Andrew Bolt brings our attention to yet another incredible waste of taxpayer money – this time by foreign affairs minister Julie Bishop:
Not long ago, The Marcus Review provided a list of 18 key Labor spending decisions which largely contributed to our $400 billion loan.
Today, Nick Cater provides an all-too-typical footnote to No. 6 on the list – the $20b ‘Education Revolution’ ($16.2 billion of which was committed to ‘Building the Education Revolution’). Read it and weep:
If you want simple, no-nonsense budget analysis that can’t be found anywhere else, then read on.
All figures have been sourced from the official 2016-17 budget papers and are presented so that you can form your own opinion.
For some fun at home, try to guess which spending item scored the biggest percentage increase. I promise you’ll be unpleasantly surprised.
Now that it’s budget time, it is important to properly understand how our federal finances became so shambolic.
Those who have followed The Marcus Review from its humble beginnings (thank you all) will be familiar with this material – which is well worth re-reading might I add. For those who haven’t yet read it: grab a coffee, sit down and see the scandalous waste for yourself.
If you’re one of the 50% of people in our society who is a net tax payer, then never forget this: it’s your money that they’re spending and they don’t spend it anywhere near well enough that you should be donating extra (may you rest in peace Kerry).
Increasing the tax on super contributions is yet another ill-conceived ‘budget fix’ idea which attempts to tax our way to prosperity.
The whole point of super is to decrease people’s reliance on aged welfare (which currently amounts to $60.7 billion of spending annually – or 1 in every 7 dollars spent by the federal government). The more super is taxed, the greater the disincentive to save and the more people will rely on welfare in their retirement (shocking stuff, I know). Given that our population is ageing and that around 80% of retirees receive a full or part pension, discouraging even more people from funding their own retirement is something we can ill afford. However, this is precisely what is going to happen, regardless of whether Turnbull or Shorten wins at the upcoming election.
What I agree is that for Australia to have a bright future, then we’ve got to go for growth. And the way you go for growth is you spend money on skills and training and higher education. You make sure that you have a system where the infrastructure is being built and it’s working…
It appears that Malcolm Turnbull and South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill ideologically have a lot more in common than most would think… and every bit as much in common as some would.
South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill, who proposed the income tax sharing idea, said Australia had a revenue problem that would not be fixed by one change.
“We don’t raise enough taxation as a nation to meet the imperatives that we have,” he said.
And here is Turnbull:
It’s an absolute pleasure to have the current political conversation flatulating around the edges of the government’s revenue sources – and the get-rich-quick schemes that could be used to extract more money out of us. Meanwhile, $40 billion annual deficits are still being cranked out (see also above graph) and our $400 billion debt will be added to for years to come.
Malcolm Turnbull’s justification for replacing Tony Abbott was that he could provide better economic leadership. Six months on, how much longer should we have to wait for the evidence?
Federal Labor appears to think that the government is spending too much money by putting $6 million into developing a smartphone/tablet language app for children.
Given that Labor annihilated well over $400 billion of our money on ill-conceived junk, its comments here are about as useful as a convicted paedophile giving child healthcare tips.