John Howard - leader of profligation

[mantra]

Those who are considering voting for the Coalition next year need to think again. Abbott will be mentored by Howard who has now been officially declared the leader of the most needlessly wasteful and spendthrift government in history. How can Abbott now sell the Coalition as being fiscally responsible?

Hey, big spender: Howard the king of the loose purse strings

AUSTRALIA'S most needlessly wasteful spending took place under the John Howard-led Coalition government rather than under the Whitlam, Rudd or Gillard Labor governments, an international study has found.

The International Monetary Fund examined 200 years of government financial records across 55 leading economies.

It identifies only two periods of Australian "fiscal profligacy" in recent years, both during John Howard's term in office - in 2003 at the start of the mining boom and during his final years in office between 2005 and 2007.



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politi ... z2Hc69R7p1

[Rorschach]

Well, was expecting this from the Head Howard Hater.

Abbot is not Howard mantra and in fact was 1 of only 2 people to stand up to him on Workchoices. He also spoke up against various things the Howard government wanted to implement including many cuts/changes in health for instance.

I suggest you really read the article again before sounding off. It is a very flawed report on several levels and btw the IMF as it is at the moment isn't exactly a body I'd be listening to. Or haven't you kept up with their misdemeanors lately?

Funnily enough this so-called PROFLIGATE government managed to pay off Labor's $96 billion dollar debt and leave a $22 billion surplus to see us through the GFC even after they were voted out. Care to explain that mantra?

[Rorschach]

ps. (from your article link)

The IMF study mirrors findings of a 2008 Australian Treasury study that found real government spending grew faster in the final four years of the Howard government than in any four-year period since the 1990s recession.

The number of spending decisions worth more than $1 billion climbed from one in the first Howard budget to nine in the last. The proportion of savings measures fell from one-third of budget measures at the start of the Howard era to 1.5 per cent at the end.

In its final year in office, the Coalition boosted the AusLink national roads program by $2.3 billion and announced grants for water conservation and water buybacks worth $10 billion over 10 years.

I think you'll find.
1/ Spending savings is different from borrowing to spend.
2/ That the idea of profligacy is up for definition here... is it profligate to spend on infrastructure development or is it profligate to spend on pink batts, set-top boxes, un-wanted COLAs, fuel-watch, grocery-watch, etc, etc, etc.

[Rorschach]

Excerpts...

''The Howard government in its last two terms was rolling in cash,'' Mr Eslake said.

Mr Howard rode two booms - in mining and household spending - and as a result raked in ''extraordinary'' amounts of income during its last two terms.

During that period, Mr Eslake said, the Howard government increased spending ''in real terms'' at a faster rate than any other government since the Whitlam years.

Which afforded the government the opportunity to spend, Howard was myopic and IMO the spending was short-sighted and wasteful.

Mr Eslake did say, however, that he was ''gobsmacked'' the IMF did not judge Gough Whitlam's government as profligate.

''That they didn't regard the 40 per cent plus increase in government spending in 1974 to 1975 under the Whitlam government as profligate . . . [that's] far worse than anything the Howard government undertook,'' Mr Eslake said.

So can Eslake be wrong about one and right about the other?
Is he wrong?
Is the IMF wrong?

As much as I like Penny she's pushing the propaganda uphill with this one.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political ... z2HcmwYvlj" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mellie]

WHAAAT???

Look, I voted for Labor in 2007, and even I miss John Howard in light of the mess the Labor government has made of things.

John Howard was a great PM Mantra, why else would have people kept voting for him in order for him to have been PM for 11 years?

Lol, Labors PM's are flat out completing their own term, without being knifed by one of their own.



When someone from the Labor camp lasts as long as Menzies or Howard, come and talk to me about it.

The proof is in the pudding.

I think what I despise most about the Labor party is an entrenched culture of back-stabbery and go-getting.

They are all so self-interested, this and don't appear to have much regard for their own party on the whole.

If they did, they wouldn't undermine their own leaders the way they do for self-serving go-getting purposes.


When it comes to Labor, there's no loyalty, they are all so treacherous..are out for themselves.

Liberals are team players, are more loyal, ....it takes an entire team/administration to run a country properly, not one person being loathed and despised by their colleagues.



Labor are too busy squabbling amongst themselves and knifing one another to be bothered with running our country.

As has been demonstrated.

[mellie]

I think it's a case of you don't spend what you don't have.

Howard was able to spend given he delivered a surplus.



Read the article properly, rather than cut and pasting the bits you believe make an anti-liberal political statement.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political ... 2cj32.html

[Black Orchid]

How can Abbott now sell the Coalition as being fiscally responsible?

How can you slam a government for spending a surplus that they themselves delivered, yet praise a government who recklessly spends a surplus they didn't deliver and have no hope of replenishing?

[mellie]

How can Abbott now sell the Coalition as being fiscally responsible?

How can you slam a government for spending a surplus that they themselves delivered, yet praise a government who recklessly spends a surplus they didn't deliver and have no hope of replenishing?

Exactly.



At least Howard spent within his means.

So, who has a spare 20k laying around and are willing to help bail out a Gillard government to help restore the surplus?

http://www.debtclock.com.au/

Mantra, under a Howard government Australians owed nothing, though under a Gillard government each Australians share of the debt is $19,652.00.



Honestly, what's not to love about being debt free and having a surplus?

[mantra]

Abbot is not Howard mantra and in fact was 1 of only 2 people to stand up to him on Workchoices. He also spoke up against various things the Howard government wanted to implement including many cuts/changes in health for instance.

Link please. Abbott was going on about reintroducing workchoices not so long ago after his first visit with David Cameron.

I suggest you really read the article again before sounding off. It is a very flawed report on several levels and btw the IMF as it is at the moment isn't exactly a body I'd be listening to. Or haven't you kept up with their misdemeanors lately?

Funnily enough this so-called PROFLIGATE government managed to pay off Labor's $96 billion dollar debt and leave a $22 billion surplus to see us through the GFC even after they were voted out. Care to explain that mantra?

I'm no fan of the IMF - but the article was interesting. Yes the debt was paid off and there was a surplus, but the economies made to pay that debt off put most government spending back into the hands of the people, which created serious personal debt to access the most basic of services. Funding was cut in too many essential areas. I'm not going to go back over Howard's divisive policies. Memories are short and you'll get your chance next year to vote for the party you refused to vote for in 2007.

[IQS.RLOW]

Australia got a pay rise under Howard and because H&C kept the living expenses and loan repayments in check were able to have "profligate spending" in the form of tax cuts to middle Australia who had been screwed by bracket creep as well as cut the tax rate...until Labor got back in and Australia saw the first rise in the PAYG tax bracket for the first time in decades.

Now we have a Labor govt who are unable to contain their living expenses and have borrowed beyond our means to pay for their shiny new Plasma (NBN) and their servants (public sector) while the loan repayments keep stacking up