Abbott/Liberal Govt Watch

[stan]

Who gives a shit anyway. Click bait article.

Well that applies to about 90% of online articles.

[Q.]

am sure if julia was still PM or billy boy was PM then there would be an outrage....

[Bully]

could not have put it better myself ^

[stan]

Feds cutting foreign aid by 4 billion to try and get the budget but under control.

It does make sense, if we cant afford to sort out our own issues then unfortunately we cant keep sending out money.

Although Australia is in a better place than some countries we need to get our shit together otherwise we'll be no help to anyone.

[bennymacca]

The thing I don't like about cutting the aid budget is the implication that all of our problems are more important than the rest of the worlds. I would rather see us keep a little more debt if it means we can do our part as a global citizen and help some other people out that need that money far more than we do

[mighty_tiger_79]

I agree we need to get our money in order first. Then we will be in a better place to help others.

[stan]

The thing I don't like about cutting the aid budget is the implication that all of our problems are more important than the rest of the worlds. I would rather see us keep a little more debt if it means we can do our part as a global citizen and help some other people out that need that money far more than we do

I see where your coming from but I would say we need to pull back a bit, regroup and then go again once we are im a better place.

[Q.]

We're in a better place than most countries. Cutting aid by this much is embarrassing on the world stage.

[Psyber]

We're in a better place than most countries. Cutting aid by this much is embarrassing on the world stage.

Share the wealth and in the end all be equally poor in an overpopulated world gradually exhausting its resources, particularly water and food, as we can already see happening.

A nice ideal, but in the end self-preservation has a place if all can't be saved - and I think we passed the point where all could be saved decades ago. Once we have done what is needed to dig ourselves out of the present debt prison, we can look again at what we can do to help mitigate the suffering elsewhere, but it is limited, a mitigation not a cure. Anybody who has ever watched a bacterial colony grow expand and collapse, as the resources in the Petri dish run out, knows how a closed environment works.

[Q.]

Then you would have to be against exploiting these countries for resources and labour if you wish to be self sufficient.

We aren't bacteria colony.

[bennymacca]

We're in a better place than most countries. Cutting aid by this much is embarrassing on the world stage.

Share the wealth and in the end all be equally poor in an overpopulated world gradually exhausting its resources, particularly water and food, as we can already see happening.

A nice ideal, but in the end self-preservation has a place if all can't be saved - and I think we passed the point where all could be saved decades ago. Once we have done what is needed to dig ourselves out of the present debt prison, we can look again at what we can do to help mitigate the suffering elsewhere, but it is limited, a mitigation not a cure. Anybody who has ever watched a bacterial colony grow expand and collapse, as the resources in the Petri dish run out, knows how a closed environment works.

what do you think the utility of $4B is in south sudan compared to australia?

[Psyber]

Then you would have to be against exploiting these countries for resources and labour if you wish to be self sufficient.
We aren't bacteria colony.

1. Against "exploiting" yes, but I support helping them develop their resources and technology through shared enterprise.

2. The principles of crowding and resource depletion work much the same in all species. Bacteria are simply a basic example not complicated by consciousness and acts of violence. In more advanced species with consciousness the increased crowding leads to increased violence - most of those studies have been done with rats, which as a species seems to behave much like humans, but which tolerate crowding somewhat better than we do.

(That's why I also oppose "high density living" being touted by developers and their politician mates.)

[stan]

We're in a better place than most countries. Cutting aid by this much is embarrassing on the world stage.

Ok fair enough I see the point your making but if we end up like Greece, then who can we help?

[mighty_tiger_79]

I believe if we can get our act together financially, who knows, in the future we may be able to offer more in the way of foreign aid than we would if we kept going at our current rates

[Q.]

Then you would have to be against exploiting these countries for resources and labour if you wish to be self sufficient.
We aren't bacteria colony.

1. Against "exploiting" yes, but I support helping them develop their resources and technology through shared enterprise.

2. The principles of crowding and resource depletion work much the same in all species. Bacteria are simply a basic example not complicated by consciousness and acts of violence. In more advanced species with consciousness the increased crowding leads to increased violence - most of those studies have been done with rats, which as a species seems to behave much like humans, but which tolerate crowding somewhat better than we do.

(That's why I also oppose "high density living" being touted by developers and their politician mates.)

We're capable of innovation and adaptation unlike bacteria. We also have a conscience.

[bennymacca]

I believe if we can get our act together financially, who knows, in the future we may be able to offer more in the way of foreign aid than we would if we kept going at our current rates

And when are we "rich enough"?

We are currently 14th in GDP per capita 19th overall (both in PPP terms)

We have 11% net government debt as a percentage of GDP, compared with 82% in the UK and 87% in the US and 35% in Canada (as examples)

We are second in the world in human development index, which measures standard of living, behind Norway.

We have a 6.5% unemployment rate which is also one of the best in the world, and comparable with those countries mentioned above.

So I say again, how exactly are we doing so badly that we now can't afford to give 0.3% of our GDP to help out other countries?

[Psyber]

Then you would have to be against exploiting these countries for resources and labour if you wish to be self sufficient.
We aren't bacteria colony.

1. Against "exploiting" yes, but I support helping them develop their resources and technology through shared enterprise.

2. The principles of crowding and resource depletion work much the same in all species. Bacteria are simply a basic example not complicated by consciousness and acts of violence. In more advanced species with consciousness the increased crowding leads to increased violence - most of those studies have been done with rats, which as a species seems to behave much like humans, but which tolerate crowding somewhat better than we do.

(That's why I also oppose "high density living" being touted by developers and their politician mates.)

We're capable of innovation and adaptation unlike bacteria. We also have a conscience.

Rats are very capable of innovation and adaptation, possibly more so than us in pure survival terms.
How they compare with us in the conscience department is up in the air because we don't really know what degree of self-awareness they have.
Some humans, like those who run up these debts we can't pay without going on borrowing , to buy power from gullible voters, obviously either lack awareness or lack conscience...

[Psyber]

I believe if we can get our act together financially, who knows, in the future we may be able to offer more in the way of foreign aid than we would if we kept going at our current rates

And when are we "rich enough"?
We are currently 14th in GDP per capita 19th overall (both in PPP terms)
We have 11% net government debt as a percentage of GDP, compared with 82% in the UK and 87% in the US and 35% in Canada (as examples)
We are second in the world in human development index, which measures standard of living, behind Norway.
We have a 6.5% unemployment rate which is also one of the best in the world, and comparable with those countries mentioned above.
So I say again, how exactly are we doing so badly that we now can't afford to give 0.3% of our GDP to help out other countries?

It is not just total government debt relative to current government income that matters, but whether that income will be sustained or whether it will decline and the percentage of debt thus rise and be compounded by further borrowings to pay the interest. That has already happened to some extent.

It becomes a problem if you've done it all before and are running out of saleable assets to bridge the gap too.

[dedja]

I hate to be the Grinch but that's just not correct. Governments operate very differently from businesses or you and me. They have this 'special' ability to raise funds via bonds, which is essentially and effectively unlimited. Together with a very strong and regulated financial system (i.e. the Reserve Bank) Australia doesn't really have much to worry about.

Yes it's true that there needs to be the income, but generally that's not a problem and again because of Australia's strong financial and regulatory environment, it's sort of a licence to print money.

So really any discussion about debt is a political or religious one if you like ... the Tories (yes, that the Liberals) are fiscal ultra-right wing conservatives, whilst the left (you guessed it, Labor) are much more liberal when it comes to spending money.

What does this all mean?

Psyber, get your hand off it ... the debt fear mongering that is!

That is all!

[bennymacca]

We're capable of innovation and adaptation unlike bacteria. We also have a conscience.

nah, i think we are more like bacteria