Fact check: Does the federal budget cut $80 billion from hospitals and schools? NO

[nero_bolt]

NOPE they dont, its just as usual all Labor/Greens/left hot air and scare tactic

From the ABC FACT CHECK

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-03/does-the-federal-budget-cut-80-billion-from-schools-hospitals/...

• The claim: The budget papers say the Government will achieve $80 billion in savings from hospitals and schools. Bill Shorten says this is a cut. Tony Abbott says it isn't.
•  
• The verdict: The debate over the $80 billion - claimed by the Government as savings and by the Opposition as cuts - is hot air.  (But then what else can you expect from Shorten and Labor... Just more HOT AIR)

The verdict 

The Abbott Government claimed in the budget it would achieve $80 billion in "savings" over 10 years by changing funding for schools and hospitals. That figure assumes the Coalition will spend less than Labor's policies would have cost.

Labor never produced a 10-year plan for hospitals, although there were some long term funding projections for schools. As Mr Abbott said, "there was no $80 billion in any Labor budget to be cut". This contradicts the claim in his budget papers of $80 billion in savings.

The Government did not cut $80 billion from schools and hospitals in this four-year budget period. By trumpeting long term savings, it has left itself open to accusations of funding cuts from Labor.

Neither the Abbott Government nor the Labor Opposition can accurately predict the costs of hospital or school funding 10 years out.

There is too much uncertainty for this long-term estimate to be used as a reliable measure for cuts or savings.

The debate over the $80 billion figure - whether a cut or a saving - is hot air. 

[lightningdance · Accepted solution]

lol. Never let the facts get in the way of a good puffed up rant from the Greens and Labor.

Every day we see Milne and her munchkins  cry a river over all their blackmailed policies they forced Labor to implement,  going down the gurgler.

Fact Check: This government was not elected in a landslide to keep the failed policies of the labor/green marriage: and that's a fact.

[durruticolumna]

The fact check most important to Australians at the moment is Labor 53.1% LNP 46.9%.The ratio is even higher for Labor in Victoria and Qld. Fact:The libs are on the nose.

[lightningdance]

Looks like facts do get in the way of some on here, so few responses says it all. 

[fourandsixpants]

Support for the coalition continues to drop, with the latest poll putting the Abbott government is now 10 points below its election-winning vote.
The Newspoll, published in The Australian on Tuesday, puts Labor ahead of the coalition 55-45 per cent in the two-party preferred vote, a drop of two points for the coalition since the previous poll two weeks ago.

Voter dissatisfaction with Tony Abbott has reached the highest level since he  became prime minister, 62 per cent.

[lightningdance]

Is this thread about Polls? Is this topic about Polls? I must have read it wrong and it's now about Polls! silly me.

[lightningdance]

lolly legs leghorn still blowing the vuv vu zela  at dawn lol

[cherry*135]

Re: Fact check: Does the federal budget cut $80 billion from hospitals and schools? YES

"2018 is the first year when the expiry of various agreements allows the feds to really start screwing the states on grants for public schools and public hospitals. From then on, grants will be adjusted only in line with inflation and population growth.

This means almost all of Hockey's cumulative savings of more than $80 billion on payments to the states for schools and hospitals over the decade to 2024-25 occur beyond the forward estimates.

In the case of payments to the states for schools and hospitals - whose main cost is wages - it leaves an ever-widening gap the states wouldn't have a hope of covering by increased efficiency, only from other revenue sources. (The cost of medical supplies grows much faster than the CPI.)

The budget was a giant attempt to get back to surplus solely by cutting spending and not increasing taxes. It failed. Not so much because of the temporary deficit levy or the resumption of indexing the fuel excise, but because the cumulative $80 billion saving from short-changing the states on schools and hospitals - almost a quarter of the total saving - will have to be covered by increased state taxation.

A tax increase flick-passed to the states is a tax increase avoided? Any serious increase in state tax revenue would have to be made possible by the feds, in any event."

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/less-to-budget-than-meets-the-eye-20140518-38hut.html#ixzz36SdW8XR5

[durruticolumna]

Giving the states cause to consider a rise in the GST,the raising of state taxes or the selling off of public assets (if there are any left to sell)