|
Not that I support the ALP policy, but I'm confused by your comments. Somebody saves a dollar and the government matches it - so there is 2 dollars saved. In the altnerative scenario the individual would have saved less than a dollar (say 50 cents) and the government matching funds would have previously been in the hands of a consumer who may also have saved some of it (say 50 cents). So the alternative scenario has savings on 1 dollar - which means that the scheme would increase savings. My primary objection to the policy is that I think it silly to pursue a specific national saving level when nobody knows (and never can know) what that target should be.
| 
