Macquarie Network ::: 2GB | 2CH | LIVENEWS | STREET CORNER | RUGBYLEAGUELIVE | WHAT CAREER | AMAZING AUSTRALIANS :::
Friday, 21 November 2008

PM's spend to mend gains wide support, but small business misses out

15/10/2008 7:09:00 AM.  | Joel Labi & AAP
Business leaders have thrown their support behind the Rudd government's $10.4 billion boost for the economy, but are calling for more help for small business.

Pensioners, low income earners and first home buyers were all big winners in yesterday's pre Christmas spending spree by the Prime Minister.

Greg Evans from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry says employers seemed to miss out.

“We think at some stage we’ll need to address other issues, more longer term issues such as taxation relief to help small business, to ensure that they’re not adversely effected by the economic downturn as well.”

The PM addressed the nation last night, warning we're going through the worst financial crisis in our lifetime.

Kevin Rudd has suggested the government might loosen the budget purse strings further, as the government's determined to take whatever action's necessary to maintain stability of the Australian financial system.

In his first televised address to the nation as prime minister, he's moved to reassure Australians while also acknowledging many are anxious about the future.

Commonwealth Securities chief economist Craig James says it's not yet known what impact the package will have on economic growth and inflation.

Mr James says he expects the Reserve Bank still has room to cut the cash rate, currently at six per cent, to five per cent by late this year or early next year.

COMMENTS

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Stuff small business.Rudd has done the right thing and given it to those who need it most( pensioners) and who are hard up.They are OLD and cant change anything because of that.Small business and Greg Evans and his Chamber of Commerce are second rated here and are sounding more like a Chamber of Selfishness if they consider they are more important.Good one Kevin 007

Posted by: Pierce B, Tennis1

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Small business can cut down staff levels,diversify,innovate etc.But what can an old pensioner do who has retired.They totaly depend on our society.I know some pensioners have prepared for retirement and good on them for being partialy independant with their own savings.This is certainly a compasionate move by Mr Rudd,but it is long overdue.The lowering of interest rates will also make it harder for these people who have worked all their lives,saved and tried to stay as independant as possible.

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Sure pensioners need to be looked after but don't lose sight of the fact that small business employs 4 million people. If large numbers of people lose their jobs and small businesses go broke it means there will be a huge drop in taxes collected-and guess what? Taxes pay pensions.

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

This PM is here to stay, what a pro he is and how refreshing to see a trustworthy man lead our great country..Those last 11 years are history and so is little jonny

Posted by: g soul, sydney

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Sole - What a fool you are. The only reason Dudd has been able to put together a response like this is because of the surplus left by Costello. Had keating just left parliment, Australia would be close to bankrupt. You are obvioulsy a little brain dead so in simple terms $96Billion debt = Bad news; $22Billion in the bank + good news. pretty simple eh? Howere simple the equations is it seems far too complex for some people.

Posted by: Pete 2, North Sydney

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Peter 2, and do not forget the $96B that the LIBERALS also put into the pension fund for public servant liabilities as well that was never done by Labor. Plus all the cash from the GST. NSW has had $90B as a Labor Government and what have these Muppets in NSW got to show for it. Rudd is only interested in his info-commercials of himself every day. So sick of it. He will never give credit to anyone.

Posted by: Andy Mac, HK

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Peter 2, and do not forget the $96B that the LIBERALS also put into the pension fund for public servant liabilities as well that was never done by Labor. Plus all the cash from the GST. NSW has had $90B as a Labor Government and what have these Muppets in NSW got to show for it. Rudd is only interested in his info-commercials of himself every day. So sick of it. He will never give credit to anyone.

Posted by: Andy Mac, HK

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

People that are single miss out, as do people who run small business. Small business is really suffering at the moment, with many pushed out of business because no one is buying. If someone were to give money to single people, that money would be spent quickly on consumeables which is what is wanted for the economy. It is a bit like giving a surplus to an ALP government.

Posted by: Happy Fun Ball, Carramar/Sydney

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Ball, Carramar. I agree. In Australia around 1 million small businesses employ around 3 million people. The stimulus forgets these. The planned IR changes will destroy many of these - pushing many onto welfare. The GFC (Global Financial Crisis) will be blamed for the increase BUT some will be due to deliberate government policy.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

from 1 oct new zealand govt increased the payments for those living in australia--- the australian govt takes the increase. just to be concise look up last new zealand budget on net, NO one misses out and note their govt can afford all the measures.

Posted by: allan aitchison, mebourne

Friday, 17 October 2008

You talkng about "those on pensions/unemployment", or all? Just curious as i think we do the same for them. being, our people over there on govt. benefits.( or we used to?)

Posted by: Nick Again, Maryborough

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

It is a stimulus to spending, the standard economic response to a recession and a fall in confidence. As such, it is the smart thing to do. And purely because it IS a stimulus to spending, small business (and for that matter large business) will see the benefits as well

Posted by: Mick S, Central Coast

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Oh this is just a great package - Give low income earners a $1000 per kiddie, give pensioers who probably have low income earning grand children $1400 - Do this at Christmas time? I can hear Jerry Harvey laughing all the way to the bank. The queue for Plasmas will be a mile long.

Posted by: Repeat Offender, Sydney

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

You just don't get it do you? This package is, quite simply, DESIGNED to stimulate spending.

Posted by: Mick S, Central Coast

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Discussion. In May Swan delivered a budget that predicted a surplus at the end of 2008/09. That surplus does not exist yet. The only surplus that exists now is the one at the end of 2007/08. And that was indisputably created by Costello/Howard. Yes, Rudd made a good decision to spend. But don't let Rudd, Swan or Gillard fool you into thinking that Rudd created it. Rudd lied in parliament yesterday. The time is right for Rudd to admit he's had some help. He'd climb in my estimation if he did.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

So you reckon your a business man eh Bolts. You'd be broke.The budget surplus is for 08/09 and the Rudd package is simply funded out of current revenue like any other business that has strong cashflow.Your mindless ignorant attempts to twist the truth is disgraceful.Like I said yesterday if Swan spent $25BN extra in the budget would it be Costello's deficit.You have no credibility as usual Its Swan/Rudds surplus for 08/09 and the world know it.

Posted by: Lance Freestone,

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Freestone, fortunately you are not running the country. You are a fool. Rudd's surplus will be created DURING THIS YEAR. It hasn't been created yet. It will only exist if revenues and expenditure are as budgeted. They won't be. You are a moron.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Only the blind left don't realise the facts that the surplus was created by Howard/Costello - even Gillard skimmed over it briefly just that as being made possible by the previous govt in yesterday's interview on radio - it is a shame and also a great pity that the left still have to be convinced of the facts!The decision to give it back to the community (the pensioners particularly) was a good move by Rudd - it's about time he realised that these people need it (long overdue and still not enough ) they earnt it by paying their taxes-not many of those left anyhow they paid their dues many times over especially those who had to work off a 2 year contract to build this country (as labourers no matter what qualifications they held - it was a labour force required after WW2 the govt wanted here) to what it is today-the rest of you wanting the handout wait till you reach their age!

Posted by: RS ****, Sydney

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

This is good Bolts because you are helping me draw out your stupidity.The $10.4bn stimulus package is being funded from the 08/09 surplus so clearly the projected $22bn will be reduced.Do you really think that the surplus miraculously only appears on July 1 each financial year and is not accumulated during the year.You are such a dill.Other readers will continue to laugh at your lack of understanding even basic accounting let alone economics.Stop the ferris wheel Piers has had enough.

Posted by: Lance Freestone,

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Cashflow Freestone. Think about it. On July 1 2008 how much had Rudd accrued for the year 2008/09? (zero perhaps), plus cash in hand carried forward (Hmmmm?). On June 30 2009 Rudd should have the planned surplus as funds to carry forward. Progressively throughout the year the fund accrues as revenues (Rudds new taxes, exceed expenditure? (Hmmmm). Now, if Rudd spends BEFORE accruing WHERE DO THE FUNDS COME FROM? Oh I see, from funds previously accrued? Wally! Swan's budget is blown.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Bolts you have really lost it.If a business started on July 1 with an budget projected to be a profit(surplus) by your analagy they could not spend anything until July 1 the next yr.Of course the business would either have to have start up capital or CASHFLOW to fund that expenditure.The Govt has both.Keep going Bolts you are looking sillier and sillier as we go .About time Gazza Benson came to your aid.

Posted by: Lance Freestone,

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Freestone, I can't put it any simpler, but twice you haven't read this bit "Progressively throughout the year the fund accrues as revenues". Of course they don't wait till year end, but they cant spend it on day 1 either. Get over it. SO WHERE DID THE FUNDS COME FROM ON DAY 1....the previous year's surplus (and all the Costello surpluses before that). As opposed to the huge friggin' deficit that Costello inherited. Story ends.

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

You're nearly there Lancer!, and hows that latest boil, and look mate, yes to if you are starting up a business on July 1 or whenever, having capitaland cash flow funds ain't too bad an idea or otherwise you'll just be more in hock to someone as Plan B or Plan C is you do not open your doors - you will not have them, and in this case or every government case they run their business on carryover surplus or loans themselves to do so if they do not have the previous years budgeting surplus on hand.

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

Friday, 17 October 2008

Nev you should join Anarchy and Bolts on the accountancy reserves bench as well .Look up the phrase "positive cashflow" you imbecile.

Posted by: Lance Freestone,

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Bolts where did the Howard govt get the money to start business on day one after Keating left office.Of course it was paid out of cashflow and cash in hand left by the previous govt.You are in denial of basic acounting and everyone knows it.We are in 08/09 and you need to recognise it.You also need to tell the truth re Keating's last budget which was a surpus albeit a small one.

Posted by: Lance Freestone,

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Lance, I suggest you stick to taunting and name calling, for which your acerbic wit serves you well. Stay away from economics and finance as your posts clearly shows you have as little understanding as Swan does.

Posted by: A Narchy, The Hills

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Freestone (my last word on this subject). Howard got the funds from borrowings, the previous government was in debt up to its eyeballs. YOU are in denial. NOW DO YOU UNDERSTAND Finance 101?

Posted by: Geoff Bolton, Lane Cove

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Keating left cash in hand ?????????????? He had us drowning in debt !!! All this from the one who loves to try and ridicule me. Stick to insulting people Lance, that is your more in line with your expertise.

Posted by: susan lawe, gippsland

 

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

Lets give Rudd the benefit of the doubt - its HIS money that he is spending. So the 0809 surplus he predicted was $21.7b (based on 1.8% GDP). So by Christmas he will have earn't $10.85b from which to make his payments from, theses total $10.4b. This leaves a balance of .45b (450mil) which is only $21.43 for each of the 21mil approx people. This is of course assuming that the books are on target & given recent volitility worldwide, I somehow doubt it! This would mean he is using 0708 surplus.

Posted by: Concerned Liberal, Minto

Wednesday, 15 October 2008

CL, I will hold any vitriole against you because you are moderate but you are also wrong.The simple facts is not all budgetted expenditure is spent from day one of the financial yr.Accordingly not all spending occurrs before DEC or in fact some doesnt even occur before 30 jun. Generally all govt expenditure is done from cashflow and that is fact.Read the small business example I posted earlierand you will understand.