Here we go again

18 comments on “Here we go again ”

• Comments are now closed

1. inpassing 1

   28 May 2009 at 4:27 pm

   farce..? unkind, sir (or madame)… 1990s was recession-lite.. start over.. from real or your understanding of it..
2. gingercrush 2

   28 May 2009 at 4:33 pm

   See you really can’t call me a fringe-right person Irishbill. The real far right are absolutely scathing that National didn’t cut nearly enough and spent too much.

   Do you think Labour need to provide an alternative budget like the Greens did or should they simply denounce the budget. Whilst, the changes in superannuation are an easy target. I don’t think its enough for Labour to simply decry broken promises about tax and cuts in spending. I just don’t think the general public will swallow it.
   • IrishBill 2.1

     28 May 2009 at 4:41 pm

     I don’t give a toss what Labour are doing and I’m not writing an alternative budget myself. There needed to be greater stimulus in the form of job and skill intensive infrastructure projects. Instead there was contraction-creating belt-tightening.
   • felix 2.2

     28 May 2009 at 5:24 pm

     Actually I think it was “fringe-right troll”.
     • gingercrush 2.2.1

       28 May 2009 at 5:25 pm

       Quite right.
       • felix 2.2.1.1

         28 May 2009 at 5:29 pm

         Yes he was.
3. Greg 3

   28 May 2009 at 4:36 pm

   Right. So $180 thousand of debt per household isn’t enough? You want more?
   • Daveo 3.1

     28 May 2009 at 4:39 pm

     I’d be interested to see the working on those figures. Sounded to me like English had just taken the current debt track and extrapolated it to 2025. That’s stupid.

     Do you have the figures Greg? Or are you just repeating what Bill told you?
     • IrishBill 3.1.1

       28 May 2009 at 4:47 pm

       Past the dubious figures the projected debt to GDP ratio was something like 36% That’s a lot less than most other countries and it gives us plenty of room to move on projects that would increase GDP further down the line.
       • serpico 3.1.1.1

         28 May 2009 at 4:50 pm

         GDP is a fishing line Irish? Do watch the trains on the line.
4. Philonz 4

   28 May 2009 at 5:41 pm

   This is nothing like Richardson’s budget. Her budget slashed spending on social services, cut benefits etc. National had to recapitilise BNZ and deal with undisclosed fiscal issues left by the outgoing Labour Govt. This budget has no such undisclosed dodgy accounting left by Labour, but is a response to a global recession. Whether it’s a good response is a matter for discussion. Richardson’s budget was a shock and was greeted as such. This budget is not a shock and has been greeted as such.

   If you’re going to make wild generalised comparisons at least try to follow it up with some reasoned thought please.
   • IrishBill 4.1

     28 May 2009 at 5:47 pm

     I wasn’t referring to Richardson’s budget.
     • Philonz 4.1.1

       28 May 2009 at 5:53 pm

       Birch’s cuts were nothing like Richardson’s. In fact from memory he tended not to balance the budget by cutting spending but by selling assets. Again, the economic situations were vastly different. Yes English and a few others survive but the architects of those policies are gone. There are plenty of things in this budget to spark debate, I just think your comparison here was poorly executed.
5. Stephen Whittington 5

   28 May 2009 at 5:54 pm

   Well, this budget does pretty well by your measures. A few days ago you guys were saying these were the necessities:

   750 million for health.

   Education. Something in the range of $500 million.

   In Health, the spending increase was over a billion (you must be stoked).

   In Education, it was $320 billion (but remember, Labour actually decreased educatino spending in some years).

   Also, Government expenditure is on the rise. Core Crown Expenditure in the 2007/2008 was 31.8 percent of GDP. Under National, it will surge to 37.3 percent of GDP in 2010/2011. Even by 2012/2013, it is 36.3 percent.
   • IrishBill 5.1

     28 May 2009 at 7:00 pm

     Stephen, the only stimulatory line in this budget is the Green’s insulation project (and prisons). The rest is either cuts disguised by taking away with one hand and giving less with the other, cuts created by failing to increase funding in real terms or cuts as plain old cuts (generally in lines people don’t bother to read such as employment relations education contestable fund).

     It’s essentially a neo-liberal budget hamstrung by the needs of immediate political PR.
   • Jasper 5.2

     29 May 2009 at 8:59 am

     The post referred to $750 million per year being the bare minimum to keep health in line with inflation over four years.
     National delivered just that. No extra.

     Education was already in line for an increase, but The Nactzis have it down as “new” spending when it isn’t.

     The only thing that is new spending is the additional $700 million for the “extra” $500 per year for rich households to get insulated homes.

     Also interesting is that the “middle income” cap that currently exists for retrofitting insulation, currently set at $100K for a two income couple, $140K for three or more, has now been dropped down to $70K for a two income couple or $90K for three or more.

     Effectively, those couples earning over 70K combined won’t be eligible for the retrofit scheme.
     • Bill 5.2.1

       29 May 2009 at 10:06 am

       So if your take is correct Jasper, we can expect a release from the Greens highlighting the ‘scam’ elements of the insulation scheme?

       No.

       Because they are locked into joint press releases on the issue thanks to that MoU they signed.
6. the ghost of Aunt Daisy 6

   29 May 2009 at 6:38 am

   whats wrong poppets?
   run out of jam? well!

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS