The "$60bn blackhole" in the economy

does not actually exist. I am puzzled as to where this idea came from. Even for opposition politicians this seems rather extreme.
This  is  sixty billion dollars which does not need to be spent.
For those of you in Upover and elsewhere this was an estimate of the cost of an initiative the government has put together to try and kick start the post Covid19 economy. There were and are, as there often are, problems with the implementation of the plans and with the form filling and the details and more. 
I have some idea of how difficult it is to do these things. Ms W's father has been peripherally involved in all this as part of his own work. He has been working very long hours and tells me that his more directly involved colleagues are working the same sort of hours. 
Our Prime Minister has been on air saying that yes there was a mistake in the costings. He says it is money that does not need to be spent. Surely we should be pleased about that? 
Apparently not. "Spend it on something else then," the Leader of the Opposition is saying, "Spend it on the people who missed out the first time around."
There are several things wrong with this. While there are people who missed out some  have other income available to them and others are simply not eligible for any assistance under the law. There may be a few to whom financial assistance can be extended  but it won't be everyone - however nice that may be. Any such assistance also needs to have a time limit placed on it. Already there are calls from the Opposition and elsewhere to extend the increased income support well beyond what the government planned.  It is the sort of thing you can say when you are in Opposition or you do not need to be accountable for the way in which taxpayer money is being spent.
And then there is the other little problem, this money is being borrowed.  Governments cannot simply print money. They have to find it from somewhere. Sixty billion dollars does not simply appear in the Treasury coffers. It has to be borrowed - and paid back. A sum that size will be paid back by future generations, as will much other post bush fires and post Covid19 expenditure. 
If the government did do as being demanded then it would be accused of "fiscal irresponsibility". I think we have had enough of that. We have had the program where schools were provided with halls whether they needed them or not. We have had the "pink batts" (roof insulation) program and the "cash for clunkers" (old car buy back) program.
The state next door is planning on borrowing money from China to fund an infrastructure project. This is a very high risk strategy and a very foolish one but the present government believes it will keep them in power for years to come - simply because it will provide work and the economy will appear to be booming. At the present time most of the state's residents appear to be  unaware of the consequences of borrowing huge sums of money - or naively believe that is can be paid back fairly easily. It can't. 
Our federal government realises that money borrowed is money which has to be repaid - and repaid with interest. It is not my generation or the generation on either side of me which will pay for any borrowing. It is the generations below that.
Burdening them with unnecessary debt just so everyone can enjoy our past comfortable life style is selfish in the extreme. We all need to cut back and consider the future. There is no $60bn black hole  in the budget - but there might have been if we had needed to borrow that on top of what we will already need to borrow.