AU$ Debt Clock

How much is YOUR share of Australia’s national debt?

13 Responses to “AU$ Debt Clock”

  1. shayne wicks March 14, 2010 at 10:47 pm #

    Australia one mineing contract from bankruptice. In 2020 Australia will be in the same position as Greece is today and the IMF will all ready be on the front bench telling us how to controll our money not waste controll it,telling us to cut gov. spending,in the public sector an at the same time useing an extream eg. opening up our national parks to mining because Australia has simple lost the plot in money matters, The bigest problem in the western world is the fact we are rewarding failure an not sucess .I Could go on all night an wright a book the subject but thats all for now………….Regards SHAYNE WICKS

    Reply
  2. Bob May 20, 2011 at 10:24 am #

    Y’all have been drinking a little too much of the Liberal/National propagandist kool-aid. (Oh noes, another leftie signing onto my board. Quick, press delete!) How WOULD you have lived during the post-war Menzies era? Or the Howard-as-treasurer years?
    Investment necessitates debt. It’s how business works. If a company, even a small business, was wandering this country with debt equal to 7% of its annual turnover, the banks would be all over it begging to lend it money and its shareholders criticising it for failing to take advantage of the profitable opportunities before it. The commonwealth’s 7% of GDP is nothing. And the debt clock fails to point out that GDP per taxpayer is $106,070. I think that is more than enough to service the $7,386 debt.

    Reply
    • Andrew Baker August 16, 2011 at 7:35 pm #

      Bob, I’m not sure where you are getting your figures from but according to the ABS shows that the GDP per capita for the March Quarter 2011 is $15,407. It also shows that real net national disposable income per capita is only $11,892. If you take away that $7,386 from the real net income figure of $11,892 you have Australians living on $4,506 per annum. Keep in mind of course that these are the Australian Bureau of Statistics figures, not some Liberal Party figures, not some rubbery figures from the Labor Party or the government, but straight from the horse’s mouth.

      What you are also forgetting when you quote these figures of yours is that GDP is not “owned” by the taxpayers and nor is it “owned” by the government. If a company mines gold and earns $46 billion doing it, the government gets a portion of that in royalties, taxes of various types, but they do NOT get $46 billion. The $46 billion is part of the GDP but it is not “owned” by either the taxpayer or the government.

      Would you like to try again?

      Reply
      • Bob August 31, 2011 at 11:41 am #

        I can scarcely believe what I am reading.
        “GDP per capita for the March Quarter 2011 is $15,407″
        See, THIS is why we can’t have nice things, or let people who do not understand what they are reading near the ABS website. (Mind you, I’m sympathetic, I find the ABS website deliberately obstructionist.) We’re a one billion dollar economy; a simple division by 21 million people should have told you something was up. A simple bit of google-mathematics or searching will tell you that $15,407 is an absurdly ridiculous figure. Your colleagues here are embarassed for you. I suspect it’s a per quarter per employed figure. In which case, multiply by four, you nong!

        “If you take away that $7,386 from the real net income figure of $11,892 you have Australians living on $4,506 per annum.”
        Really? Do you understand what you just wrote? You’re taking the entire debt and somehow insisting that it has to be paid off in one single quarter. Yes. Because that’s what normal people or companies do.

        Reply
        • L B February 10, 2013 at 12:44 am #

          Bob, you are not a very nice person. If you ask me, I will tell you why.

          Reply
      • Andrew Baker August 31, 2011 at 12:38 pm #

        Bob, my darling Leftie sweetheart, if only it were as simple as you. IF I were to follow your advice and multiply that March Quarter ABS figure by 4 I would still only get $61,628, a far cry from your originally quoted $106,070. Where did the extra $44,442/capita go, into the failed BER Scheme? The failed Computers in Schools Scheme, or maybe the failed Pink Batts Scheme?

        Where you also went wrong in your Google mathematics is that short division probably doesn’t work for large economies. Again, if I were to follow your advice and divide one billion by your supposed population of Australia of 21 billion, then the GDP/capita would be a measly $47.62!

        So what is it that you are arguing Bob? Are you arguing that there is a missing $44,442/capita thanks to your government, or that the REAL GDP/capita is only $47.62, which is it? I’ll tell you what, the ABS tells us that the 2009-10 full year GDP was (and I’ll round it up for you) $1.3 billion. So, I’ll go ahead and divide that by 21 million and tell you what YOU say is the GDP/capita for the 2009-10 FY.

        Are you ready?

        $61.90 per man, woman and child, now isn’t that HUGE!? For a whole year!

        Now you tell us how we pay off JuLiar’s $7,386 per man, woman and child debt when all we earn, as a Nation, is $61.90 each?

        Remember now, this is YOUR mathematics.

        Reply
  3. Stephen May 28, 2011 at 10:21 pm #

    Bob you use the word “if”. The world is full of ifs but the government is NOT a business and it’s powers should not extend to the borrowing of money to service and expand its own existence. Small businesses create money, governments only acquire money by taking it off other productive people or entities. Investment does not always necessitate debt where good forward planning is involved. As we live in a now culture, debt helps expediency and it works this way now when there are tax incentives and with the government in control of monetary supply but in no way is this a superior system to the use of Crusoe economics.

    Reply
    • Bob August 31, 2011 at 11:50 am #

      Well, therein the whole crux of politics, isn’t it? I disagree, for I contend that the good functioning of a national economy occasionally necessitates interventionist, and thus occasionally expansionist, policies to be undertaken by government. Not lightly, mind. Government must run balanced in the long term, and with a minimal debt level only necessary to maintain infrastructural or other investment needs. If the government returns to surplus and debt-free status within a few years of the current malaise, I think they will have performed their jobs. However, I fear your appeals to Crusoe economics and debt-free investment hinder my ability to argue rationally with you.

      Reply
      • L B February 10, 2013 at 12:56 am #

        Ha ha Bob, “if the government returns to surplus”? Now 2013 and it is a giant IF.

        Reply
      • Stepehn February 10, 2013 at 11:56 am #

        Are you saying there can only be a rational conversation if we both believe/agree that government should be able to spend other peoples money at their will? That the government can chose who the winners and losers will be by who they choose to subsidise/protect for the sake of “jobs” and “working families” at the expense of not only taxpayers who have now had the choice taken away from them but also small businesses who now have an added obstacle to take on the larger businesses? How about telling the truth and telling them that the jobs are unsustainable and allow the smaller more economical businesses take over. Government of all levels are the biggest expense for business through tax, fees, levies, charges, licencing, compliance, gst, super ect. How we consider ourselves a nation that believes in free trade is beyond me when there is constantly a third party which uses force to decide the trades, prices and conditions of sale not the consumer and producer and through which medium the trade is carried out(cash so the government get their share and opposed to like value). What I believe you are saying Bob is that the government is the most important aspect here and not the individual.

        How can there be growth when there is the constant weight of debt around the necks of business? A weight mind you not put there by their mismanagement but that of government. A bit of creative destruction is what is needed to purge the dead wood or we too will become a nation of zombie businesses that only survive through government support, protection and kickbacks rather than letting innovative and dynamic companies thrive. Let the new rise from the ashes of the old.

        Reply
  4. peter July 30, 2011 at 9:21 pm #

    if the goverment keeps spending and sendind money over sea and passes the cabin tax we will be doomed . Im in the housing game its dropped by 50 to 60 percent . US goes down the drain we all do ! Happy days

    Reply
  5. Brad October 21, 2012 at 10:59 pm #

    have you noticed how the majority of countries in the world have and continue to rack up massive debts? how money continues to have influence on politics? how federal reserves dont get audited? how we’re roped into pointless wars and pointless spending? im a low income earner living within my means. i dont have any debt because i pay my debts off as quickly as possible without adding to them but that seemingly obvious way of taking control of your financial situation isn’t followed by what should be the most brilliant among us IE politicians. Then again the opinions and internet posts of average, decent citizens dont mean much do they?

    By the way its pretty funny to see people with an of understanding of finances arguing in the same way as youtube commenters. Mammalien genetics in a hyper-complex world. All us monkeys on our computers ;)

    Reply
    • robH November 5, 2012 at 7:03 pm #

      Brad, it’s all fairly simple really. Barnaby is right, Swan is an idiot. While economists are worthlessly arguing the latest budget figures, GDP and commodity prices we are working through the world’s largest debt bubble in history. See, all money is created through debt issuance. Our economy is based on constant debt expansion and the illusion of wealth. Your house price hasn’t gone up in value, the money supply has been debased so one needs more to purchase it. It’s the principal of a fiat economy. Keep things inflating and greed will stop anybody noticing that our we are trading things of real value with increasing amounts of worthless paper. How is Europe solving it’s debt problems? With the issuance of more debt. How is America solving its economic problems? By printing more than $80bn per month. Read Bernake’s latest Fed Reserve statement. He openly states that the US economy will only improve via further money expansion resulting with people FEELing more wealthy.The majority of this paper bubble has been injected into the derivatives market. Some say as much as US$700 to US$800 trillion dollars. It is the ultimate pyramid scheme. WHEN this bubble bursts…

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,130 other followers

%d bloggers like this: