5 hours ago, Kent said:

So in April 2006 we had zero federal debt

on the 20th anniversary federal debt has ballooned to 1 trillion dollars

That is $1000 Billion for the people who dont figure

Sure no problems at all

We were left a $1tril debt after Covid in 2022.

4 hours ago, Bowserpower said:

Quotes like Bullock's are correct but often used out of context. The government can't run out of money like a business can but it doesnt mean debt is meaningless. Inflation, exchange rates and financial stability still impose limits so its not like the debt doesnt matter.

Yes, inflation imposes limit. It is the limit! Not government debt. And in case you hadn't noticed, Australia and most of the world have been operating in a floating exchange rate environment for almost 50 years.

Again, multiple central banks have done papers on exchange rate pass through being small to non existent, mostly because most import items are actually priced for the domestic market they're sold into.

As it stands, we have next to no financial stability because nuffies like Chalmers and the RBA refuse to use fiscal policy to reduce inflation and they use NAIRU, a mythical, imagined number to manufacture enough unemployment to hopefully reduce inflation. That is not price stability. That is hitting and hoping, and crushing working people in the process.

They could do what Japan has done for the last 5-6 years and provide oil importers the excess import margin in exchange for price caps. An anti inflationary fiscal expansion. I won't hold my breath that Chammers and co will use any sort of fiscal policy to reduce inflation.

Instead, what we've seen since 2022 is inflation driven in part by interest rate rises, which feed through the rental component of the CPI.

And back to your original thesis, no, government does not matter. It only matters politically, while we let it.

4 hours ago, Bowserpower said:

Well no, government debt is a financial asset for whoever holds the bonds but that doesnt make it private savings. In fact a large share is held by institutions and foreign investors.

Because foreigners have the choice between non interest bearing AUDs they accumulate in trade with us or interest bearing AUDs in the form of debt. Which one would you take?

And again, Australia hasn't issued foreign denominated debt since 2004. So all its liabilities are in AUD, and Treasury is the only source of the AUD currency.

Banks are allowed to create credit in AUD (the vast majority of the money supply), because they have exchange settlement accounts with the RBA in order to do business in this country. They use the reserves/AUDs in those accounts to carry out daily interbank transactions to ensure the functioning of the private banking system.

But given you've mentioned exchange rates as a limit, it's pretty clear your thinking is still fixed in the Bretton Woods era, like most mainstream economists.

Edited yesterday at 04:571 day by Adam The God

5 hours ago, Redleg said:

With Tennis Australia, the Pies and the Tigers all wanting us off Goschs, I would imagine that body I don't trust one bit, the AFL, would be keen to see us somewhere else in the short term.

If that is the case, for us to release our leverage as the current tenant, we would have to know that our long term base is happening.

To leave without long term security would be impossible to sell to the club members.

The AwFuL are a corruption of administrative delegation. They weren't always but have been for a long time.

When old Ralphy Lane ceased influence it all went pear shaped.

It's a club....just not one we're in 😞

I will be in the MRC Committee room for lunch on saturday and will ask the Vice Chairman who I know and/or a few other Committee persons what the state of play is.

3 hours ago, Fritta and Turner said:

No, the trust exists to manage the racecourse reserve which is crownland. I think the MRC pays $300k pa which wouldnt leave much change after the gate man, dunny and bbq cleaner are paid. And keep the dog poop bags stocked, which from where I have stepped dont get much use.

That's correct F&T - the CRRT is already on board and has in fact extended their MOU with the MFC until June/July 2026 to allow the government, i.e. the Premier, to knock the final heads together (i.e. the Sports Minister and the Racing Minister) and get the MRC to play ball - particularly re the tunnel access. The CRRT prefers us to be there because they will get more lease rental income to maintain their own operations and, more importantly, they will finally develop something meaningful inside the racecourse (i.e. two quality sporting ovals) which fits in with their master plan - which was the scope of the feasibility study completed some time ago. The MRC has, selfishly, never wanted anyone else in the precinct, except for the time when the school came along and represented an opportunity to wipe out their massive debts.

10 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Thanks for the update - I'm so confused about this when it seems like the MRC are no longer keen?

From the infamous 'Betsy' article that recently came out, I'm wondering if the MRC were expecting more benefits of the deal. The comment around the tunnel is one thing - that really could be mitigated if need be however the unwillingness to share the administration facility is interesting.

Maybe they thought they were getting some new free gym area/office space/canteen/commercial kitchen bar usage via the Demons new HQ but we've told them that will 100% be ours.

"There are many issues that threaten to scupper the deal – the main being the football club’s insistence a tunnel is built underneath the racetrack [which would shut racing down for at least a year], not to mention an unwillingness to share an administration facility."

Nothing worse than an additional rooster in the hen house. If this is the case, I hope we hold firm.

49 minutes ago, Deeko2 said:

From the infamous 'Betsy' article that recently came out, I'm wondering if the MRC were expecting more benefits of the deal. The comment around the tunnel is one thing - that really could be mitigated if need be however the unwillingness to share the administration facility is interesting.

Maybe they thought they were getting some new free gym area/office space/canteen/commercial kitchen bar usage via the Demons new HQ but we've told them that will 100% be ours.

"There are many issues that threaten to scupper the deal – the main being the football club’s insistence a tunnel is built underneath the racetrack [which would shut racing down for at least a year], not to mention an unwillingness to share an administration facility."

Nothing worse than an additional rooster in the hen house. If this is the case, I hope we hold firm.

There is much to say about this.

There are those who's only joy is to NAG !

Tbh a lot of the horsey set are right up themselves and can go [censored] themselves sideways

Some in that 'field' are totally of themselves...

To build MFC at Caulfield is not hard...truly

There is a lot of rubbish debated here

The problem is political... not about the build.

6 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

I'm fascinated by the fact that this thread was opened on February 8 2020 with the following words ...

"I know this topic has been done to death but ... "

Indeed. After 6 years I'm thrilled that we at least managed to change the topic header.

1 hour ago, Deeko2 said:

From the infamous 'Betsy' article that recently came out, I'm wondering if the MRC were expecting more benefits of the deal. The comment around the tunnel is one thing - that really could be mitigated if need be however the unwillingness to share the administration facility is interesting.

Maybe they thought they were getting some new free gym area/office space/canteen/commercial kitchen bar usage via the Demons new HQ but we've told them that will 100% be ours.

"There are many issues that threaten to scupper the deal – the main being the football club’s insistence a tunnel is built underneath the racetrack [which would shut racing down for at least a year], not to mention an unwillingness to share an administration facility."

Nothing worse than an additional rooster in the hen house. If this is the case, I hope we hold firm.

If we have facilities (ie a 360 degree bar) that overlooks both our training ground and a part of the racetrack I have no issue with it being used on race days for events. With the provision that we get a cut of the days bar/food purchases (which I would think is fair), they can have all profits from the ticketing and any other side parts to it.

I would think they would want to remain in the main racecourse area for admin purposes.

Guerra seems confident...in the Stynes interview he talks about the move to Caulfield as though its a given.

I just listened to Jack Viney, Kate Hore and Paul Guera discussing the Jim Stynes game and Jim’s giant shadow that caste over MFC. At the end Paul was asked about Waverley and he was very firm that they are wholly focussed on Caulfield as our home base, G is our spiritual home, Casey is critical to our long term plans and where AFLW games will be played but Caulfield will be our AFL Home Base and won’t discuss any other options until that is decided.

18 hours ago, rjay said:

Guerra seems confident...in the Stynes interview he talks about the move to Caulfield as though its a given.

You just beat me to the punch rjay He sure spoke positively about Caulfield as Home base.👍💕

I remain intrigued that despite a number of media reports, supposedly confirming that we will be going to Waverley as a temporary home, spokespersons for the club; e.g. Guerra and our VC, Viney, seem steadfast in not wanting to address the Waverley proposition directly. They are very reticent. Why?

21 hours ago, Adam The God said:

Yes, inflation imposes limit. It is the limit! Not government debt. And in case you hadn't noticed, Australia and most of the world have been operating in a floating exchange rate environment for almost 50 years.

Again, multiple central banks have done papers on exchange rate pass through being small to non existent, mostly because most import items are actually priced for the domestic market they're sold into.

As it stands, we have next to no financial stability because nuffies like Chalmers and the RBA refuse to use fiscal policy to reduce inflation and they use NAIRU, a mythical, imagined number to manufacture enough unemployment to hopefully reduce inflation. That is not price stability. That is hitting and hoping, and crushing working people in the process.

They could do what Japan has done for the last 5-6 years and provide oil importers the excess import margin in exchange for price caps. An anti inflationary fiscal expansion. I won't hold my breath that Chammers and co will use any sort of fiscal policy to reduce inflation.

Instead, what we've seen since 2022 is inflation driven in part by interest rate rises, which feed through the rental component of the CPI.

And back to your original thesis, no, government does not matter. It only matters politically, while we let it.

Because foreigners have the choice between non interest bearing AUDs they accumulate in trade with us or interest bearing AUDs in the form of debt. Which one would you take?

And again, Australia hasn't issued foreign denominated debt since 2004. So all its liabilities are in AUD, and Treasury is the only source of the AUD currency.

Banks are allowed to create credit in AUD (the vast majority of the money supply), because they have exchange settlement accounts with the RBA in order to do business in this country. They use the reserves/AUDs in those accounts to carry out daily interbank transactions to ensure the functioning of the private banking system.

But given you've mentioned exchange rates as a limit, it's pretty clear your thinking is still fixed in the Bretton Woods era, like most mainstream economists.

God knows Economic Rationalism did nothing for nobody, except.....

On 13/03/2026 at 09:31, Lucifers Hero said:

This thread https://demonland.com/forums/topic/66964-exclusive-interview-with-paul-guerra-steven-king-steven-smith/#comment-2756682 makes a strong case for the whole club being in one location.

Management and the Board would have been closer to what was happening in the FD and the locker room rather than having it filtered by the coach, GMFD, CEO.

Yes, everything has worked perfectly in the recent past so why would we need to change? Oh wait ...

On 12/03/2026 at 09:44, Dannyz said:

It definitely aligns to what Guerra said on SEN when he had every opportunity to announce the Waverley move and didn't.

It appears Morris is wrong, or at least premature in his reporting. He normally got his leaks from The Brand.

I think Waverley will happen and I've been told that some players have been engaged for their insights into how we make it a home but only once Caulfield can be solidly announced which is edging closer.

On 12/03/2026 at 09:44, Dannyz said:

It definitely aligns to what Guerra said on SEN when he had every opportunity to announce the Waverley move and didn't.

It appears Morris is wrong, or at least premature in his reporting. He normally got his leaks from The Brand.

I think Waverley will happen and I've been told that some players have been engaged for their insights into how we make it a home but only once Caulfield can be solidly announced which is edging.

Wasn't "we should have smoked em" an informant for Morris as they went to school together also?

On 12/03/2026 at 09:22, Salems Lot said:

I was at a Mental Demons function last night where Steven Smith confirmed that Waverley is definitely not happening and the Caulfield option is very close to being announced.

Just sayin...

On 12/03/2026 at 15:40, picket fence said:

It is only Dizzy for the brethren who believe we are of to Caulfield. Take it to the bank we will be at Waverley sooner than later and we have a snowflakes chance in hell of EVER getting to Caulfield, PERIOD. What that will ultimately mean is that in the absence of any other viable alternative, Waverley will be our home for the forseable future. All over red rover!

You are the most broken record I've ever seen in my life enough already with saying the same thing every single post and you don't even know what's going on

On 17/03/2026 at 16:43, Deeko2 said:

From the infamous 'Betsy' article that recently came out, I'm wondering if the MRC were expecting more benefits of the deal. The comment around the tunnel is one thing - that really could be mitigated if need be however the unwillingness to share the administration facility is interesting.

Maybe they thought they were getting some new free gym area/office space/canteen/commercial kitchen bar usage via the Demons new HQ but we've told them that will 100% be ours.

"There are many issues that threaten to scupper the deal – the main being the football club’s insistence a tunnel is built underneath the racetrack [which would shut racing down for at least a year], not to mention an unwillingness to share an administration facility."

Nothing worse than an additional rooster in the hen house. If this is the case, I hope we hold firm.

100%, that's what I took out of that article too. They don't see anything in it for them so why would they support it?

Edited 40 minutes ago40 min by Dr. Gonzo