Re: OT: Australia
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Nov 03, 2012
- 1713 views
Sadly, many don't figure out that the periods of "greed" create more prosperity than the times of "compassion."
Disagree. When Clinton ended his last term as President, we had a balanced budget (actually a small surplus). When Bush ended his last term as President, we had the largest budget deficit in US history at the time.
I don't see what you're disagreeing about. The balanced budget had a lot to do with the draw down of defense after the Cold War, plus the dot-com bubble which popped right around the end of Clinton's term.
Point taken. All these things were factors largely outside the control of the government.
a relatively slow expansion of government in the US (we managed to avoid HillaryCare back then, and then we got a Republican Congress to oppose a centrist Democratic president, reduced welfare, cut capital gains taxes),
Point taken.
The stuff that happened then is pretty much the opposite of what those who argue for "compassionate" government. In fact, Bush got elected calling himself a "compassionate conservative."
Oddly enough, I don't recall Bush increasing welfare spending or raising capital gains taxes.
Not to mention the way income inequality has grown: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/09/1107890/-10-things-the-GOP-doesn-t-want-you-to-know-about-taxes#four
Those sorts of analysis ignore things like income mobility (I know that my income is very different than it was a few years ago). Income inequality statistics are really easy to make up all sorts of just-so stories. Mostly, it's just envy-politics when applied to economies like the US'.
Not all of them ignore it:
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/ir_22.htm
But, on lies, darned lies, and statistics: Point taken.
You're not completely independent, of course.
I disagree. Australia is an independent, soverign country that is formally controlled by a monarchy (atm, the Queen of Australia) and in practice handled by the Govenor-General in conjunction with the executive branch headed by the Prime Minister. Australia also has a completely independent Parliament and its own High Court which serves as a court of final appeals/supreme court.
Yes, like I said, not completely independent. Sure, for all practical purposes, the monarch is just a figure head.
Yes, like I said, completely independent.
Possibly. The British might have, given how much more expensive it would have been to fight a war in Australia vs North America.
Agreed.
At the very least, the Australians are doing something right during the Great Recession: http://theconversation.edu.au/the-benign-effects-of-the-great-recession-8163
Their economy appears to be a lot healtier than America's. Not to mention their healthcare: http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/25/whats-health-care-like-in-aust/
