Friday, July 20, 2007

The Truth About Economic Management

Peter Costello
Originally uploaded by Sydney Weasel
Mr Costello and Mr Howard are not at odds with each other, much as their enemies would like them to be. Nor is the current round of reports correct in historical assessment, which would be disappointing for their enemies.

The truth about the Australian economy circa 1983 is that Howard critic, then PM Malcolm Fraser attempted center left policy in order to keep government from the ALP. Fraser's policy was less of a failure than Whitlam's far left excess had been, probably because Howard applied some good judgement .. which Fraser criticises to this day.

Former Liberal leader Hewson also gets to throw mud. A party with him and Fraser might not be fun, but would be dirty.

Meanwhile, ALP get to apply their old accuse the leadership of division trick. It certainly seems to apply to the ALP.


Anonymous said...

Good times 'not due to Costello management'
THE good economic times that Treasurer Peter Costello has enjoyed do not have a lot to do with his own economic management, a former liberal leader said.

Mr Costello has publicly criticised Prime Minister John Howard's economic credentials in a new biography on Mr Howard.

But former liberal leader and economic adviser to Mr Howard, Dr John Hewson, said Mr Costello should not be so quick to judge.

"Costello's had very, very good economic circumstances for most of the time, not a lot to do of his own making," Dr Hewson told ABC radio.

Extracts from the book by Wayne Errington and Peter Van Onselen, published in Fairfax newspapers yesterday expose the tensions between the two men, just months before the election.

Dr Hewson said the comments were made in frustration when Mr Costello aborted a possible leadership battle with the prime minister last year.

"If you look at the timing of these interviews obviously he (Costello) was pretty pissed off by the fact that his aborted attempt at the leadership was just that.

"He was probably pretty... annoyed but very silly to actually put it on the record."

Dr Hewson said the comments demonstrate the treasurer is working in his own self interest.

"I'm sure a lot of people on the back and front bench are going: Christ what's he on about? What is it that Costello's doing? We're already having a hard time, we're not beaten, we can still win. Costello just makes it that much harder."

Dr Hewson said he did not think Mr Costello necessarily would ever be prime minister.

"He's doing a good job of becoming leader of the opposition."

Anonymous said...

Tony Abbott 'no regrets' about public swearing
FEDERAL Health Minister Tony Abbott has no regrets about swearing in a television interview.

Mr Abbott was hosing down Liberal leadership speculation while admitting Treasurer Peter Costello's public criticism of Prime Minister John Howard could hurt the coalition.

"Not to put too fine a point on it - s*** happens ... we just have to cope,'' he told ABC Television last night.

Mr Abbott drew a round of laughs from reporters today after being asked if he regretted saying it.

"S*** happens,'' he said again.

Student of Economics said...

You say that there is no great animosity between Howard and Costello when it is plain for all to see, without the numerous verifications by their political colleagues, they absolutely loathe each other. You ignore the wonderful revelation that the Howard household's code of ethics includes the right to mislead people in order to achieve the outcome you desire. This is the genesis of the core and non core promise revelation by the sneaky little man. It also why Peter Costello was somewhat dismayed by the Little Liar's denial that he had promised to hand over the Prime Ministership at an agreed time, in spite of the commitment being witnessed by a well respected former Minister and ally of the Prime Minister. There is nothing really new in this book. We knew that Howard was lying about the impact of work choices and anything else where the truth may have been inconvenient. One of the few honest statements by Honest John was made shortly after he took office as PM. The Treasury produced a glowing quarterly report on the economy the Howard Government had inherited from the Labor Government and Howard actually acknowledged that the economy was in very good condition. And of course it was as a result of a decade of real reforms by Hawke, Keating, Button and others, some of which caused some real pain as is expected when major structural change is taking place. Macro economic changes have long leads and lags and Howard and Costello deserve absolutely no credit for the economic growth that took place from 1996 to 2000. Since 2000 productivity increases have steadily declined as Howard and Costello have fiddled at the controls at the economic engine that Hawke and Keating built. Further Australia's national debt level, once Howard's preferred measure of how well the economy was being managed, has ballooned under the management of these economic buffoons. Australia has cried out for major Federal Government infrastructure developments over the last ten years, and this pair of economic dimwits has sat on their hands. Twiddling with the tax system is not real economic reform. Howard and Costello are economic impostors. Read John Hewson's comment. Look up the rates of growth of productivity for the last 12 years. Read the comments of the former Governors of the Reserve Bank and see who they give credit to for Australia's good economic performance in recent years. It's not Howard and Costello.

The Weasel said...

Wow student of economics, you are good .. at using fiction to present an argument.

Before buying into the rest, one might have to accept that the 'core promise' concept was not a creation of ALP favoured propaganda. If one repeats a lie often, the younger generation won't be able to distinguish fact from fiction. Throughout the non debate over 'core and non core' promises it was only the arbitrary judgement of anti conservative speakers searching for some silver lining at the substantial conservative win at the time.

Calling Howard little, unethical and unreliable doesn't add weight to your arguments either. I gather that by arguing, and using lies as facts, you intend to convince other readers of your points. More fool you. Someone else would have to read this first :D

Economics Student said...

We now know wher the expression "weasel words" came from don't we! Do you deny Howard used the phrase "non-core Commitment or promise" to justify not honouring a pre-election promise?

I used the name Little Liar as a resonance to a Queensland Liberal Senator's reference to Howard as "a lying little rodent".

Howard's chronic dishonesty is relevant to the economic debate because he contiually lies about the state of the economy that he inherited from Labor.

You make no attempt to argue the econmic points because it is obvious you can't.

Your nom de plume is oh so appropriate.

The Weasel said...

Economics Student
In logic study one finds the description fallacy which applies to argument. The idea of argument is that one finds truths that are gathered to support a viewpoint. If it is shown that an argument supporting a viewpoint is fallacious, then the theory may not be supported.
arguments aside, you need to sidestep emotive antecedants in order to provide argument or you aren't arguing the point, so much as abusing the audience.
I happen to be of the opinion that Mr Howard is a decent, capable well intentioned person. Arguing that he is an inhuman demon requires much you haven't provided. Similarly with Costello. Have you a substantive argument?