Top StoriesMay’s sharp fall in jobless numbers added to the greenness of the ‘recovery’ (or less bad) thesis; overnight June’s unemployment figures were so awful that they could have stunted at least, the wavering shoots.
Rudd’s stimulus package divides the pack
|
We’re in the middle of the most perverse economic debate in years. Despite apparently universal agreement about the need for the Government’s economic stimulus, it’s copping a hammering from the media, the Opposition and even recipients. Never was a measure more welcomed and yet criticised. The Government’s desire that, being a stimulus package, it is actually spent rather than saved, is apparently objectionable to many in the media. Only 15% of recipients would “do the Prime Minister’s bidding” and spend their money on Christmas presents, the Telegraph gleefully reported. The basis for the report was perhaps the twee-est online survey ever, in which participants could select spending options like “something nice for yourself” or saving options like “for a rainy day” and timing options like “before Christmas — I can’t wait to get to the shops!”. Then again, being the Telegraph, we were probably lucky the survey wasn’t about rating n-de celebrities. The Age picked up on the theme of Kevin Rudd demanding people spend the money. “He’s wrong,” an 82-year-old pensioner was quoted as saying. “It’s not his money. It’s our money, and we should decide what to do with it.” Apparently there’s no pleasing whingeing pensioners even when you give them a huge handout. An academic from “Monash University’s Australian Centre for Retail Studies” was brought in to surprise with the observation that struggling pensioners will “spend money as they need to, despite what anyone tells them to do.” Well, not according to Tony Abbott, making a rare comment actually within his own portfolio, who predicted some of the money would be spent on “booze and gambling”, to the annoyance of pensioner groups. Malcolm Turnbull — he of the “no quibbling” endorsement of the package — is complaining that the stimulus will be temporary. Given the Government has repeatedly said since announcing the package that it is intended to be “timely, targeted and temporary”, Turnbull is probably on pretty safe ground with the “temporary” call. He wants tax cuts, although Wayne Swan demolished this idea yesterday in about 20 seconds at a press conference, pointing out tax cuts were spread thinly and wouldn’t go to pensioners. You can bet the Government will make sure pensioner groups don’t forget Turnbull’s tax cut suggestion. The Australian had also gotten into the moral panic game last week too with lurid stories of payments being “wasted” on alcohol and gambling and a Rudd-fuelled wave of drunken violence. But today it’s all about how it won’t be spent at all. Commentator Michael Stutchbury is actually urging people to save and pay off debt, in terms traditionally reserved for class warfare screeds from the Left. Likewise, the astonishingly unfunny Peter Ruehl at the back of the AFR declares that saving is the “no-brainer” option. There was more balance at the SMH, with Phil Coorey and Peter Hartcher reporting Treasury estimates about how much would be spent. Treasury estimates that on average about 70% of the total stimulus will be spent. And the Herald Sun actually used retail data to try to work out how much might be spent — although, really, in a choice between an online Tele poll and Treasury estimates or retail data, who could go past “Is Krystal Forscutt the most beautiful girl in Australia”? And then there’s Terry McCrann, who wrestles manfully with himself for an entire column in trying to overcome his sense that attempts to stimulate the economy are a good thing. McCrann worries that the package was introduced too soon (contra Peter Martin at The Age, who complains that the package has taken too long). “Is this the best way to spend the $9 billion?” McCrann demands, presumably rhetorically. “In terms of immediacy, yes. In terms of direction, arguably not. Much of it can just bleed overseas.” Hmmm. “Bleeding.” Can’t be good. Much of this commentary seems to be a reflection of resentment toward the Government — a resentment made sullen and cranky not merely by Kevin Rudd’s persistent high polling figures but by the Government’s failure to provide any basis for criticism. In its bank guarantee and early stimulus, the Government has stuck close to not merely the advice of the Reserve Bank and Treasury but most economic commentators. Quite what the Government was supposed to have done to ensure the entire stimulus would be spent isn’t really clear — perhaps just dispatched a small brown envelope filled with unmarked $100 bills to every retailer in the country, although then they probably would have saved it rather than spent it. And then there’s groups like ACOSS who object to the unemployed missing out, and the moral panic merchants who insist — as bourgeois hand-wringers have insisted for centuries — that the poor can’t be trusted with their own money. Even if it makes no difference whether $1000 is spent on grog or on something nice and middle-class like whitegoods. Accordingly, Kevin Rudd is not merely damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t, he’s damned no matter how he does it. Everyone is aware of the danger of talking ourselves into a recession. But we’re insisting on doing it anyway. There’s an economic stimulus package, massive interest rate cuts, more tax cuts next year and a fall in the Australian dollar to help exporters. The next seven months will see about the biggest jolt to the Australian economy ever delivered. Let’s try and keep a little optimism. |
|
|
17 Comments
Note that Keane doesn’t actually critique ACOSS’ position, merely mentions it and invites readers to draw their own conclusions. If you disapprove of ACOSS’ stance, Bernard, you should say so and explain your reasoning. Crikey at its best isn’t just a summary of the contents of the papers and of major interest groups; it’s a haphazard collection of argument, opinion, invective, analysis, etc.
Thanks Bernard, the media often play this game. I guess it’s their continual search for ‘drama’. Forget the facts, try and generate some conflict.
Here’s a link to the media release by Swan talking about how the package will be spent. I was wondering…
http://www.pm.gov.au/media/release/2008/media_release_0550.cfm
“the astonishingly unfunny Peter Ruehl …” - a bit like the astonishingly unfunny Bernard Keane??
Perhaps future Rudd government economic stimulus packages should be distributed in the form of Harvey Norman gift vouchers, so that recipients have to spend their money properly and patriotically, on items such as plasma screens.
I certainly hope that pensioner from the front page of the Tele awhile back, the one who could only afford a plain sausage sandwich and table salt for dinner, has bought herself some nice yuppie condiment, like organic relish, for her Christmas dinner.
I’ve never heard such sanctomonious rubbish coming from people’s mouths about this bonus.
Joe Hockey, Wendy McCarthy and Hugh Mackay were speaking in grim puritannical tones last night on ABC radio as though those receiving the money were children who needed to be hand-held whilst they paid their credit card bills.
Strangely silent are the small business lobbies as well. They take every opportunity to belt Rudd over the “work choices” that never was, yet when the PM injects a gigantic sum into the economy from which they will no doubt benefit, they hold their tongues.
As for Malcolm and the Coalition-a few months ago they were moaning about Labor “talking down” the economy ,now when something positive is done to boost the economy they have gone into meltdown. The desire to label the recipients as beer swilling, fag smoking polkie addits is tearing them apart as to do so means they risk the ire of all pensioners.
Not Hugh “I’ve just dressed up some common-sense statements of the bleeding obvious as some amazing tapping of the zeitgeist and they’ve been swallowed hook line and sinker by the media” McKay?
For shame.
Though not amongst the legendary 1 per cent who actually make or do things that make Australians better off (apart from saving and investing with little skill) I am a taxpayer rather than tax-eater and therefore ambivalent when I note how much the state gets from pokie addicts. On the whole I am for pensioners spending up on booze and, specially, cigarettes. But government could have done much better than that commendably morale boosting $10,4 billion giveaway promise of which I will get none, and my children will have to pay off eventually, if not next year, because it could have geared much of it to incentive devices for early spending which also includes private savings being spent and credit used. If you can’t think of a dozen ways, then you are not fit to be a Treaury official, or Opposition spokesperson, but then you are in good company, because few of them are either.
Rudd’s stimulus package is just part of the ongoing alienation of a nation launched by the last PM wwho left his Party in tatters and without a magnet. Hence the Howard-hugging media is dead in the water with a choice of doing an about face on fiscal analysis that makes them look a bunch of hypocrites or taking on Rudd and his monetary policies with pack mentality. Turnbull was supposed to be Phoenix rising to replace both Costello and the Member for Bennelong. That he isn’t sort of leaves the media without their idea of the thinking man’s MP. All a bit sad that our two-party system is so lopsided it took a media with it. Or is it the other way around?
Even though the Pensioners and carers got some money, some may abuse it on drink, or gambling, or they could the wise ones, use it to pay off debts, or buy a Christmas Present for a love one,. I think some times going through hard times where money is concerned can help you be careful in your planning and be happy with various, gifts you may have and put them in good use for yourself and friends,
OOOH!!!! I meant the debate over Rudd’s stimulus package…..
We Are The
Forgotten Australians
Victims Of sexual Abuse, Physical Abuse, Slavery, Neglect, Emotionial Abuse, Physical Abuse, Torture, Mental Abuse, All Forms of Abuse. Of Which We, Were Only Children When We Suffered These Abuses, From Those employees That The States Had, Had To Care For Us In Their State Run Institutions, Orphanages,Girls Homes, Boys Homes, State Ward Homes, Remand Centres, State Run Church Homes,From The 30’s To The Late 80’s And Still to This day.
Still To This Day The State Of New South Wales Australia Continues To Cover Up The Abuse That We Victims suffered In these Homes That Were Run By The State Of New South Wales And That Of Other States And Territories Of Australia We Are The Victims The Goverment Of Australia Have Been Covering Up From The Australian Public As To The Abuses We Had Suffered While Under State Care By State Aurthorities. The Goverment Was Responsable For Our Saftey And Welfare. This Did Not Happen In Many Cases Of Which Have Been Recorded In Senate Inquiries, And The Courts. Yet The State Of New South Wales Will Not Acknowledge Us Victims For The Abuse That We Victims Suffered They Say The Records Such As, Excursion Log Book Records, Missconduct Log Book Rcords, Medical Log Book Records, Educationial Log Book Records, Work Log Book Records,
They Say That These Records Were Either Lost, Missplaced, Or Either Destroyed. And This Was Stated In The Court Case By The State Crown Lawyers, Without The Victim Even Knowing Any Of This Information,
We Are Real Victims And We Will No Longer Be Forgotten HuffnPuff
So, Michael, let me get this straight - you’re saying there’s been abuse of some kind?
You’re not a former MP staffer are you Micheal?
I fail to see how buying Christmas presents is going to help the economy when the bulk of trashy presents, not to mention decorations, and those ghastly festoons of coloured lights-draped around peoples’ houses-are all made in China. HTF is this going to help? I’m sure a lot of people will put this money to good use. But it’s like going to what used to be the wonderful Melbourne show; who are the people with the dozens of show bags hanging off their pram handles? The people who can least afford it. These are the people getting the money. I’m going to say it again. How will buying cheap pressies, made in China, help the Oz economy?
the goverment bonus
helps only so much
and not all of us people out here will be wasting any of the money mr rudd just handed out im lucky to have $50.00.dollars left after i pay and catch up on bills , we struggle everyday , bills add up ,food is dear ,and xmass presents are not cheap, all this money has done for me is catch up on bills , nothing left for me to even going have a good time out and enjoy ones self . my faimly first ,then if their is anything left we will just be able to fill the car up with petrol thats if its cheap at the time ,
so to all out their who think that everyone is just going to piss the money up the wall or play the pokies or get their drugs , we they really dont care for their faimly or their self
and some will do the right thing as me yet others its their chocie what they do with it ,
as mr rudd said spend it , hell the prices are already going up 20 cents or more , the big super markets have seen this as a bonus for their companies ,
what i don’t understand is they say this will greate jobs , well hello where are the jobs , i don’t here or see all these big shopping centres putting anything back to us as its those companys who are benifiting are they not ,
they buy all their products at cost price from overseas and wack a hundred to 2 hundred percent on what they actually paid ,
a container full of goods from overseas worth say half million by the time its in the shops that container with the goods is worth 1 and a half million in the shops , see we the australian public are still the losers in every thing
really the goverment should of given the pensioners twice of what they gave ,
next year the goverment will have us all on the scrap heap anyway ,as they will , change all the centrelink payments, also proberly bring the stamp issue back that they had in the great depression so how will we survive
we suvive on very little and always have done If this money was not given to us people
Yes you are right Mr Keane - them and us. Them is about a quarter of all Australians who are pensioners, or who have kids and earn under $100k. That excludes most of us - all the people 45-65 who have no dependent kids, the unemployed, who probably need it more than most of those who will get it, and the 18+ years with no kids. This really is the most divisive thing Rudd and Swan could have dreamed up, and its value will be proven to be bu — er all at the end of the day.
All the journos you quote will be in the “we ain’t getting it” category - you Bernard are obviously getting it.
Venise makes the most incisive comment - the real winners will be the overseas manufacturers and the importers, and Oz will see very very little. You watch!
Graeme Lewis: Thank you for restoring some of my confidence. I thought I may have dropped the proverbial clanger. Cheers
V.
PS: What on earth is Michael Brown on about? Surely not relevant to Bernard’s article? The man doesn’t make any sense.
Cheers
V.