Who Is Going to Pay for All This?

Trying2SaveABuck on 07/04/2020 - 22:16
Last edited 07/04/2020 - 23:08

Who is going to pay for all this sh!t?

With sweeping policies regarding government spending aimed at helping businesses and unemployed during COVID19

The government is having over 700m to airlines (probably more in the end if virgin gets cash too)

130billion in their job seeker program

Millions more in beefed up welfare payments

On top of that extra funding is urgently needed to our healthcare system incase this crisis worsens

Over 1-2million jobs will be lost and unemployment is tipped it hit around 10%

Pretty much every industry bleeding money it asking for a hand out

Keep in mind we just had horrible bushfires….

When this is all said and done who is going to pay for this?

I agree with most of what the government is trying to do because desperate times call for desperate measures though i cant help but feel that we will be incredibility screwed for generations to come…eventually the dust will settle and who will fit the tab because we will essentially be in the worst financial position Australia has been in most of our lifetimes…. And unlike the GFC we aren’t in a mining boom to help us out…

Update

ill add this should Australia stop all international aid, refugee re-settlement programs and essentially humanitarianism for at least the next 5 years?

Financial

Comments

  • payton on 07/04/2020 - 22:22
    +67

    The most wonderful, benevolent group of people in this country: taxpayers, especially the middle class
    ScoMo is pretty much throwing money at the unemployed, by doing so he hopes they'll listen to him as he tells them that most fun and social activities are now banned. Helps stave off unrest and disobedience against the of $1300+ penalties police are handing out.
    For me personally, the AUD exchange rate now sucked, a lot of items in my wishlist are out of stock or its price have significantly increased, def feels like a dreary autumn and winter.

      • bronan on 07/04/2020 - 23:00
        +21

        Our dollar hit a fifteen year low last fortnight because of the $105b 'quantitative easing' scheme that handed the money directly to the big banks.

        • Yawhae on 08/04/2020 - 09:36
          +35

          You seriously can't expect the liberal government to not help their sponsors in a time of crisis. $105,000,000,000 buys a lot of support for next election. Plus banks still need to make a profit and why shouldn't the taxpayer foot the bill. After all it's taxpayers spreading the virus.

          I for one am grateful for our lord and saviour Scomo.

          • TheCutter on 08/04/2020 - 12:23
            +18

            @Yawhae: Hallelujah!
            He will bankrupt the country to keep up house prices - that has been made clear many times

          • bronan on 08/04/2020 - 14:47
            +3

            @Yawhae:

            After all it's taxpayers spreading the virus.

            Lost is at this point. 🤣

          • Devils Advocate on 08/04/2020 - 22:40
            +1

            @Yawhae: You do know the RBA launched the QE, not the government right…

        • s3th2000 on 08/04/2020 - 13:28
          +10

          You realise that QE involves buying something right? It's not a $105b charity donation- they get govt bonds back for it.

          • od810 on 08/04/2020 - 16:36

            @s3th2000: Yea, most people don't understand what QE is. Without QE, the home loan rate is still going to hover around 3%. People thought cash rate is the main drive of the home loan rate.

          • yannyrjl on 09/04/2020 - 23:41
            +1

            @s3th2000: buying bonds with newly printed money, essentially diluting the currency and essentially stealing everyone's savings

            • geoffs87 on 10/04/2020 - 18:20
              +3

              @yannyrjl: or… economy goes to sh!t even further.

              I as a fully employed tax payer certainly dont enjoy everyone getting a free ride through this crisis while others still work and will foot more of the bill (higher tax bracket) than the rest once its all over…

              BUT…

              if that wasnt the case, then my savings, investments, future would all be for naught as without propping up the economy like this, there simply wouldnt be one in 12-24months time.

              • yannyrjl on 10/04/2020 - 20:56

                @geoffs87: you mentioned concerns over savings / investments isn't that a direct result of paper money rather than tangible backed?

                I'm not against the government's initiatives, I'm against the RBA stimulus. I rather social redistribution at a time like this to ensure everyone's survival.

      • dcep on 08/04/2020 - 00:00

        no hyperinflation in US since 2008 GFC pumping by Fed

      • Caped Baldy on 08/04/2020 - 00:52
        +2

        I'm very curious to see how it plays out in the US. They seem woefully unprepared and ignorant to the damage.

        • TheCutter on 08/04/2020 - 12:27
          +8

          What damage?
          With 20% of their over 80's and medically sick gone ( together with 1 in 300 under 80's ) they will probably emerge stronger - unless civil war ensues.

          • harthagan on 09/04/2020 - 11:37
            +8

            @jaimex2: Lol way over 0.001% have already died you clown, and the number is rising exponentially each day.

            • jaimex2 on 09/04/2020 - 13:32

              @harthagan: Just going by what the media spout out.

              Only 14k dead so far in the US.

              • Alzori on 09/04/2020 - 14:00
                +19

                @Dogsrule: Maths is a little off mate. 0.001% = 0.00001 as a decimal, or 1/100000. The US currently has 14.7k deaths, which is 0.0045%.

                • Dogsrule on 09/04/2020 - 16:04
                  +3

                  @Alzori: Fair enough, good pickup, forgot I was dealing with a percentage and not a decimal. Special apologies to Mr/Ms Harthagan, you were right to call them, and probably me, a clown.

                  • harthagan on 09/04/2020 - 19:19
                    +3

                    @Dogsrule: No, calling him a clown wasn't really for his poor maths skills. More so his claim that the whole thing is overblown, backing that stance up with incorrect numbers was the icing on the cake.

                    Anyone who thinks this is being over blown needs a reality check. Even if it miraculously only takes another 6 months for a vaccine and deaths keep doubling every 10 days like they are currently, we will surpass the death toll of the Spanish flu many times over!

                    The more we limit the spread now can save millions of lives a few months on from now.

                    • Dogsrule on 09/04/2020 - 19:39
                      +1

                      @harthagan: Very true. For the record, I agree with your moral stance on the issue, people babbling on about the death toll being some small percentage of a nations population are far too callous to the suffering of others for my liking. You can bet your arse they’d be crying if one of their loved ones died.

            • yannyrjl on 09/04/2020 - 23:44
              -2

              @harthagan: number is rising but not exponential, I know you want to make a point, and call people "clown" but best use facts to do that

              • harthagan on 11/04/2020 - 21:17

                @yannyrjl: Lol I doubt you even know the meaning of the word exponential. Stick to a subject you actually know about.

                • yannyrjl on 16/04/2020 - 13:01

                  @harthagan: can't argue the facts so resorts to personal insults

          • Lysander on 12/02/2021 - 12:55

            @jaimex2: As of today, 473000 people have died in the US with more to come from the daily increase of cases of about 90000.

            • jaimex2 on 12/02/2021 - 15:51

              @Lysander: That's 0.15% of their population of 328 million people.

              What exactly is your point?

    • Hasbulla on 08/04/2020 - 09:28
      +32

      Please allow me to rectify this.
      This is not just middle-class taxpayers, the range is even narrower:

      This is middle-class taxpayers with savings and no debt.

      The looming hyperinflation will destroy their (cash) savings just for the sake of keeping the real estate saga going.
      This shall result in house prices skyrocketing (yes, even more, way more) and with that the price tag of everything else.

      Banks and highly leveraged investors will be stocked, few will pay the price.
      Money printer: brrrrrrr

      • greatlamp on 09/04/2020 - 08:33
        +9

        Inflation always exists. Being responsible and living within your means debt free is always going to leave you no better off than a dole bludger at the end of your life.

        Play the game, borrow the maximum you can get and invest in real estate that you barely afford. Get a worthless health insurance plan you don't need to save on tax. Get a new car on a lease, preferably something with a tray so it's a 'work vehicle'.

        This is the system. It won't change.

        • echelon6 on 09/04/2020 - 08:48

          savers are the biggest debt holders though - what kind of dumbass keeps their networth in cash?

          if they put their networth in any asset, be it shares or property, all those exposures already have inflation hedge built-in

          • yannyrjl on 09/04/2020 - 23:45

            @echelon6: don't know why you are being neg'd it's the truth, perhaps some can't handle it?

        • bargainparker on 09/04/2020 - 14:24

          Inflation exists because… people made it. They can easily erase it, but you can't have that in capitalism.

          • yannyrjl on 09/04/2020 - 23:47
            +3

            @bargainparker: because we went off the gold standards and decided to use USD as reserve currency. In 1944 US "promised" to always stick to the gold standard, but during the Nixon years, they decided to "temporarily" go off it to try and balance their trade, Nixon resigned and the rest is history

            • bargainparker on 10/04/2020 - 00:32

              @yannyrjl: And everyone went for it, just shows why health system in the USA is still crap.

              • yannyrjl on 10/04/2020 - 00:44
                -1

                @bargainparker: the health system is actually a completely different story, I feel it is more due their insurance and hospital scheme which formed a vicious cycle to drive up prices, akin to their education system.

                Having said that, I'm not sure how you can call their health system crap, a proper measure needs to consider multiple facades such as quality of care, waiting times, outcomes. US is expensive if you don't have health cover which often is negotiated as part of salary and can be purchase just like Australia. Their emergency waiting times are in the 20-40 minutes, ours are 3 hours minimum. They are world leading in general cancer survival rate, they have extremely low infant mortality rates, and reasonable life expectancy (could be higher but their economic success is also their downfall with obesity related issues on the rise, but again I feel that's a choice rather than forced)

                With Covid 19, I think mortality rates is telling around the world. According to Health Care Ranking Italy and Spain are No. 2 and No. 7. Where as Australia and US rank 32 & 37.

                • Hasbulla on 11/04/2020 - 06:22
                  +1

                  @yannyrjl: What if your call on the US mortality rate is a bit of an early one?
                  Also, it'd be more transparent to put it into context and weight it for the cluster areas.

        • tessel on 09/04/2020 - 18:41

          I'm slow but realised this the other day. Go all in like everyone else because you'll all be bailed out.

      • arcticjuggernaut on 10/04/2020 - 06:32

        And this typifies why we are (profanity) albeit at a slow burn rate.

        No one is spending, usually lower interest rate spurs spending, but since we all have massive mortgages instead of spending we pay down our mortgage. We can thank the govt for not doing a single bloody thing about house prices. At least they got their sugar rush of stamp duty right?

        • ribbonsofnight on 11/04/2020 - 23:20

          no one would be spending in this situation anyway

    • legendary-noob on 08/04/2020 - 17:36
      +2

      i disagree - i think the landlords would be paying for all these…
      XD

    • saty1296 on 11/04/2020 - 13:23

      SCOMO said MPs will not take a pay cut to help Australia.

    • Thaal Sinestro on 12/04/2020 - 02:52

      Last year, who would have though that the Liberal party were secretly harbouring socialist tendencies, given the way they persecuted the poor?

      The truth is, the LNP has always believed in welfare, but welfare just for the Middle and Upper classes. Because some of those Middle class LNP voters are now jobless, the government has become a sugar daddy (ALP voters don't need to worry about joblessness, since they all have government jobs that are immune to economic downturns).

      Enjoy your freebies, because in 2021 there will be austerity measures to pay off the 30%+ increase in government debt in curred this year eg GST tax hike. Possible also -ive interest rates like in Japan and Europe. Houses will remain overpriced because of these ultra low interest rates.

      In your comment you mention the weak Australian dollar. Low interest rates combined with a decrease in the strength of the dollar means that people have less purchasing power, and people who have saves, their savings are worth less and will lose value to inflation if kept in the bank.

      • [Deactivated] on 12/04/2020 - 12:19

        Hang on, you think there will be a budget surplus in 2021? The USA last had a budget surplus back in 2001, Australia in 2007-8. The thought of Australia being in budget surplus next year is crazy. Australia won't even cover its budget spending in 2021. Debt will be increasing.

  • Blue Cat on 07/04/2020 - 22:28

    You don't need to worry about paying for it when the RBA is just printing money out of thin air.

    Interesting comment I found on reddit:

    Question one is: exactly how many/much bonds do these commercial banks have available to sell? An unlimited amount? Where do they get them from?How long have they had them?

    It's a charade so they can say they're not printing money. If the RBA were to buy bonds directly from the government, that would amount to printing money or "monetising the governments debt". Remember, the RBA is supposed to be independent of the Treasury and is not supposed to be their servant to print money on demand.
    However, if a commercial bank buys bonds from the government, THEN the RBA buys them from the banks on the secondary market, then they're not technically monetising the debt even if it does so indirectly. The money created this way by buying bonds the banks holds ends up as extra reserves in the banks reserve bank accounts they hold with the RBA.
    So yes, they are "printing" but they need to do it this way so they can say they're still independent and not being controlled by the government.

    We will be a full communist state soon, with RBA already discussing plans ti implement MMT (Modern Monetary Theory) which is just communism under a different name - print more money if needed and employ everybody for any job possible.

    • kahn on 07/04/2020 - 23:02
      +23

      Communism is where the government owns the means of production. How is that, in any way, similar to MMT?

      • bronan on 07/04/2020 - 23:14
        +5

        Socialism is where the means of production are owned by the government.

        Communism is where the means of production are owned collectively by the PEOPLE.

        There has never actually been a Communist nation. Cuba has been the closed we've come, which is why the US has imposed such harsh trade sanctions there, and tried to assassinate Fidel Castro.

        • kahn on 07/04/2020 - 23:16
          +8

          Wrong way around.

          • bronan on 07/04/2020 - 23:35
            +6

            @kahn: I could have worded to comparison a little better, but I'll argue against it being "wrong".

            Communism is a type of Socialism. Marx saw Socialism as a precursor to Communism.

            A Communist society is stateless, moneyless, and classless. Like Star Trek.

            • Pimpiticians 4 Life on 08/04/2020 - 01:06
              +4

              @bronan: Former treasurer Joe Hockey has Lenin memorabilia hanging on the wall at his home in Canberra, proudly displayed while appearing on 'Kitchen Cabinet' a few years ago.
              Just another political pirate getting hundreds of dollars per night (travel allowance when he stayed in Canberra) paid by the tax payer to pay rent to his wife.

            • leiiv on 08/04/2020 - 02:04
              +8

              @bronan:

              A Communist society is stateless, moneyless, and classless. Like Star Trek.

              Which only exists in Theory and Fictions.
              There is no way we will be a full communist state neither sooner nor later. You need to find another word for it. How about fascist capitalist police state?
              The rich will govern the poor in one way or another, as it has always been, anywhere on earth.

              • bronan on 08/04/2020 - 02:28

                @leiiv: Yep. It sounds great in theory, but there will always be a level of corruption.

              • FrugalDealSeeker on 12/04/2020 - 05:45

                @leiiv: Did you mean Plutocratic Oligarchy?

            • cameldownunder on 08/04/2020 - 11:14

              @bronan: Star trek has a flourishing trading of Dilithium paid by Latinum.

            • yannyrjl on 09/04/2020 - 23:51

              @bronan: It's also Utopia, which literally means "No place". Case in point, you can only raise an example of it from fiction. And everywhere it's tried, they've done it "wrong".

            • Thaal Sinestro on 12/04/2020 - 03:09

              @bronan: "A Communist society is stateless, moneyless, and classless." This,a nd the Star Trek reference, reminds me a bit of Oscar Wilde's essay, "The Soul of Man under Socialism". Machines do all of the hard work and the wealth they create is distributed among the citizens, who can live in any manner they like. It is an anarchical socialism since there isn't any nanny state micromanaging people's lives, telling them what to study, where to live, what occupation to have, etc.

          • dengziyi on 09/04/2020 - 02:15
            +2

            @kahn: I studied this in uni, finally some use! Bronan has it the right way around. Socialism is when all means of production are transferred to the government. Then it is to be sorted and given back to the people, in which rulers dissolve the ruling party and it becomes a communist state. Socialism (in theory, not practice) is meant to be a step to Communism, and not a long term state.

            • yannyrjl on 10/04/2020 - 00:00
              +1

              @dengziyi: correct, regardless of so called "democratic socialism" or not, the ultimate state is communism. Which even in theory (let a lone in practice doesn't work with humanity). Also, it's a way organising the world to say "I live therefore I deserve", with no consideration to societal contribution through mutually consensual transactions.

              That's why in communist China, they have so many classes trying to mould young minds to "contribute" to society which receiving zero benefits, unfortunately, the results is much worse than western nations. During the heavy communism years, there were nearly no concept of voluntary donations. People were extremely ungrateful. Even, the common "double thank you" is non-existent, which I found very fascinating when I first saw it in Australia.

              Why do you think both the shop keeper and the shopper thank each other? It's because they both received more value than what they parted with. In China prior or early in the capitalist expansion, people always just expected to receive things (albeit using heavy provision and extremely scarce).

        • sien on 08/04/2020 - 07:01

          There has also never been a true Scotsman.

        • [Deactivated] on 08/04/2020 - 19:30

          There is no difference between communism and socialism, except in the means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave the people by force, socialism by vote. It is merely the difference between murder and suicide. Thanks but no, thanks.

          • bargainparker on 09/04/2020 - 14:39
            +4

            @[Deactivated]: And you are not a slave in capitalism? Just keep toiling. This is your life: Normal is getting dressed in clothes that you buy for work and driving through traffic in a car that you are still paying for, in order to get to the job you need to pay for the clothes and the car and the house you leave vacant all day so you can afford to live in it. Merry, have children so they can follow in your footsteps.

            Sure, you have holidays, can buy things, have some entertainment… That's exactly what Romans said, bread and circuses. And so, you and your descendants will keep going like this until one day maybe China occupies Australia? Or as the scientists say the universe will either be a frozen wasteland or will just go back to its birth state and which by the way, means humanity is doomed either way. You were nothingness and you will be nothingness. Your life is just a movie. When it ends, it's no more, well unless you believe in reincarnation, god…

            • [Deactivated] on 09/04/2020 - 17:13
              +2

              @bargainparker: Are these our only options ? Either a 16th century economic system or a 19th century one? We can do better.Ideally, I would like an economic system that has democracy as its underpinnings and an ethical code .

              Truth be told, I quite like the nordic model, which is a capitalistic system where the state intervenes in the economy with regulations, welfare, and strong social protections, without interrupting the private ownership of the means of production. These countries have a generous social safety net, high quality public services, and strong regulations on private business to protect both individuals and the community.

              In fact, the Scandinavian countries are among the happiest countries on Earth. They enjoy some of the best healthcare on the planet. Their trust in other people is very high. Norway has the highest Human Development Index score of any country in the world, with Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland all making it into the top 15.

              So, no, I don't have a problem with paying more tax if it is for the good of everyone. What I am struggling with at the moment is the hypocrisy of those who are gladly accepting government handouts but who, once their lives go back to normal, will have no moral qualms whatsoever to judge those less fortunate than them.

              • bargainparker on 09/04/2020 - 17:49
                +1

                @[Deactivated]: My aunt in Sweden says that health system is quite a bit worse now than some 20 years ago, much longer time to get to see a doctor, so i wouldn't put high hopes.

                "will have no moral qualms whatsoever to judge those less fortunate than them."

                It has always been like that. Humans will be humans. You can't change their nature.

                Even with Scandinavian countries, this planet is still heading downwards. Humans are too wasteful and inefficient and the planet has only so much that it can offer before it flops.

                Yes, there is a way to make this a better world, but not in this world. Humans love convenience and that is impossible thing to beat. Sure a bit of inconvenience here and there, no problem. Like no plastic bags in shops, and they go on their merry way thinking how they did a great deal helping the environment. Sure if you think that patching that small hole will make a difference, good for you. When you finally start drowning and see that huge gaping hole that you did nothing about, well… have fun then.

                You can't change the world, and people won't do anything as long as they are left in peace to live their life regardless of how little they have, like in China. This is a long story and one that will always be like that, neverending story. People don't understand the notion of working together for the benefit of all and because of that this planet is suffering together with humans, they just don't see it yet.

                • [Deactivated] on 09/04/2020 - 17:57

                  @bargainparker: Sweden has a national guarantee of care, Vårdgaranti, which lays down standards for waiting times for scheduled care, aiming to keep waiting time below 7 days for a visit to a primary care physician, and no more than 90 days for a visit to a specialist .Urgent cases are always prioritised and emergency cases are treated immediately.

                • SlavOz on 12/04/2020 - 12:45
                  +1

                  @bargainparker: I haven't followed this whole conversation but this post really hit the nail on the head. Everyone complaining about global warming showing up in protest yet they go home that same day and live their life in a way that contributes to the overall problem. Buying excess food, we smartphone every year, 4 pairs of sneakers, and thence plain when things don't arrive fast enough or aren't cheap enough.

                  Corporations do what we tell them to do, and so far we've all told them to put convenience and affordability ahead of any need to care for the environment. We wouldnt have it any other way.

          • yannyrjl on 10/04/2020 - 00:02
            +1

            @[Deactivated]: Indeed, it's the mob robbing the rich (aka the more productive, or descendants of the more productive who themselves may no longer be). Or voting first and then robbing the rich.

    • afoveht on 07/04/2020 - 23:06
      +11

      No. This is the early pangs of late stage capitalism. The virus is a neat scapegoat.

      • [Deactivated] on 08/04/2020 - 07:28
        +27

        Oh. If only we are a communist/dictatorship nation, we wouldn't have suffered these "early pangs".

        Glorious Supreme Leader Kim had it figured out - Can't have early pangs if everyone is constantly in severe pangs. Problem solved.

        • afoveht on 08/04/2020 - 08:12
          -7

          communist/dictatorship

          Assuming this association demonstrates you know little about either. Maybe you should read a book, even a Wikipedia page, on some of the many, various forms of socialism and democracies.

          • [Deactivated] on 08/04/2020 - 09:19

            @afoveht: Who said there's an association? The / sign is also used as an exclusive. Ie. Y/N.

            The only assumption seems to be on your part.

            • afoveht on 08/04/2020 - 14:21
              -2

              @[Deactivated]:

              Who said there's an association? The / sign is also used as an exclusive. Ie. Y/N.

              Then how random that you would mention a dictatorship when there is no mention of that anywhere else in this topic until you brought it up.

              This ain't the first time I've seen this from you. How stifled you must feel not being allowed to be wrong, ever. Try admitting to mistakes sometime - it's liberating.

        • cameldownunder on 08/04/2020 - 11:15
          +3

          Oh I thought Australia is a Dictatorship, where Australian have to choose their dictators every 3-4 years.

      • freakatronic on 08/04/2020 - 13:42
        +10

        Hahaha say it again. I can't believe anyone in real life even types it out. "Late Stage Capitalism".

        Tired of your iPhone and the things you own?

        • afoveht on 08/04/2020 - 14:30
          -1

          Even overall sh1tty things can have various good outcomes. That doesn't make the things less sh1tty.

          • freakatronic on 08/04/2020 - 15:30
            +9

            @afoveht: Yes, it's awful the way capitalism has raised billions of people out of poverty. The sooner it ends, the better.

            • afoveht on 08/04/2020 - 15:49
              +3

              @freakatronic: Google "capitalism has raised billions of people out of poverty." You will get hits that bolster your opinions and also those that make you uncomfortable. If you want to learn something read the latter - you might still not come around but at least you'll see why other views are held and why the iphone knee-jerk is not all you might think it to be.

            • sarahlump on 08/04/2020 - 18:12
              +3

              @freakatronic: WHat???? Whattt? o.O Wahattt?

              Show me these billions raised out of poverty?

              I feel like you're just quoting some unfounded capitalist propaganda.

              I can show you literal billions being forced into poverty by capitalism.

              • greatlamp on 09/04/2020 - 08:55
                +6

                @sarahlump: You shouldn't doubt that billions are moving out of poverty in the last 100 years.

                Economic data proves that we all have much more wealth than our grandparents.

                https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_new_insights_on_pover…

                It isn't a given that capitalism is responsible however, but capitalism likes to take credit for the industrial revolution - which still has work to do spreading across the globe.

                At some point however, our lives have stopped improving. Life expectancy isn't increasing in the 1st world. In fact we have never extended life with all modern drugs, just cut down on early deaths. Happiness is decreasing and mental illness is increasing.

              • yannyrjl on 10/04/2020 - 00:20

                @sarahlump: ok in the 1980 China average YEARLY wage was 762 (RMB) which is around $150 AUD. In Australia, in 1980 the average WEEKLY wage was about $220. Population in China at the time was just a tick over 1 billion (1,000,089,228) according to https://www.populationpyramid.net/china/1980/

                In 1980 China opened the door to the West and shortly after had privatisation business and allowed the country to operate economically a much more capitalistic way.

                In 1990 Australia weekly wage was around $475, China yearly 2140 (RMB) ~$425

                In 2000 Australia weekly wages was around $635, China yearly 9371 (RMB) ~$1870

                I source the info from the following website: https://tradingeconomics.com/china/wages

                So show my literal billions being forced into poverty by capitalism

              • [Deactivated] on 11/04/2020 - 19:52

                @sarahlump: Last I heard that China was the one who brought most people out of poverty unprecedented in human history. Is China capitalist now? If so why does everyone call them communist when convenient?

            • yannyrjl on 10/04/2020 - 00:04

              @freakatronic: and communism has killed over 150 million, far exceeding the Nazi's could ever dream of

        • bargainparker on 09/04/2020 - 14:43
          +1

          You think you own? Think again.
          You could go out, get run over by a car and all your 'own' disappears.

      • ankor on 09/04/2020 - 19:31

        Or you could be like the glorious CCP, where you hide official numbers and pressure others to follow your official story, no matter what it is. Systemic corruption and party group purges ahoy.. Good luck if you're a Muslim, you can go and sew some clothes, and then donate your organs when you're useless.

        North Korea:- just put all the money into the military while a massive famine destroys your populace..

        How about Russia? Putin is basically the Russian mafia and if you're gay, you're dead. Write a bad piece on Putin, you're going to be poisoned with nuclear material, even if you're in the U.K.

        So if we're talking a system of government, I'd say communism as a starting point has been the absolute worst solution in the history of mankind.

    • Oddmog on 08/04/2020 - 02:33
      +6

      Think you might be jumping the gun.

      The liberals have been great at starving the beast and being actively worse than useless trying to make the private sector look good in comparison.

      The national debt has been jumping massively higher whilst services have been cut. Just because the liberal party is being useful now don't think they're going full communist anytime soon, just look at the national debt BEFORE the stimulus measures; debt at the end of 2012/2013 financial year was 257.370 billion, and at the end of the 2018/2019 it was 541.992 billion.

      The end goal is basically to dissolve social services and if it takes a massive debt load with services or no services, that'll be done.

    • Thaal Sinestro on 12/04/2020 - 03:03

      I wish I could print as much money as I want for my own needs. I want a part of the government's Magic Money Tree, it's Golden Egg Laying Goose.

      The government is supposed to serve it's citizens; how about sending $1 million of the money you are printing to me in the form of a cheque. I shall then buy a house is Brisbane's Fig Tree Pocket and be set for life (currently I cannot afford even a cheap house in a suburb on Birsbane's outskirts).

      MMT reminds me of what Keynes wrote: "In the end we are all dead." (he had no children). Since we are all going to die, why not just keep printing money and borrowing money without ever worrying about the consequences. Of course, China is worrying about the long term, and is setting itself up to dominate the entire planet, while we decadent Westerners go on a spending binge and only care about the present.

  • Mad Max on 07/04/2020 - 22:29
    +9

    Yes taxpayers for the next 10 years will foot the bill, but I would be surprised if Trump does not sue China for this. Not sure if Australia will follow suit. Too dependent from China to upset them probably.

    • payton on 07/04/2020 - 22:31
      +22

      99.99% sure Trump will go after China as part of his re-election campaign, whether the EU countries and us will follow suit will be interesting.

      • Mad Max on 07/04/2020 - 22:33
        +43

        EU countries may follow suit, but Australia is just about a fully owned subsidiary of China…

        • Trying2SaveABuck on 07/04/2020 - 22:45
          +6

          I hope we go after China the whole world will by the end of this i just reckon repossess all Chinese owned assets in Australia… honestly what could they do about it? stop trading with us GO Da Faq ahead we will get Thailand, India etc to build stuff for us

          • kahn on 07/04/2020 - 22:54
            +40

            @Trying2SaveABuck: Following your scenario, who would want to do business with a country whose government just seizes privately-owned assets?

            • Krankite on 08/04/2020 - 11:09

              @kahn: China doesn't really have privately-owned assets.

              • kahn on 08/04/2020 - 11:19
                +8

                @Krankite: Are you just ignorant or simply lying?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join