australia faces a decade of debt, page-52

"...The Howard government took 10 years to pay down the $96 billion net debt inherited from Labor in 1996.'..."

The above statement was incorrect and misleading.


LesPaul,

Part of the $96b debt was Howard's debt in the first place, (estimated $36b to $40b of Howard's debt).

Existing assets were sufficient to cover $60b of the debt, so Howard only needed to pay off $36b of the debt over the 10 years to repay the debt in full.

Irregardless of what any particular party would or wouldn't do, the statement in the article was incorrect and misleading, which was the only point I was making.

If you believe the statement in the article is correct, then please state your reasons to support your argument.