The “adults in charge”: some myths about our economy

Joe Hockey

  • There is a budget emergency.
  • A deficit equals a bad economy.
  • A surplus equals a good economy.

These are all myths. False slogans spread by the Liberal government, unscrutinised by a sympathetic media and swallowed whole by a vast majority of the population. Calling a “crisis” is how Abbott justifies cuts to the poor and disenfranchised. The truth is:

  • There is NO budget emergency.

Australia’s spending is low by OECD standards. And our economy is relatively healthy, especially when compared to our friends in the US.

  • A deficit DOES NOT equal a bad economy.

Being in debt is often not a bad thing. People regularly go into debt to invest in their future. Mortgaging a house is a good example; voluntarily going into debt temporarily to ensure your family has a roof over their head, and with a long-term goal of owning the house as an assert, is a good investment. Spending money on infrastructure, stimulus, health, education etc. all help an economy grow and increase a country’s quality of life, which pays dividends in the future.

  • A surplus DOES NOT equal a good economy.

A surplus does not necessarily mean an economy is strong. At its core, a surplus means the government is taxing its population at a higher rate than it is spending the income on them. And if a surplus is achieved by cutting funding to long-term investments and selling assets, it is not economically wise. Charging more for a GP appointment, for example, is a poor strategy; doctors are a preventative measure and if people are priced out of visiting a GP when they need to, they will eventually cost the economy much more in ER visits, medication and lost working hours. The real problem is a revenue shortfall, and selling assets like Medibank is not a solution. Selling/privatising assets is a quick fix but a poor economic choice; making a dollar now but depriving future governments of a source of income is selfish and stupid.

Spending $24 billion on factory second fighter jets from the US that are largely useless unless we go to war with Papua New Guinea is poor economic management. Cutting funding from education and health is poor economic management. The Abbott government slogan of “trimming the fat” is all good and well, but the “fat” is in tax cuts and superannuation tax concessions for the rich, not trips to the doctor for the poor.

Repeal of Racial Discrimination Act Says “Okay!” to Racism

Brandis and Bolt

In a leap back towards Australia’s glory days of unabashed racism, defender of bigots George Brandis and Tony Abbott intend to repeal sections 18C and 18D of the Racial Discrimination Act that make it unlawful to engage in “offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin.” Given the Abbott government’s slow march against progress that presumably ends with society walking backwards so far that we end up in the ocean and devolve into unicellular organisms, such a development shouldn’t come as a surprise.

On the international stage, repealing the Racial Discrimination Act will send a fantastic message to our overseas friends. Such a move will surely do wonders for the international public opinion that we are a country of dumb, drunk racists. Our massive education industry is already suffering, with international students too scared to study in Australia and the Indian media literally telling the public it is unsafe and recommending they study elsewhere. Not to mention our best mates the United States of America, who we trot alongside wherever they go (Iraq). I wonder what Obama would think about us revoking laws that protect against racism.

Those in favour of the repeal are hiding under a banner named “free speech”. This is yet another example of a government taking a simple slogan literally to disguise their poor and often dangerous policies. How is the slogan “right to bear arms” working out for the US? And more recently and closer to home, how has the phrase “border protection” led to a first world country treating refugees worse than the countries they are fleeing from?

The motivation for this move is obvious; the Liberal government wants to say a warm ‘thank you’ to Andrew Bolt for his hard work campaigning for them for so many years. Brandis has already linked the move to Bolt and his 2010 court case. Repealing the Racial Discrimination Act will allow Bolt to continue his hate speech unimpeded, as only people who can afford a defamation court case against a rich, well-backed public figure will be able to silence the hate. And Bolt’s business model preys on the poor and disenfranchised.

After comments by indigenous academic Marcia Langton on ABC’s Q&A, fragile Bolt felt so “bruised” he couldn’t attend work the following day. He demanded an apology, which both Langton and program host Tony Jones gave shortly afterwards. Interesting that he’s able to dish out attacks on people daily on his blog, yet claims to be too hurt to work when called a “fool” on TV. The hypocrisy is is staggering.

The difference between these words directed at Bolt and Bolt’s own attacks directed at others are this; the former is public opinion based on Bolt’s liberal use of non-facts, his racism, xenophobia and his habit of being a horrible human being, whereas the latter is Bolt’s own opinion based on the colour of people’s skin.

Bolt claimed the apology “did not go far enough“, but on the contrary, I think it went too far. Although Langton never actually called him a racist, Bolt believes that conclusion can be construed from her comments. But considering he was found guilty of breaching the Racial Discrimination Act in 2011 for his blog posts claiming fair skinned Aboriginals had “chosen” to identify as Aboriginal to claim financial benefits, considering a federal court found him likely to have offended, insulted, humiliated or intimidated a racial minority, I think calling him a racist is not only fair but true.

I hope for a society somewhere in the future where people neither say, nor even think, racial hate. But until that time, laws are necessary to right past wrongs. In the same way, I hope for a time when women are equally represented in parliament. But till then, affirmative action policies like Emily’s List need to be enacted to break the initial boundaries and allow for such changes to continue naturally in the future. And if such policies aren’t in place (Liberal government) then change won’t happen (95% male cabinet) and the discrimination will continue.

The Racial Discrimination Act exists to not only protect minorities from hate, it also paves the way for a future where such an act won’t be necessary and true equality exists. But as a country we are nowhere near that goal yet, as Bolt has proven, and the act needs to stay. But with a backwards government so intent on hacking down the young saplings of progress, whose victims include science, climate change, education and the poor, what hope does one little anti-racism policy have?

Now’s a really good time to re-think voting Abbott

Prepare yourselves for this future, Australia.

Heathen Scripture

Australia. Don’t fucking ruin it for everyone. Sometime in the next couple of days you are all going to do that weird dance with the little cardboard houses and the scrawling of runes on scrolls, and like a magical phoenix sewn from boredom and Windsor knots, a new government will be formed. According to what I’ve read in the newspapers owned by one guy, and seen in the polling of people his age who still have hand-cranked telephones, enough of you are going to vote for Liberal or National candidates that Tony Abbott will be installed as Prime Minister.

What I really, really wonder is whether you’ve thought this through.

If you are planning to vote Coalition, I’d love you to actually read the following and think about it, rather than scrolling straight to the comments for a pre-emptive gloat. Because your choice would be a very poor one, for…

View original post 2,206 more words