DoesTony Abbott deserve to be called 'embarrassing'

[donnashuggy]

Is he living up to your expectations?

http://www.skynews.com.au/topstories/article.aspx?id=944574&vId=

[*crikey*mate*]

Tahnk you Boris.

My copmments on that article are.

It is fine to go into debt, if you have the capacity to repay it.

What happens if before that debt is repaid that another disaster, natural or otherwise occurs? Do we borrow more money? How many future generations, and to what extent, can we burden with financial difficulties of today?

Doesn't there come a time when debt outweighs equity and we can no longer borrow or repay our existing debts?

If we had some money ion the bank (so to speak) kept aside for "in case of emergency", then we wouldn't have to go into debt in the first place.

If borrowing money is such a good thing, then why is the US in so much trouble?

Right now, we are borrowing money on an aging population. Something like 10,000 people a day either retire or leave the workforce, but we do not have the populaTIUON TO REPLACE THEM AS CONTRIBUTORS VIA TAX AND REVENUE. (oops sorry bout the caps) so to me at least, it kind of makes sense that we do what we can to minimize the debt we already have rather than borrowing more. Yes, I know that this means some seemingly harsh and tough desicioins, but I think we need to be thinking about more than how to get through this year.

ATM, we are in debt. What happens if we get abnother flood next month, and then a devestating fire the month after? Do we continue to borrow more to replace our lost infrastructure, simply because we didn't have the foresight to keep a bit of money in reserve?

[boris1gary]

Crikey,

Also while the ALP were in govt,

The economic and social benefits of rebuilding the flood damaged infrastructure are undeniable. So why does the government refuse to borrow or issue bonds to cover the cost? The $5.6 billion is very small compared to Australia’s Gross Domestic Product of over $1 trillion (0.5%) and a federal budget of around $350 billion (1.5%). The government could easily afford to borrow double that amount and use the additional funds to provide public housing and other assistance to flood victims.

The government argues that in times of boom we must have a surplus to use during recessions but, apart from the mining sector, there is no boom. The rest of the economy is recessed; people need more money in their pockets, not less. Working people are losing their homes, retailers and the tourist industry are screaming because people are not spending. They cannot. The short-term impact of the floods only compounds that situation. The mining and farming sectors have been hit hard and prices of produce continue to rise sky high.

The government is determined to return the budget to surplus by 2012-13, regardless of the detrimental impact on working people, small business and the economy.

[***super_nova***]

Bearing in mind that TA is the president of the G20 this is how the world reacted to his speech:

"The New York Times has extensive coverage of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, with a dedicated web page and many feature articles exploring the key themes and major players. None mentions Abbott — who, by virtue of the high regard for his predecessor, finds himself the accidental president of the G20 for 2014.

Le Télégramme, L'Humanité  and Le Parisien in France published stories from the WEF but completely ignored Abbott. L’Agence France-Presse filed multiple reports profiling the contributors, but excluding Abbott.

Le Figaro focussed on the speech by International Monetary Fund director Christine Lagarde who addressed constructively the new dangers – nouveaux risques – threatening global recovery. These are, she said, deflation in Europe, tapering of US monetary policy and distortions in global financial markets.

With an embarrassed cough, Le Figaro noted Abbott’s address as a footnote, quoting him as calling for more free trade, an idea that was a long way from the agenda – très loin de la thématique – of earlier gatherings.

Les Echos did mention the keynote speech, reporting that the thrust of Australia’s G20 presidency will be free trade. It noted it was odd Abbott didn’t mention the World Trade Organisation.

The Guardian in Britain headlined its piece “Does Tony Abbott always make the same speech?” and reported that it “struck a familiar tone and was criticised for being inappropriately partisan.”

Indeed, Abbott’s reputation as a buffoon appears to have preceded him to Davos.

[spotweldersfriend]

After hearing him prattle on for the last 4 years, the Guardian's comment "struck a familiar Tone" is pertinent.

[polksaladallie]

Can't wait until November in Brisbane, he will be worse on home turf.

[the_hawk*]

DoesTony Abbott deserve to be called 'embarrassing'

Yes

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@boris1gary wrote:

Crikey,

Also while the ALP were in govt,

The economic and social benefits of rebuilding the flood damaged infrastructure are undeniable. So why does the government refuse to borrow or issue bonds to cover the cost? The $5.6 billion is very small compared to Australia’s Gross Domestic Product of over $1 trillion (0.5%) and a federal budget of around $350 billion (1.5%). The government could easily afford to borrow double that amount and use the additional funds to provide public housing and other assistance to flood victims.

The government argues that in times of boom we must have a surplus to use during recessions but, apart from the mining sector, there is no boom. The rest of the economy is recessed; people need more money in their pockets, not less. Working people are losing their homes, retailers and the tourist industry are screaming because people are not spending. They cannot. The short-term impact of the floods only compounds that situation. The mining and farming sectors have been hit hard and prices of produce continue to rise sky high.

The government is determined to return the budget to surplus by 2012-13, regardless of the detrimental impact on working people, small business and the economy.

---

I've actually got a bit of a bee in my bonnet about the floods. (I'm from qld and was involved in helping with the cleanup at Ipswich and South Brisbane, but none of my property was affected by the floods)

Just after the floods, I tried to donate a double bed, 4 single ensembles - all good near new condition as they had come out of "spare/guest" bedrooms, and the charities wouldn't take them as they weren't queen sized.

I tried to donate 4 televisions, they were all working, but on top of three of them being too small (they were just the little ones you have in guests bedrooms) the 4th one was a big one though, but they were all rejected because they didn't have the points in them to connect x boxes etc (though we did have a SNES connected to the big TV at some stage)

Tried to donate 2 tables with 4 chairs each. Now fair enough, one was that timber veneer kind of thing that you buy from kmart when you fiorst move out of home, but the other was very good quality and both in excellent condition. Both rejected because they were too small.

We got sheets and blankets and towels etc donated from some hotels, so second hand, but in good condition, no holes etc... they weren't good enough because they weren't new.

they even rejected toilet paper rolls cos they were opened (ones left over from when guests leave the hotel, so partially used as housekeeping replaces them with new ones for each guest) so not used paper iykwim, just not new roles (staff buy these for $2 for a HUGE box)

that sort of really irked me a biut. thought even if they used them until they coiuld get stuff they wanted, it was better than nothing.

[***super_nova***]

and there is more:

"Riddled with indicators of ignorance, the speech confirmed Abbott knows little about contemporary economics.

He quoted, for example, statistical measures from China:

“China’s growth is moderating, but likely to remain over seven per cent.”

He seems quite unaware that economists no longer trust statistics from China.

All economies today use strategic borrowings, at different levels, from different sources and for different purposes. Managing borrowings is a major challenge. Abbott’s glib admonition “You don’t address debt and deficit with yet more debt and deficit” displayed a dismissive attitude to this complex reality.

There was no sense of understanding the challenges the WEF faces in 2014, let alone having insights into ways forward.

What little strategy Abbott advocated seemed contradictory. He asserted that the global financial crisis (GFC) “was not a crisis of markets but one of governance.”

And then boasted of Australia,

“To boost private sector growth and employment, the new government is cutting red tape ...”

Okay. That makes sense.

The prize blunders arrived, however, when Abbott directly attacked the stimulus packages of the Rudd/Gillard administrations:

“In the decade prior to the Crisis, consistent surpluses and a preference for business helped my country, Australia, to become one of the world’s best-performing economies.”

Partly correct.

In 1996, Australia was the 6th-ranked economy in the world. But by 2007, after 11 years of a Coalition government, it had slipped back to 10th place. Still, that is one of the best.

Abbott continued:

                      "subsequent government decided that the Crisis had changed the rules and that we should spend our way to prosperity.                        The reason for spending soon passed but the spending didn’t stop because, when it comes to spending, governments can                      be like addicts in search of a fix. But after the recent election, Australia is under new management and open for business.”

Two stupidities.

First, it was precisely that extensive rapid spending through the GFC which saw Australia rise from 10th-ranked economy in 2007 to the world's top ranking by 2012, a reality all those present with an awareness of the G20 economies would have known.

Secondly, attacks on domestic opponents are never acceptable abroad.

In New York last October, Abbott was roundly condemned for a political attack on Kevin Rudd.

American Academic Clinton Fernandes said he created an image of

“... coarseness, amateurishness and viciousness."

http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/abbotts-davos-disaster,6098

[poddster]

---

@**meep** wrote:

"TA embarrasses every person he tries to talk to; there are so many pics of people pulling away from him in horror. "

---

I have a feeling that Shortie and Swannie were embarrassed by the truth put out there by Tony, so much so that they jumped to the defence of Labor and themselves.

Well done Tony, keep telling it as it is instead of being a sycaphant 🙂

[i-need-a-martini]

Telling what as it is?