Treasurer Jim Chalmers used his Budget speech to declare this is his 'most responsible' budget. With more than $140 billion of debt accruing across the forward estimates, you have to wonder how irresponsible his previous four budgets must have been for it to sit further down his list of what's responsible.

Context is everything. When government spending dramatically ballooned during the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021, by 13.4 and 17.1 per cent respectively, as a nation we tolerated the massive debt build-up, because it was all about saving jobs and businesses.

$478 billion in overall government spending blew out to $654 billion in just two years. It was reined in over the following two years, but not by anywhere near as much as it had increased by, after which it has continued to rise and rise ever since.

Chalmers' budget is now forecasting spending of $829 billion in the coming financial year. For context, that's double what it was a decade ago. While inflation plays its part in the rise and rise of government spending, the fact we are running deficits right across the forward estimates tells us that as a nation we are continuing to live beyond our means. 

Or more accurately, the government continues to spend more than it raises in taxation revenue.

What a fiscal mess. But in fairness to Chalmers, he's only adding to the mess. 

Previous treasurers since Peter Costello left office in 2007 have all done the same. It's extraordinary to think that we had no debt back then when you look at where we are today.

Forecasts that reveal wall-to-wall deficits in the years to come will contribute to gross debt passing the one trillion dollar mark next financial year before surging towards $1.25 trillion by the end of the decade. 

That figure is higher than what the accumulated deficits will add to debt during that time because the surge in spending by this government includes loads of 'off budget' spending.

So Chalmers' self-described most responsible budget of the five he has now delivered is riddled with debt, has too much recurrent expenditure, and breaks a bunch of election promises made just 12 months ago.

The key reforms include changes to negative gearing and capital gains taxes, which the Prime Minister specifically ruled out during the last election campaign.

But Chalmers is framing the backflip (or, less charitably, lie) as precisely why this is his most responsible budget. Because first home buyers need the change and it's all about improving equity, broken promise or not.

I have to say, I admire that. It is politically risky and it aligns with his worldview.

Chalmers might be kidding himself to call this budget responsible, because carrying forward so much debt with not enough curbing of spending, is anything but. That said, the reforms are bold and finally give Australians evidence that our political leaders want to do more than just last as long as they can in their jobs.

But it is still an inflationary budget at a time when inflation is on the rise, as are interest rates.

Ending the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount will apply to both property investments as well as share investments. It is being replaced with a pegged-to-inflation tax concession that can't elevate above 30 per cent. We knew this leading up to budget night, but that doesn't change the significance of the change.

Trusts are also in the firing line in this budget. Chalmers hopes that a minimum 30 per cent tax on trust distributions will raise some serious revenue for the government, and it's hard to see mainstream Australians having a problem with that because so few of them would benefit from such concessions.

We already knew about the NDIS changes contained within the budget, which are all about paring back the cost of the scheme. But it remains one of the most expensive line items in the budget anyway, and we can't be sure forecast savings become real savings just yet.

The Treasurer's speech did what treasurers' speeches always do – spinning the good news and downplaying the bad. 

Remember when Wayne Swan refused to say the deficit number? Chalmers was his chief of staff at the time. 

We'll never know whose misplaced idea that was, but Jim wasn't going to try and hide the number this evening. While he mentioned the $31.5 billion figure for next financial year, he didn't feel the need to get into the accumulated deficits forecast across the forward estimates.

Equally, he noted that this financial year gross debt is $982 billion, deliberately neglecting to mention that it hits the trillion dollar mark next year and keeps rising right across the four years of forward estimates. 

Instead Chalmers noted that 'it peaks lower, peaks earlier and is lower in every year for the next 11 years'.

You could hear that and be mistaken for thinking that debt is going to start coming down within that time frame, but it's not. The Treasurer is using post-pandemic estimates that were clearly wrong and assumed the worst.

But accountancy tricks on budget night are nothing new.

And you'd have to believe in Santa Claus to believe the line in his speech that 'real spending growth averages just 1.5 per cent for the eight years to June 2030'. 

I mean, that is what the Budget claims is going to happen, but based on what's happened in the past, it's extremely unlikely. 

Which Chalmers accidentally also belled the cat on, when he also said: 'This is the lowest average growth rate in any eight-year period for almost three and a half decades.'

It is almost like the Treasurer doesn't realise he hasn't achieved that level of spending restraint yet. It's only a forecast, and guess who has the final say on what that forecast is? The Treasurer.

Labor wants this budget to be seen to address housing shortages as well as intergenerational disadvantage. 

It is certainly arguable that some of the reforms are a chance to do that, but perhaps not when you dig a little deeper and see that by the end of the decade immigration forecasts include almost 800,000 new Australians. 

All of whom will look for housing, pushing up prices and rents. And guess what? Previous immigration forecasts have long underestimated the actual arrivals.