Abbott and Turnbull the worst economic managers since Menzies

JulieW

JulieW

Well-Known Member
Silver Stacker
Some nuggets in this:

... historically there is little correlation between "business friendly" policies and economic performance.

Inevitably election campaigns become focused on economic management. On this score historically, the Liberal Party is usually assumed to be the better economic manager. For example, a poll earlier this month by the Essential Report had voters preferring the LNP over the ALP on the issue of who they trusted on "management of the economy" by 39% to 27%.

Such a belief is behind the Liberal party's main desire to fight the election campaign on their economic plan, the central feature of which is the company tax cut.

With this has come much commentary that the ALP is waging a war on business, and that being anti-business (or at least anti the company tax cut) means being against strong economic performance.

But a report by the Australia Institute to be released today titled "Jobs and Growth ... And a Few Hard Numbers" shows that there is little correlation between economic performance and either political party. The report, which examines the economic performance of Australia under every prime minister since Menzies, also found that the "business friendliness" of a government does not appear to have much impact either.
Click to expand...

Holt

The lack of connection between economic growth and business friendliness is highlighted by the fact that GDP per capita growth was strongest under the Holt government and yet that government had the third worst level of business investment growth, but the largest growth of public sector investment:
Click to expand...

Debt

The current government has also seen the largest expansion of private household debt, beating that observed under the Howard government.

Record low wages and income growth coupled with record increase in household debt. Not really something you'd want to boast about.

The government can't really boast about the level of government debt either. While it has grown by less than under either the Rudd or Gillard governments there is little sense of a slowdown.

Although it is tough to judge this against economic performance. Had Abbott and Turnbull sought to slow the growth of government debt faster than they have, it would likely have led to slower economic growth.

But there really is no sense however that Turnbull and Scott Morrison can claim they have brought debt under control:

As Stanford concludes, "it is clear from the comparison of the successive governments that broader, often global forces have more effect on Australian economic performance than discretionary policy".

Generally speaking if you wish to be a government that presides over strong economic growth, is pays to govern at a time when the world economy is growing strongly.
Click to expand...

GDP as a measure

GDP grew stronger during Howard's government than it had since 1960, while under Rudd it was the weakest it had been under any such government.

Under Howard, GDP grew by 3.7% on average each year, well above the 2.2% of the Rudd government, so it's not surprising most people think Howard (and thus the Liberal party) was a better economic manager.

But the times were much different.

Howard's average growth was just 0.85% better than the average 2.85% growth observed throughout the OECD. By contrast Rudd's GDP growth was 2.9% better than the OECD which saw GDP fall by 0.7% during Rudd's period in office:

In effect Howard was a very good downhill skier good at looking good while things were easy; but the Rudd (and Gillard and Keating) governments were much better at outperforming the rest of the world.


https://www.theguardian.com/busines...ull-the-worst-economic-managers-since-menzies
Click to expand...

p.s.
Australia Institute
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Australia_Institute
 
The only nuggets in that (as per OP's opening) are akin to those I avoid when walking in a dog park.
 
While I don't entirely agree with the article. It is true that Howard was just a good downhill skier. All he did was untap all the bottled up capital that Keating had restrained after deregulating the banks and floating the dollar. Keatings' early 90's "recession we had to have" was just the medicine needed to cure the hangover from the 80's. And that was caused by the choke hold Frazer had to introduce after Whitlams drunken spending. Ultimately we voters are the chumps left holding the bill.
P.S. not sure if I'm using that possessive apostrophe correctly after their names :/
 
Anyone who watched what happened to the national treasury during the Swan/Gillard/Rudd era knows that they cratered it. Abbott inherited that crater, said that we had a budget emergency and the Left derided him including people who have posted in this thread. The Leftist senate blocked him from making any budget repair.

Turnbull inherited the crated that Labor and the Greens prevented Abbott repairing. He has done nothing so I agree that he is a terrible economic manager. But worst economic manager? Who is worse - The party that destroyed treasury or the party that failed to clean up the mess?

And now we have the Labor leader promising to implement Abbott's spending cuts.

Sorry, though this article is purportedly from the Australia Institute think tank there are three things here: The Australia Institute is aligned with the Greens, the Guardian cherry picks it's sources to provide a Leftist spin in all of their reporting and this thread was created by a far leftist using an emotive title.

Anyone who doesn't recognise that the explosive decompression that put Australia into it's economic tailspin was from Gillard/Rudd/Swan is blinded by ideology. The current Liberals may be worthless but Labor is wantonly destructive.
 
Abbott and Turnbull the worst Liberal Party economic managers since Menzies
Click to expand...

Fixed.

Surely nobody could ever challenge Rudd/Gillard for most incompetent economic managers of Australia......
 
SilverPete said:
Results not typical said:
Haaaa Ha Ha Haaaaaa! The Guardian!

Should be in JOTD.
Click to expand...

Comes from the Australia Institute think tank.
Click to expand...

Richard "Dick"Denniss. Professional Socialist and full-time Wannabe Re-distributor of Other People's Wealth.
 
So any actual arguments against the data and the conclusions they reached, other than 2 legs better?
 
If you'd been paying attention for the past 5 years Jules, then you would realise everything that needs to be said about Sick Dick Dennis's data and conclusions has already been said.
 
JulieW said:
So any actual arguments against the data and the conclusions they reached, other than 2 legs better?
Click to expand...


Conclusions arrived at from received data is that you create a lot of threads with limited to no actual evidence supporting them.
 
JulieW said:
So any actual arguments against the data and the conclusions they reached, other than 2 legs better?
Click to expand...
Yeah.
I'd argue that the conclusion you reached in your thread title is in no way reflected in the data.
Not sure how you made the link you did, but it's impressively dreamy. :lol:
 
wrcmad said:
JulieW said:
So any actual arguments against the data and the conclusions they reached, other than 2 legs better?
Click to expand...
Yeah.
I'd argue that the conclusion you reached in your thread title is in no way reflected in the data.
Not sure how you made the link you did, but it's impressively dreamy. :lol:
Click to expand...
It's the title of the linked article: Abbott and Turnbull the worst economic managers since Menzies

Unfortunately, insults and knee jerk responses are somewhat typical of the quality of political and economic debate in this country, and I'm sure politicians and those who manipulate them are well aware of the power of keeping people distracted and divided. We are f*cked as a nation. No ifs, no buts, the nation is on the path to utter financial ruin and a complete loss of liberties unless people grow the f-ck up and look at how they are being played.
 
mmm....shiney! said:
If you'd been paying attention for the past 5 years Jules, then you would realise everything that needs to be said about Sick Dick Dennis's data and conclusions has already been said.
Click to expand...

Ignoring all of this data, you still can't deny that the current government has failed to deliver on their tough pre-election economic talk. They simply removed the debt ceiling, borrowed like drunken sailors and continued down the path of destroying personal liberties.
 
I can look at presented arguments on politics without bias as I dont have to vote.
I know how my life as an adult has been under several labor govts and several liberal govts.
For me whilst this country has been governed by Liberals me and mine have been better off than under Labor.
Im not say Liberals are doing/ have done a stellar job but they have continually performed less poorly than Labor when it comes to looking at my personal P&L statement.

When an argument is presented for or against either side or on any topic that doesn't add up I will question it irrespective of whom presents it.
I guess thats why Im such a favourite with lecturers at college. :rolleyes:
 
Stoic Phoenix said:
...For me whilst this country has been governed by Liberals me and mine have been better off than under Labor.
Im not say Liberals are doing/ have done a stellar job but they have continually performed less poorly than Labor when it comes to looking at my personal P&L statement.
Click to expand...
Have you seen the change in NDI (net disposable income) over the last few years? You personally (and myself) might be doing better but the nation overall is going down the drain economically.
 
nBUoaM2.jpg


From: GDP in detail: Housing bubble masks income shock
http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2016/03/gdp-in-detail-housing-bubble-masks-income-shock/
 
We can only hypothesize if things would have been better if Labor won the last election. My money would be on "No and in all probability worse".
 
Stoic Phoenix said:
We can only hypothesize if things would have been better if Labor won the last election. My money would be on "No and in all probability worse".
Click to expand...
Things would probably be much the same because governments aren't addressing the fundamental economic and business issues. In fact, I'd even suggest they can't until things get far far worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top