you are saying because liberal's were in office for 72% of the time compared to labor's 28% of the time, then this offsets the fact liberals had more recessions,
4 of the recessions under Liberal compared to 2 under labor.
but if Liberals were as you believe better economic managers, then there should not have been any recessions regardless of the time spent in office
Your agrument would only have substance if recessions were cyclical and largely caused by factors outside of the governments control. Therefore the longer a party is in office the greater the odds of a cycle or world events going the wrong way.
and yes government actions can make the situation worse, which interestingly the worst recession according to the article was during the Fraser term while Howard was Treasurer. So was this the worst recession due to global factors or actions taken by the government of the day that made the situation worse.
Of course I doubt some here can see the facts and logic behind this any more than a person of fanatical religious beliefs can be made to see sense
