Comments on: A promise worth breaking: the surplus is slipping away

By: Anna Kae

Anna Kae — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:49:55 +0000

Absolutely amazed that an article on the surplus did not mention the AAA rating once… really?
There will will nothing leather or latex about the S&P stripping away the AAA rating when the surplus is not achieved.

By: Apollo

Apollo — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 09:16:18 +0000

Don’t you worry iggy648.

I get paid by the People’s Republic of China to post on Crikey.

Soon enough, our internet brigade will turn Australia and the USA into socialist countries, our nations shall form a New Socialist Federation.

A new world order is coming, so if the conservatives don’t want to spend time at our lovely re-education holiday resort in Nanking, they better have their boats ready.

By: Wallace Scott

Wallace Scott — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 06:33:23 +0000

political suicide

By: Wallace Scott

Wallace Scott — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 06:21:22 +0000

I just don’t get why you have to moderate my comment…………….

By: Wallace Scott

Wallace Scott — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 06:19:48 +0000

Today, Michael Pascoe has a good article which analyses the recent set of weak data which indicates a high chance of a rate cut tomorrow, and the government’s determination to cut back spending will push the RBA to act to stimulate the economy.

Inflation has been trending downwards in the last 3 months despite the carbon tax. Last month’s number is -0.1%, but the year on year number ticked up from 2.4 to 2.5, this is because the -0.1% from Dec last year dropped out of the series and we begin with the number released in Jan which was 0.5%.

The rate cut will unlikely be pushing inflation up any time soon because in this difficult environment where consumer behaviour has change to saving, the rate cut will allow many businesses to save money on interest repayments so they don’t have to raise price and hit the customers.

But after that the government will have to work on micro-economic reform and get the unions and businesses together. It will be political suicidal for them if the RBA has to cut rate lower than GFC level and the borrowers and savers’ rates drop to the same as the GFC level, they will open themselves up for massive attacks from the Oppositions.

By: zut alors

zut alors — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 05:09:00 +0000

Gillard should have learned the lesson about the repercussions of speaking in absolutes when the ‘no carbon tax’ promise came back to bite.

Why Swan doesn’t back off from his rash vow remains a mystery, it was a dangerous boast to claim he’d put the budget into surplus. Swan should adopt that wise old saying ie: ‘better to under-promise and then over-deliver’.

By: Hamis Hill

Hamis Hill — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 04:40:40 +0000

And achieving a surplus has effectively been sabotaged
by Campbell, O’Farrel and Bailieu’s “East Coast Recession” that they just had to have, conveniently shrinking federal tax receipts and loading up the demands on federally funded “safety nets”.
Not co-ordinated with state Liberals by the lying, Federal Liberal Abbott at all?
And with the annual national mortgage interest bill at $60 BILLION/ANNUM.
How many Gonskis and NDIS would this “Tax for the Idle Rich” cover?
Tax- BAD, Mortgage Debt INTEREST-GOOD, it would seem.

By: IC-1101

IC-1101 — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 00:21:04 +0000

“A man with a surplus controls circumstances, a man without a surplus is controlled by circumstances.”

I find it funny that, when the PM and Swan make a promise, they’re only doing it to appease the media, or to shut the Coalition up. There is no accountability for their actions or what they promise.

The reality is that they made this promise because they acknowledge the importance of a surplus. They will be unable to achieve a surplus because left-wing policy is not accessible to policy: you can’t spend big, enhance benefits, open the gates and increase government reliance and tax and still expect a surplus.

The PM wants a surplus to play it safe. It was her conservative side coming through.

Positive politics is NOT a good thing. You need scrutiny, and you need surplus.

“A young conservative doesn’t have a heart, an old progressive doesn’t have a brain.”

By: iggy648

iggy648 — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 00:08:42 +0000

I agree with Apollo. As miners cut back their investment in expansion, their profit margins should improve, and they would therefore pay more tax. For example, Herb Elliott has said he expects Fortescue to pay $1B in taxes and royalties this year, and $2B next year. Up from $0B previously. (Every little bit helps!) Should be the same for all the others who have slowed their expansion rates, shouldn’t it?

By: Apollo

Apollo — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 23:43:59 +0000

hear, too

yike, senility is not a good thing

By: Apollo

Apollo — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 23:39:39 +0000

I’m a bit confused. I often here business or the right-wing at least complaining about the government spending to much and should cut back, and now they are worried that the government is cutting spending?

The third quarter is always quiet for China so it’s not surprising that commodity price was low. The price is picking up and the miners are reigning in cost so there might be good profit to provide tax revenue, however I am concerned whether the MRRT would raise any revenue at all.

If the RBA gives one more cut this week, there will be more spending stimulus and construction activity so the budget bottom line might not be that bad.

By: tqft

tqft — Sun, 02 Dec 2012 23:33:25 +0000

”: is the fanatical surplus promise one that should be broken?”
There is a way to run even if a number of things are already set in stone - but we won’t know the actual outcome until September, even if the budget (May 2013) number is close to actual.
The government by now has little ability to impact the outcome other than trimmings.
Not a surplus or all debt is bad fetishist at all, but in a world where things could get very ugly very quickly, perhaps the government is being prudent in preserving fiscal options.