The good and the bad of the budget

I don't believe we need any new taxes. But if Hockey really thinks he must break one election promise about no new taxes in order to fulfil another promise to (eventually) return the budget to surplus, he might as well come clean and say so.

However, Hockey's speech and his post budget comments just jumped around this issue. It made him look like he had something to hide.

And of course, he does. The vast majority of the revenue raising measures are going towards new spending programs. They aren't paying down debt at all. And that is the real reason Hockey couldn't lump home tax increases to Labor's wasteful spending.

The problem with Australia's budget is not revenue. It's expenditure. All sorts of stupid ideas are receiving government funds. For instance, Hockey is still going to pump $2.55 billion into a program to tackle 'climate change'.

And then there's the paid parental leave scheme. We don't have any idea how much that will cost yet because Joe Hockey has only factored in payments for the current and much less wasteful Labor scheme. But it's still wasteful and treats women like slaves.

It's also going to hit hip-pockets to the tune of $1.9 billion.

And it still locks out stay-at-home mums.

Then there's childcare. This will cost a whopping $28.5 billion over the next four years. What a waste of money. Again, stay-at-home mums miss out, even though they are doing the best thing for the child. That also means they are also doing the best thing for the nation.

Mums and bubs are viewed as cogs that are out of place if they are not slaving away for the 'economy' by both sides of politics. But they are not cogs. They are not slaves. They are people.

Joe Hockey says that women have the choice to stay at home. But many feel that they have no choice at all but to join the childcare conga-line and work.

Real reform in this area would be to introduce income-splitting for families while reducing government payments and tax churn. That would increase choice, provide incentives to work as a family, reward those families that stay together and reduce the size of government. It's also the best long-term way of addressing the problem of Australia's ageing population. It's win, win, win, win and win.

I will add another point here that will seem controversial but should be considered. I am not philosophically opposed to Medicare co-payments. Broken promise aside, I think this idea is a good one because services that are free are not valued.