Liberal or Labor? (1 Viewer)

[absorber]

You would have been in primary school for the majority of their tenure.

Fine. Allow me to concede that point, purely because you're lucky I'm four years younger than you.

You haven't rebutted my argument over Keating's good economic policies versus Howard's bad ones. It contradicts your earlier thesis, basically that:
'Labor gets into power, takes the credit for being good economic managers and spends Australia into the ground

Liberal gets into power and spends a decade being brutally frugal and fixing it back into surplus

rinse and repeat'
Brutally frugal. Howard. REALLY.

 

[absorber]

You would have been in primary school for the majority of their tenure.



I guess that depends on your perspective on tax, in that case. Generally Liberals and those of the libertarian persuasion regard income tax as theft, and generally a disincentive to hard work. I don't draw a direct causative link between economic growth and tax cuts, but if you can afford to give people back the money they've earned without impacting the economy, you should, and Howard/Costello did.

The debate continues. We could only afford those tax cuts because of the mining boom. They placed us in worse position in 08 with the downturn in activity than we otherwise would have had.

 

[Rothbard]

Howard increased tax rates to pay for middle class welfare

You idiot

 

[Kwayera]

Fine. Allow me to concede that point, purely because you're lucky I'm four years younger than you.

You haven't rebutted my argument over Keating's good economic policies versus Howard's bad ones. It contradicts your earlier thesis, basically that:
'Labor gets into power, takes the credit for being good economic managers and spends Australia into the ground

Liberal gets into power and spends a decade being brutally frugal and fixing it back into surplus

rinse and repeat'
Brutally frugal. Howard. REALLY.

because I cbf, really

 

[Rothbard]

The debate continues. We could only afford those tax cuts because of the mining boom. They placed us in worse position in 08 with the downturn in activity than we otherwise would have had.

Um... what? Absolutely not. Tax cuts increase economic activity.

 

[absorber]

Laziness oughtn't be an excuse for refusing to find a comeback in an argument

 

[absorber]

Um... what? Absolutely not. Tax cuts increase economic activity.

This is heavily debatable. I'm not going to go into details, but this isn't a fact. Of course, depends what tax rates you refer to.

 

[Kwayera]

Laziness oughtn't be an excuse for refusing to find a comeback in an argument

Because it's 5:30 on a Sunday afternoon, my wisdom teeth sockets hurt, I'm hungry and I really don't have the energy for an Internet Debate.

 

[runoutofsleep]

dw kwayera i've got this

liberals = good economy
labor = bad economy

 

[Lolsmith]

Laziness oughtn't be an excuse for refusing to find a comeback in an argument

Kwayera has no obligation to debate things with you when you don't even realise that tax cuts generate economic activity.

 

[absorber]

Kwayera has no obligation to debate things with you when you don't even realise that tax cuts generate economic activity.

For a second, let me back down on what I just said. Say they do generate economic activity.

This doesn't necessarily make us better off.

 

[Kwayera]

For a second, let me back down on what I just said. Say they do generate economic activity.

This doesn't necessarily make us better off.

People get to take home more of what they earn, and the economy thrives.

Exactly how doesn't this make us better off?

 

[Lolsmith]

becuz then howard wins and i dont like he

 

[absorber]

Money doesn't equate to happiness, first of all.

Secondly, I said it was debatable. Sure, we get more money, we might be better off.

BUT. We're just as worse off monetarily for that. The government's tax receipts don't proportionately increase (that is, to offset the loss of tax receipts due to the cuts) (the increase in economic activity, if it occurs, is not going to be this high) and so there is less money for public funding of things like roads, hospitals, education, etc, etc. And here is where you'll almost surely disagree with me; that you believe privatisation of everything is good, and that we should be able to control where our money goes, and not the government.

 

[Graney]

I was pretty sold on Abbott, but the 'tough on asylum seeker business is incredibly fucked up, I can't get behind that.

 

[scuba_steve2121]

Money doesn't equate to happiness, first of all.

Secondly, I said it was debatable. Sure, we get more money, we might be better off.

BUT. We're just as worse off monetarily for that. The government's tax receipts don't proportionately increase (that is, to offset the loss of tax receipts due to the cuts) (the increase in economic activity, if it occurs, is not going to be this high) and so there is less money for public funding of things like roads, hospitals, education, etc, etc. And here is where you'll almost surely disagree with me; that you believe privatisation of everything is good, and that we should be able to control where our money goes, and not the government.

well yea because what makes government better at spending then an individual

the government spends on what they perceive we want or just what they want regardless of what we say, sounds pretty inefficient to me

look at socialism and there is your answer

 

[Lentern]

well yea because what makes government better at spending then an individual

the government spends on what they perceive we want or just what they want regardless of what we say, sounds pretty inefficient to me

look at socialism and there is your answer

So you think academics etc are less capable of taking the broader view into account than car mechanics and forklift operators?

 

[scuba_steve2121]

So you think academics etc are less capable of taking the broader view into account than car mechanics and forklift operators?

oh yea because the minister for education or the treasurer is going to know exactly what a forklift operator or car mechanics need?. is there a minister for forklift operators? no because once u get that then u get 1000's of ministers and a very inefficient bureaucracy more inefficient then it is now. let people keep their money and spend it on what they want don't have someone else making choices for u

 

[Rothbard]

So you think academics etc are less capable of taking the broader view into account than car mechanics and forklift operators?

And the true Labor supporter shines through.

 

[Lentern]

oh yea because the minister for education or the treasurer is going to know exactly what a forklift operator or car mechanics need?. is there a minister for forklift operators? no because once u get that then u get 1000's of ministers and a very inefficient bureaucracy more inefficient then it is now. let people keep their money and spend it on what they want don't have someone else making choices for u

Actually they would know what they would need(or atleast someone in the department would), perhaps not what they want but people seldom want whats best for them.