After the 2008 financial crisis The Rudd Government passed two stimulus packages in an effort to revive the Australian economy. The packages were worth more than a combined $50 billion. Mr. Rudd argued that they helped sustain the economy by boosting retail sales and saving tens of thousands of jobs.
86% Yes |
14% No |
70% Yes |
11% No |
5% Yes, but in the form of increased spending on infrastructure |
2% No, recession is a natural cycle that purges excess |
5% Yes, but in the form of tax breaks for all citizens |
0% No, and the government should drastically reduce spending during recessions |
3% Yes, but in the form of assisting sectors most heavily hit by the recession |
|
2% Yes, the government should intervene to boost a recovery |
|
1% Yes, but in the form of tax breaks for low income citizens |
|
0% Yes, and collectivize all industry |
See how support for each position on “Economic Stimulus” has changed over time for 38.6k Australia voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
See how importance of “Economic Stimulus” has changed over time for 38.6k Australia voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Australia users whose views extended beyond the provided choices.
@9DNJPSJ8mos8MO
Personally I think Government should assist at times to help business`s but I have no faith in them at all to actually do what is required or would work
@9C5TRZG11mos11MO
Yes for people on low income
@9BJ8MH712mos12MO
Depends on why the recession occurred and how large
@98LDNWJ1yr1Y
Stop most spending in general regardless but cut all spending ALL spending during a recession/depression
@97ZF7LJ1yr1Y
Yes, but get the high income earners to have a specific tax that requires a portion of their funds to be donated to community services and education
@HippopiJ2yrs2Y
Yes, but stimulus should go straight to those in lower socioeconomic groups.
Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Economic Stimulus” news articles, updated frequently.
@ISIDEWITH2mos2MO
The first China shock came after a series of liberalizing reforms in China in the 1990s and its accession to the World Trade Organization in 2001. For U.S. consumers, this brought considerable benefits. One 2019 paper found that consumer prices in the U.S. for goods fell 2% for every extra percentage point of market share grabbed by Chinese imports, with the biggest benefits felt by people on low and middle incomes. But the China shock also piled pressure on domestic manufacturers. In 2016, Autor and other economists estimated that the U.S. lost more than two million jobs between 1999 and 2011 as a result of Chinese imports, as makers of furniture, toys and clothes buckled under the competition and workers in hollowed-out communities struggled to find new roles. A sequel of sorts appears to be under way. China’s economy expanded 5.2% last year, a subdued rate by its standards, and is expected to slow further as a drawn-out real-estate crunch crushes investment and consumers rein in spending. Capital Economics, a consulting firm, thinks annual growth will slow to around 2% by 2030. Beijing is seeking to engineer an economic turnaround by plowing money into factories, especially for semiconductors, aerospace, cars and renewable-energy equipment, and selling the resulting surplus abroad. Protectionism might shift some of the deflationary impact to other parts of the world, as Chinese exporters look for new markets in poorer countries. Those economies could see their own fledgling industries shrivel in the teeth of Chinese competition, much as the U.S. did in an earlier era.
@lemans34272mos2MO
Recent global events have sparked fears of a commercial real estate crisis in Europe, mirroring situations in Japan and the US. Notably, Deutsche Pfandbriefbank AG faces significant downturns due to the real estate market's weakness.The past week has witnessed significant downturns in the stock values of several banks worldwide, particularly those with substantial exposure to commercial property loans. Mirroring unsettling developments in Japan and the United States, Europe is now facing the prospect of an emerging commercial real estate crisis. Some senior officials at the European Central Bank say Germany will inevitably be a special focus as they examine CRE risks at banks across the region.“There is more pain to come in real estate valuations, so what does that mean for lenders and does that mean there is the potential for a crisis?”German banks have the most commercial real estate loans in the European Union, along with their French peers, but they have classified a relatively small portion of those loans as non-performing. Recently, however, that share has been rising while it declined in several other countries.“This is definitely not just a US problem,” said Valeriya Dinger, a professor of economics at Germany’s University of Osnabrueck. “I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a wave of loan loss provisions for German banks on their domestic commercial real estate exposure,” she said, even if there’s no systemic risk.German property values are particularly vulnerable to higher borrowing costs because capitalization rates — or the potential return on a real estate investment — were pushed lower there than in other markets during the cheap money era. That reflected in part the fact that yields on German government bonds, a benchmark for investors, were negative at the time.
Explore other topics that are important to Australia voters.
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Countries that have mandatory retirements for politicians include Argentina (age 75), Brazil (75 for judges and prosecutors), Mexico (70 for judges and prosecutors) and Singapore (75 for members of parliament.)
@ISIDEWITH6mos6MO
Proponents argue that this strategy would bolster national security by minimizing the risk of potential terrorists entering the country. Enhanced screening processes, once implemented, would provide a more thorough assessment of applicants, reducing the likelihood of malicious actors gaining entry.…
