Diary of our stinking Govt.

As it's more than 100 days now, it has been suggested that a new thread was needed.  The current govt has been breaking promises and telling lies at a rate so fast it's hard to keep up.Woman Happy

 

This below is worrying, "independent" pffft, as if your own doctor is somehow what? biased, it's ridiculous. So far there is talk of only including people under a certain age 30-35, for now. Remember that if your injured in a car, injured at work or get ill, you too might need to go on the DSP. They have done a similar think in the UK with devastating consequences.

 

and this is the 2nd time recently where the Govt has referred to work as welfare???? So when you go to work tomorrow (or tuesday), just remember that's welfare.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-20/disability-pensioners-may-be-reassessed-kevin-andrews/5400598

 

Independent doctors could be called in to reassess disability pensioners, Federal Government says

 

The Federal Government is considering using independent doctors to examine disability pensioners and assess whether they should continue to receive payments.

 

Currently family doctors provide reports supporting claims for the Disability Support Pension (DSP).

But Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews is considering a measure that would see independent doctors reassess eligibility.

 

"We are concerned that where people can work, the best form of welfare is work," Mr Andrews said at a press conference.

 

Message 1 of 17,615
Latest reply
17,614 REPLIES 17,614

Diary of our stinking Govt.

I agree Am... these elderly people have paid taxes all their lives and supported our country/economy ... fought in wars for us etc ( MIL is on a war widows pension) and imo they deserve a bit of help when they need it

Message 12921 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

Yes. The criteria ( mental and/or physical abilities) to get a place in a retirement home is strict ( as it should be) As alexanderb said there isn't the extra beds spare now for people who are assessed as being in need of care. 

 

Sometimes the elderly just need a caregiver, housecleaner, grocery shopper for a few hours a week. Meals on wheels covers their main meal.

Message 12922 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

image.jpg

 

Message 12923 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

Federal budget 2015: Small measures and a media circus

 

As an exercise in media manipulation, this week's budget scores top marks. The government's spin doctors managed to convince the media it was a "stimulatory budget" when it was actually mildly contractionary.

 

With financial markets trading virtually continuously, the old need to lock the media up on budget day until the markets had closed disappeared decades ago. The only reason for continuing the practice is to maximise the government's ability to influence the media's initial reaction to its budget.

 

.....Don't be misled. The 1.5 percentage-point cut in the company tax rate for small businesses is itself small. The equivalent cut for unincorporated businesses will yield a maximum saving of less than $20 a week.

 

And the two-year offer of an immediate 100 per cent write-off for newly purchased business assets costing less than $20,000 each is nothing like the rort-inducing "bonanza" imagined by innumerate journos and economists who don't know as much accounting as they should.

 

You don't get up to $20,000 a pop taken off your tax bill - making the asset essentially free - you get it taken off your taxable income, meaning the taxman picks up 30 or 40 per cent of the cost, leaving you to pay the rest.

 

In any case, the cost of assets purchased for business purposes has always been 100 per cent deductible. The difference is that usually this "depreciation allowance" is spread over five years or so, whereas this special deal accelerates the full deduction to the end of the first year.

 

So it will probably induce a noticeable increase in small business investment spending, but that's unlikely to be big enough to make much difference to the economy's rate of growth.

 

It's a classic example of the things governments do when they're trying to apply fiscal stimulus, being similar to a measure in Kevin Rudd's stimulus package of 2009 after the global financial crisis.

 

But note the measure's downside: because it's temporary, its main effect will be to draw forward into the next two financial years spending that would otherwise have occurred in subsequent years, leaving a vacuum in those years. And because most motor vehicles and business equipment are imported, much of the increased investment spending will "leak" into imports.

 

Another part of the hype is the government's claim that small businesses are "the engine room of the economy". Nonsense. Big business is. As the budget's fine print admits, small business accounts for only about 38 per cent of the workforce and about a third of production.

 

The most important point, however, is that just because a budget contains a few small but sexy measures doesn't make it a "stimulatory budget" to anyone but a journo after a good headline.

 

To an economist, you have to put the few stimulatory measures into the context of the net effect of all the new measures taken in the budget.

 

When you do that you find they are expected to add $2.2 billion (or 0.13 per cent of gross domestic product) to the budget deficit in the coming financial year, but subtract $1.6 billion from the deficit over the five years to 2018-19.

 

Either way, the expected net effect of the budget's measures is too tiny to matter. That's the old, strict Keynesian way to determine the "stance" of fiscal policy adopted in the budget.

 

The Reserve Bank's way of determining the budget's overall effect on the economy (which adds to the above change in the discretionary or "structural" component of the deficit the expected change in the "cyclical" component caused by the operation of the budget's "automatic stabilisers") shows that, measured as a proportion of GPD, the coming year's deficit is expected to be 0.5 percentage points lower than for the financial year just ending, with expected falls of 0.6 points, 0.7 points and 0.4 points in the following years.

 

In my book, a change of 0.5 percentage points is right on the border between insignificant and significant. That makes the budget only mildly contractionary.

 

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/the-economy/federal-budget-2015-small-measures-and-a-media-...

 

Message 12924 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

What else but Gittens and his slightly rosy pink outook   I will check again to see if the post is other than yet another C&P with  no additional meaninful (interesting) comment.

 

Lets see,   Gittens attempts to "discount "  small businesses  (WHY?) with this:

 

Another part of the hype is the government's claim that small businesses are "the engine room of the economy". Nonsense. Big business is. As the budget's fine print admits, small business accounts for only about 38 per cent of the workforce and about a third of production.

 

It would appear that Gittens does not know that a  "big business is one with 200+ employees,  or has overlooked that fact !

 

How important is small business to Australia? (Conversation Feb 2013, sorry)

It is probably worth reminding ourselves just how important small business is to Australia’s economy. Small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs) – which are those employing fewer than 200 people – comprise around 99% of all businesses in Australia. They also employ around 65% of the workforce or about 2.8 million people.

 

However a check of a treasury paper using ABS figures shows this: ( I would have used a graph but they are diffucult for some to understand)

 

Small businesses.JPG

 

Assuming that one appreciates the attempt to invigorate the economy  (remember the Circus, but forget Poor Me's  'cash for clunkers')  I would assert that allowing some 2,000,000  NOT LARGE businesses  (within the turnover criteria) to offset annually $20,000 for business purchases would have a far greater economic effect than doing the same for  4000 Large businesses.

Do the maths!

 

Gitten writes:  "....... anyone but a journo after a good headline."

 

Really.?  Not  an economist pushing his barrow?

 

johnsig2.jpg 

 

 

 

 

Message 12925 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

yeah the  budget was fantastic for LNP limpets

 

 

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/paid-parental-leave-could-the-coalition-have-been-any-dumber-201505...

 

Paid parental leave. Could the Coalition have been any dumber

 

What kind of idiot labels mothers "rorters"?

 

It's the same kind of idiot who thinks it's a good idea to draw a line in the sand between the Coalition and Labor over super. Tony Abbott told Parliament last week there would be "no changes to super, no adverse changes to super in this term of Parliament, and we have no plans to make adverse changes to super in the future".

 

It was remarkable coming from a government whose Treasurer only six weeks ago reached out to Labor for a "bipartisan" approach on super, saying he had measures "under very active consideration".

 

Labor took him at his word, announced its own very mild position, and had the door slammed in its face.

 

Message 12926 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

 

Paid parental leave. Could the Coalition have been any dumber

 

dumb and dumber

 

 

I still can't see what's to get excited about the small business depn write off... limited period 2 years.

 

Quote  from Gittin's article.

But note the measure's downside: because it's temporary, its main effect will be to draw forward into the next two financial years spending that would otherwise have occurred in subsequent years, leaving a vacuum in those years.

 

 

1.5% tax cut. For unincorporated max $20 approx a week. WOW a whole extra $1000 p.a. (maximum) to invest in their business or to spend.

 

 

 

 

Message 12927 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

a few economists are saying they expect that money to go overseas anyway ( imports)

 

the $20,000

Message 12928 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

Yes, vehicles will probably make up the majority of the purchases.

Message 12929 of 17,615
Latest reply

Diary of our stinking Govt.

it's so easy to see abbotts game plan regarding the Labor govt in Vic

 

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-16/victoria-must-build-nationally-significant-road-projects/64748...

 

http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/may/16/tony-abbott-marginal-seat-tour-is-about-the-bu...

 

he wants the funding back so he can can say 'your project doesn't stack up - we'll only go with the original east/west link

 

it's all about discrediting  the Labor Premier

 

 the alternative is

 

 

Matthew Guy LNP

 

eeww!!

Message 12930 of 17,615
Latest reply