Joe Hockey: comedian
The Budget was released yesterday with the Government coming up with a slim $1.5bn surplus.
With the media being the way they are, of course there was no acknowledgment of the Government keeping its promise of a surplus.
Instead the talking head coverage was on two basic themes:
1. This budget is a bribe to get votes back for the Government. Of course this has NEVER EVER HAPPENED BEFORE IN THE HISTORY OF POLITICS.
2. This was an “election” budget, contrary to all logic that the election is next year and another budget will be handed down before that…despite the media wishing and praying for an election before then.
Then the cherry on top of the crapulence that is our media coverage was a rare gem from Joe Hockey.
Joe got up in front of the cameras and with a completely straight face said that this Government’s hand outs to the less well off was purely bribery and they weren’t going to stand for that, so they would be voting against it.
Seriously!!
Now as anyone older than 5 knows, the Howard government that Joe was a member of made an art form of the voter handout, and in fact got so good at it that they would throw us a $5 tax cut and expect us to worhsip the gournd they walked on for the privilege.
It’s hard to believe that anyone in politics could be THAT stupid (I know I know, Barnaby Joyce yada yada), but I think it’s more than that.
Either Joe is has such a breathtaking lack of self-awareness that he feels free to spout such unfounded dribble at the drop of a hat, or in fact he is a master at ironic comedy.
I see him as the next Elliott Goblet or Stephen Wright with that particular brand of observational humour with the ironic twist.
After all, as the Shadow Treasurer he couldn’t really be stupid enough to talk that much shit could he?
Leave a reply to reb Cancel reply
RSS Feeds
Recent Posts
Archives
- June 2013 (2)
- January 2013 (1)
- November 2012 (1)
- August 2012 (2)
- July 2012 (2)
- June 2012 (2)
- May 2012 (2)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (3)
- February 2012 (4)
- January 2012 (1)
- December 2011 (2)
- November 2011 (3)
- October 2011 (3)
- September 2011 (2)
- August 2011 (2)
- July 2011 (5)
- May 2011 (2)
- April 2011 (2)
- March 2011 (3)
- February 2011 (7)
- January 2011 (4)
- December 2010 (4)
- November 2010 (3)
- October 2010 (5)
- September 2010 (7)
- August 2010 (9)
- July 2010 (11)
- June 2010 (16)
- May 2010 (16)
Blogroll
Visitor Locations
Tags
arse-clowns asylum seekers backyard blogging bogans Budget cricket demotivational Election 2010 fear mongering flagsturbation Government jumping the shark leadership spill links lying shitbags mainstream media motivational NBN Opposition politics queensland election queensland floods recap satire scum slog-fest State of Origin suckholes talentless wannabes the stupid it burns thinking whining wingnuts worldviewBlog Stats
- 38,189 hits
Spray of the Day 
“With the media being the way they are, of course there was no acknowledgment of the Government keeping its promise of a surplus.”
That is because we will not know until September 2013. The surplus is supposed to be for the year ending June 30, 2013. The results are released in September 2013. Based on passed predictions it aint gonna happen.
Only 12 months ago Swan said this years deficit would be $23B. He now says it will be $44B. We will find out the answer in September.
So how is this different from any previous Budget then Neil? I remember them being full of praise for the Costello budgets…why the difference now?
Things have changed over the past 12 months Neil, hence the differences. As you said nothing can be guaranteed when outside forces have such a big impact…it’s Treasury’s best guess scenario.
It’s still a mighty effort to aim for that surplus so quickly.
I think Neil is the comedian.
True it is a “mighty effort,” borne out of political necessity rather than fiscal logic.
And if they said they would run a deficit do you really think the Lame Stream Media or Noalition would accept that? It is truly damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
I’d like to know why Joe isn’t delivering the budget reply…
As Shadow Treasurer, shouldn’t that responsibility fall upon his shoulders…?
Or could it be that Abbott doesn’t want him anymore near a microphone after his abysmal performances at the National Press Club?
It’s always the LOTO reb…
2011 = Abbott
2010 = Abbott
2009 = Turnbull
2008 = Nelson
2007 = Rudd
2006 = Beazley
2005 = Beazley
2004 = Latham
2003 = Crean
You get the idea…
Oh ok, thanks Bacchus…
How disappointing, Joe would be far more hilarious….
Although if Abbott works himself up into a hysterical fit of rage (which he is prone to do when allowed to talk for any lengthy period of time without interruption) that could well be entertaining too.
Well we could hope for the “pass the parcel” trick from last year – you get three for the price of one and still no information 🙂
Yes,who could forget that… ! 🙂
I’m looking forward to a big huff and puff. A number of the Opposition could handle that. Abbott, Hockey, Pyne, reb, Barnaby.
What happened to my strike through? Reb was meant to have a strike. 😦
suuuure….. 😉
“Now as anyone older than 5 knows, the Howard government that Joe was a member of made an art form of the voter handout”
One big difference is that Costello was running surplus budgets and could afford to hand some tax money back.
Swan has gone to China and borrowed money and then is handing this borrowed money out. Anybody can do that.
He has also brought forward the spending to this year so it will not appear in next years budget.
Swan is very deceitful.
Perhaps an alternate view of debt and deficits may help you Neil?
http://hir.harvard.edu/debt-deficits-and-modern-monetary-theory
“One big difference is that Costello was running surplus budgets and could afford to hand some tax money back.”
Better still, Neil, he could have afforded to spend the money on a few important things. You know, like infrastructure, roads. 🙄
+1 Migs
“Better still, Neil, he could have afforded to spend the money on a few important things. You know, like infrastructure, roads.”
I think you will find they did and still ran a $20B surplus. Do you have any figures for what Howard spent on roads compared to what the Federal govt is now spending??
WE know Labor has spent more on school assembly halls, but that is with money borrowed from China.
What money are we borrowing from China? I’m afraid that one went over my head.
We borrowed money to spend on school assembly halls. It almost certainly was lent to us from China. I think they are buying lots of our govt bonds. This is where Labor gets the money to fund its govt deficits from.
i think the point I was trying to make re:China was that anyone can fund things better when you borrow money we don’t have rather than funding things by spending within our means.
But is Labor spending more on roads than Howard did??
“almost certainly” huh?
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/worry-over-china-bankroll/story-e6freooo-1225698713739
“CHINA is secretly helping to bankroll Kevin Rudd’s economic rescue plan as concerns grow over the its relationship with the Labor Government.
The Courier-Mail can confirm that China is a significant investor in Australian government bonds – used by Canberra to fund billions of dollars in emergency spending.”
Oh looky looky – the “journalist” in that article is none other than Steve “Utgate Slippergate” Lewis 😯 Then we have:
“The Courier-Mail can confirm that China is a significant investor in Australian government bonds …”
followed up with:
“Market insiders believe China is buying 15 to 20 per cent of the $2 billion in Treasury securities being issued every week.
This would make China the single biggest lender to Australia, although details of who owns the bonds are cloaked in secrecy.”
oops – what happened to “The Courier-Mail can confirm” 😳
What more proof do we need? If Neil is ‘almost certain’ then I reckon that’s fairly solid evidence. 😉
Well if not from China our debt is being financed from overseas.
http://afr.com/p/opinion/blame_it_on_the_bonds_F1sQViIeTXvcGS8zo6kb8J
“a big increase in holdings in Australia’s bond and foreign exchange markets by overseas investors, specifically official investors such as central banks and sovereign wealth funds in Asia, the Middle East, Europe and Latin America.
They are by far the biggest holders of Australian government bonds, with an 85 per cent share of the $220 billion stock of commonwealth government bonds.”
What spending? How much does a flagpole cost? And can you hold an assembly in it?
Does anyone have any data if Labor is spending anymore on roads and rail than Howard??
You would hink they would be since they are running a $44B budget deficit. Would be nice to think they are spending the borrowed money on something useful.
Neil, is it China or not?
You really are making things up, aren’t you?
You can tell an ALP supporter. he tries to smear his opponent. Does it really matter it is China or not?? The main point from my link is that 85% of our debt is funded from overseas.
By the way do you have any evidence that Labor is spending more on road and rail than Howard was ??
Do you have any evidence that they’re not Neil? – you want to know – you do the research 🙄
If you are talking about road spending it was Miglo who made this statement
“Better still, Neil, he could have afforded to spend the money on a few important things. You know, like infrastructure, roads”
So the implication is that Howard did not spend much on roads. I just want to know if it is true. I do know that Howard spent more than Labor party supporters say.
http://www.budget.gov.au/2005-06/ministerial/html/dotars-19.htm
Oh FFS Neil, go and do your homework.
Like talking to a block of wood, isn’t it Migs? 😉
Once again with feeling: 😆
Neil – you want to know – you do the research!
Bacchus
It was Miglo who implied that Howard did not spend enough on Infrastructure/Roads.
I assume he must have some knowledge about what Labor is now spending to make such a statement. So I asked him to provide some information.
The other thing Bacchus is that I do not need to do the research. I always take the view that ALP supporters are twisting the truth unless proven otherwise.
I was told for years that Howard spent nothing on infrastructure. I now know that is not true.
“Do not need to do research”.
Neil you have just highlighted the problem so many people have with your commenting…facts are irrelevant to you. No matter how correct someone’s statement may be you will disregard it because you don’t do your own research and you “believe” things differently.
Congratulations, you are Abbott’s target demographic.
Well said, Massive. 🙂
No facts are not irrevelant.
From experience I have found when I have time things that ALP supporters are wrong. I was told many times that Howard did not spend on infrastructure. Well have a look at this link
http://www.budget.gov.au/2005-06/ministerial/html/dotars-19.htm
Did Howard spend nothing on infrastructure??? Is Labor now spending more than Howard did?? I would suspect that Labor is doing no better than Howard and maybe worse on road and rail. I will admit Labor is spending more on school assembly halls.
Very good Neil – now can you find what Labor budgets allocated in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 & this year? Then you’ll have your answer 🙂
There you go, Neil. Mr Bacchus has given you your homework off you run like a good boy.
You’ll be tested tomorrow.
Neil, your gravatar, did you draw that at school?