about how reliable economists are in the first place.


OK. Probably a bit over the top but the points remain.
Back to top
 
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.
 
IP Logged
 
Bam
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 21905
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #50 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 4:35pm  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:16am:
The rebate has been derided by just about every economist on the planet. It is still in place because like most subsidies the political fallout from it's removal would be catastrophic.

The rebate is not the only factor that drives health care costs either. The work of the AMA and College of Surgeons in keeping tight wraps on their numbers ensuring supply is always short and prices consequently inflated can't be underestimated.

The uncompetitive structure of doctors' insurance programs doesn't help either.

The private health insurance industry has grown fat, bloated and inefficient due to the health insurance rebate and the Medicare surcharge for high-income earners without private health insurance. Removing these measures will make that industry more efficient.

Many private health insurance policies cover matters that have nothing to do with health and this causes health money to be wasted. Another source of waste is the Medicare surcharge, which makes some people take out useless policies just to dodge the punitive tax. Neither of these are efficient use of health money.
Back to top
 
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are only entitled to hold opinions that you can defend through sound, reasoned argument.
 
IP Logged
 
crocodile
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #51 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 4:44pm  
Bam wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 4:35pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:16am:
The rebate has been derided by just about every economist on the planet. It is still in place because like most subsidies the political fallout from it's removal would be catastrophic.

The rebate is not the only factor that drives health care costs either. The work of the AMA and College of Surgeons in keeping tight wraps on their numbers ensuring supply is always short and prices consequently inflated can't be underestimated.

The uncompetitive structure of doctors' insurance programs doesn't help either.

The private health insurance industry has grown fat, bloated and inefficient due to the health insurance rebate and the Medicare surcharge for high-income earners without private health insurance. Removing these measures will make that industry more efficient.

Many private health insurance policies cover matters that have nothing to do with health and this causes health money to be wasted. Another source of waste is the Medicare surcharge, which makes some people take out useless policies just to dodge the punitive tax. Neither of these are efficient use of health money.


A rare moment in history. Crocodile agrees with Bam. I'll note the date in my diary.
Back to top
 
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.
 
IP Logged
 
mariacostel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #52 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 5:29pm  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 11:50am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:00am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


I'm assuming you mean if tax was lower the people would have kept more income. Clearly this is by definition.


In a nutshell, yes. It's amazing how this rather simple accounting measure is not understood more widely. The effects on savings, private debt and investment is important. If you are really interested then google "sectoral balances". There you will find that long runs of government surpluses effectively decrease private sector savings and add to private debt. There is little point in looking only at the government debt levels without consideration to the level of private debt.

This is a medicare thread so its probably the wrong thread to carry on. Suffice to say that the 10 years of surplus simply moved the debt from the public sector to the private sector. Great for electioneering but the nation is actually still carrying the debt but privately. The reality is that small deficits should be the ongoing default position.


There may be a clue there.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mariacostel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #53 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 5:42pm  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:01am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:31pm:
Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:03pm:
Quote:
NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord is calling for a doubling of the Medicare levy to help cover the multibillion dollar shortfall in health funding faced by NSW under cuts to Commonwealth payments in the federal government's 2014 budget.


Both the increase to the GST and now this support to double the Medicare levy are only the result of the federal Liberal governments budget cuts.

The better solution is to force the feds to give the money back and to stop them from forcing the states into asking for tax increases to cover up for federal government nastiness and incompetence.



Deficit? Debt?  Heard of those?  Your leftly-losers gave us that and a sinking economy to make fixing it harder along with a senate that insists on being part of the problem.


In reality it is all brinkmanship. They really don't matter as much as our dear leaders carry on about. Every surplus budget creates dollar for dollar deficits on the private side of the ledger anyway.



Good old theory once again. Deficits don't matter, surpluses don't matter.  Your real-life experience appears to be deeply lacking.


Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


It is beyond simplistic - which is why you don't hear other actual experienced economist saying this. You think in closed economies only. You ignore productivity growth and innovation - which government NEVer does and come up with this ludicrously simple concept. Where does the money come from to fund government deficits? LARGELY OVERSEAS. Crash goes your argument.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
crocodile
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #54 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm  
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 5:42pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:01am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:31pm:
Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:03pm:
Quote:
NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord is calling for a doubling of the Medicare levy to help cover the multibillion dollar shortfall in health funding faced by NSW under cuts to Commonwealth payments in the federal government's 2014 budget.


Both the increase to the GST and now this support to double the Medicare levy are only the result of the federal Liberal governments budget cuts.

The better solution is to force the feds to give the money back and to stop them from forcing the states into asking for tax increases to cover up for federal government nastiness and incompetence.



Deficit? Debt?  Heard of those?  Your leftly-losers gave us that and a sinking economy to make fixing it harder along with a senate that insists on being part of the problem.


In reality it is all brinkmanship. They really don't matter as much as our dear leaders carry on about. Every surplus budget creates dollar for dollar deficits on the private side of the ledger anyway.



Good old theory once again. Deficits don't matter, surpluses don't matter.  Your real-life experience appears to be deeply lacking.


Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


It is beyond simplistic - which is why you don't hear other actual experienced economist saying this. You think in closed economies only. You ignore productivity growth and innovation - which government NEVer does and come up with this ludicrously simple concept. Where does the money come from to fund government deficits? LARGELY OVERSEAS. Crash goes your argument.


That is complete nonsense Maria. The total issue of Australian securities as of 30th June 2015 was $ 368,729.8 million of which a paltry $ 7.1 million are foreign denominated.

http://aofm.gov.au/files/2015/10/Table-H12.pdf

Deficits are funded by the issue of government bonds which are denominated in our sovereign currency. Foreigners may purchase them but they purchase them in $AUS and cop the arbitrage risks along with it.

The local economy, on average grows at a nominal rate of around 5% pa. The money supply must grow in nominal terms as as well. New money enters the economy as the interest on the bonds is paid. This is why a small deficit that never goes beyond the natural growth of the economy is entirely manageable. Surpluses are useful to claw back the times when it is exceeded but this is a historical rarity.

I take issue with your claim that reputable economists never mention the fact. I don't know of any economist that is even remotely suggesting a return to government surplus any time soon. The sectoral balance topic would be found in just about any decent macro textbook and most likely have an entire chapter devoted to the subject.
Back to top
 
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.
 
IP Logged
 
Its time
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Boot libs out

Posts: 25639
Gender: female
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #55 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:36pm  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 5:42pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:01am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:31pm:
Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:03pm:
Quote:
NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord is calling for a doubling of the Medicare levy to help cover the multibillion dollar shortfall in health funding faced by NSW under cuts to Commonwealth payments in the federal government's 2014 budget.


Both the increase to the GST and now this support to double the Medicare levy are only the result of the federal Liberal governments budget cuts.

The better solution is to force the feds to give the money back and to stop them from forcing the states into asking for tax increases to cover up for federal government nastiness and incompetence.



Deficit? Debt?  Heard of those?  Your leftly-losers gave us that and a sinking economy to make fixing it harder along with a senate that insists on being part of the problem.


In reality it is all brinkmanship. They really don't matter as much as our dear leaders carry on about. Every surplus budget creates dollar for dollar deficits on the private side of the ledger anyway.



Good old theory once again. Deficits don't matter, surpluses don't matter.  Your real-life experience appears to be deeply lacking.


Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


It is beyond simplistic - which is why you don't hear other actual experienced economist saying this. You think in closed economies only. You ignore productivity growth and innovation - which government NEVer does and come up with this ludicrously simple concept. Where does the money come from to fund government deficits? LARGELY OVERSEAS. Crash goes your argument.


That is complete nonsense Maria. The total issue of Australian securities as of 30th June 2015 was $ 368,729.8 million of which a paltry $ 7.1 million are foreign denominated.

http://aofm.gov.au/files/2015/10/Table-H12.pdf

Deficits are funded by the issue of government bonds which are denominated in our sovereign currency. Foreigners may purchase them but they purchase them in $AUS and cop the arbitrage risks along with it.

The local economy, on average grows at a nominal rate of around 5% pa. The money supply must grow in nominal terms as as well. New money enters the economy as the interest on the bonds is paid. This is why a small deficit that never goes beyond the natural growth of the economy is entirely manageable. Surpluses are useful to claw back the times when it is exceeded but this is a historical rarity.

I take issue with your claim that reputable economists never mention the fact. I don't know of any economist that is even remotely suggesting a return to government surplus any time soon. The sectoral balance topic would be found in just about any decent macro textbook and most likely have an entire chapter devoted to the subject.


As much as im thoroughly enjoying it , you should give it a rest bruce maria longy , getting your arse absolutely handed to you , perhaps you concentrate on winning an argument with facts as opposed to winning an argument based on debating .
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 74981
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #56 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:42pm  
Its time wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:36pm:
perhaps you concentrate on winning an argument with facts as opposed to winning an argument based on debating .



the only facts Maria knows are those she makes up Grin Grin
Back to top
 
Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
crocodile
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6683
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #57 - Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:44pm  
Its time wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:36pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 5:42pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:01am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:31pm:
Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:03pm:
Quote:
NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord is calling for a doubling of the Medicare levy to help cover the multibillion dollar shortfall in health funding faced by NSW under cuts to Commonwealth payments in the federal government's 2014 budget.


Both the increase to the GST and now this support to double the Medicare levy are only the result of the federal Liberal governments budget cuts.

The better solution is to force the feds to give the money back and to stop them from forcing the states into asking for tax increases to cover up for federal government nastiness and incompetence.



Deficit? Debt?  Heard of those?  Your leftly-losers gave us that and a sinking economy to make fixing it harder along with a senate that insists on being part of the problem.


In reality it is all brinkmanship. They really don't matter as much as our dear leaders carry on about. Every surplus budget creates dollar for dollar deficits on the private side of the ledger anyway.



Good old theory once again. Deficits don't matter, surpluses don't matter.  Your real-life experience appears to be deeply lacking.


Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


It is beyond simplistic - which is why you don't hear other actual experienced economist saying this. You think in closed economies only. You ignore productivity growth and innovation - which government NEVer does and come up with this ludicrously simple concept. Where does the money come from to fund government deficits? LARGELY OVERSEAS. Crash goes your argument.


That is complete nonsense Maria. The total issue of Australian securities as of 30th June 2015 was $ 368,729.8 million of which a paltry $ 7.1 million are foreign denominated.

http://aofm.gov.au/files/2015/10/Table-H12.pdf

Deficits are funded by the issue of government bonds which are denominated in our sovereign currency. Foreigners may purchase them but they purchase them in $AUS and cop the arbitrage risks along with it.

The local economy, on average grows at a nominal rate of around 5% pa. The money supply must grow in nominal terms as as well. New money enters the economy as the interest on the bonds is paid. This is why a small deficit that never goes beyond the natural growth of the economy is entirely manageable. Surpluses are useful to claw back the times when it is exceeded but this is a historical rarity.

I take issue with your claim that reputable economists never mention the fact. I don't know of any economist that is even remotely suggesting a return to government surplus any time soon. The sectoral balance topic would be found in just about any decent macro textbook and most likely have an entire chapter devoted to the subject.


As much as im thoroughly enjoying it , you should give it a rest bruce maria longy , getting your arse absolutely handed to you , perhaps you concentrate on winning an argument with facts as opposed to winning an argument based on debating .


OK fellas, there's nothing wrong with probing questions. Hopefully we all come here for information which we then use to make our own judgements. I've learned a lot here myself just reading the thoughts of others. I hope this is not viewed as a point scoring exercise. I'm actually quite serious about the economic and political landscape. Over the last 20 odd years we have been let down quite badly with opportunistic mistruths and negativity from both sides.
Back to top
 
Very funny Scotty, now beam down my clothes.
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #58 - Nov 4th, 2015 at 6:13am  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 11:50am:
Kytro wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 10:00am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


I'm assuming you mean if tax was lower the people would have kept more income. Clearly this is by definition.


In a nutshell, yes. It's amazing how this rather simple accounting measure is not understood more widely. The effects on savings, private debt and investment is important. If you are really interested then google "sectoral balances". There you will find that long runs of government surpluses effectively decrease private sector savings and add to private debt. There is little point in looking only at the government debt levels without consideration to the level of private debt.

This is a medicare thread so its probably the wrong thread to carry on. Suffice to say that the 10 years of surplus simply moved the debt from the public sector to the private sector. Great for electioneering but the nation is actually still carrying the debt but privately. The reality is that small deficits should be the ongoing default position.


It can increase private debt, but it doesn't have to do so, nor is doing so always a bad thing. For instance if the government wants to enact certain policy, it might be useful.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mariacostel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female
Re: Calling For A Doubling Of Medicare Levy
Reply #59 - Nov 4th, 2015 at 6:24am  
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 7:25pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 5:42pm:
crocodile wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:20am:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 3rd, 2015 at 8:01am:
crocodile wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 9:34pm:
mariacostel wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 7:31pm:
Dnarever wrote on Nov 2nd, 2015 at 6:03pm:
Quote:
NSW opposition health spokesman Walt Secord is calling for a doubling of the Medicare levy to help cover the multibillion dollar shortfall in health funding faced by NSW under cuts to Commonwealth payments in the federal government's 2014 budget.


Both the increase to the GST and now this support to double the Medicare levy are only the result of the federal Liberal governments budget cuts.

The better solution is to force the feds to give the money back and to stop them from forcing the states into asking for tax increases to cover up for federal government nastiness and incompetence.



Deficit? Debt?  Heard of those?  Your leftly-losers gave us that and a sinking economy to make fixing it harder along with a senate that insists on being part of the problem.


In reality it is all brinkmanship. They really don't matter as much as our dear leaders carry on about. Every surplus budget creates dollar for dollar deficits on the private side of the ledger anyway.



Good old theory once again. Deficits don't matter, surpluses don't matter.  Your real-life experience appears to be deeply lacking.


Are you suggesting that a surplus on the government side of the ledger does not show as a deficit on the private side. If so then I suggest your own real-life experiences are misunderstood.


It is beyond simplistic - which is why you don't hear other actual experienced economist saying this. You think in closed economies only. You ignore productivity growth and innovation - which government NEVer does and come up with this ludicrously simple concept. Where does the money come from to fund government deficits? LARGELY OVERSEAS. Crash goes your argument.


That is complete nonsense Maria. The total issue of Australian securities as of 30th June 2015 was $ 368,729.8 million of which a paltry $ 7.1 million are foreign denominated.

http://aofm.gov.au/files/2015/10/Table-H12.pdf

Deficits are funded by the issue of government bonds which are denominated in our sovereign currency. Foreigners may purchase them but they purchase them in $AUS and cop the arbitrage risks along with it.

The local economy, on average grows at a nominal rate of around 5% pa. The money supply must grow in nominal terms as as well. New money enters the economy as the interest on the bonds is paid. This is why a small deficit that never goes beyond the natural growth of the economy is entirely manageable. Surpluses are useful to claw back the times when it is exceeded but this is a historical rarity.

I take issue with your claim that reputable economists never mention the fact. I don't know of any economist that is even remotely suggesting a return to government surplus any time soon. The sectoral balance topic would be found in just about any decent macro textbook and most likely have an entire chapter devoted to the subject.



The point is not where they are denominated but where the money comes from and it largely comes from OVERSEAS which was my point. You are very theoretical. And you don't know of any economist suggesting a return to surplus being a good thing??  Maybe in a university perhaps where I think your experience is largely limited to.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
‹ Previous Topic | Next Topic ›
 
 

  « Forum ‹ Board Top of this page

Australian Politics Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2025. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge