Well I disagree. I said it before and I'll say it again, any drongo can balance a budget (my pet cat could do it) during a resources boom as per this post below. They even did it in my State in WA under Labor - what does that say - see also post linked. You just look at headline figures, not the structural deficit the budget was haned over to both Labor and Liberal govt because when you do giveaways and the primary driver of giveaways is over - commodity boom - then everything goes to shiiiite.
Post #:
17014247
The real issue is that whilst Howard and Costello were rolling in govt revenue when it was 25% of GDP they just kept giving it away in the last three to four budgets (tax cuts, astronomical further concessions on super, etc) because Howard was waning in the polls (should have stood down and let Costello take over IMO back then) and because of a commodity boom revenue still stayed at over 25% of GDP even after these giveaways (see attached link below to actually understand what I have said). Come the GFC and commodity price collapse well the structural problems in the budget came home to roast. The underling fools who thought the commodity boom would last forever are the ones who need to answer and given everything I read in this forum when you give money away and concessions, well self interest dictates they can't be recouped any time soon. Booms never last forever and when you giveaway the proceeds during the boom you can't get them back easily because everyone loves their tax concessions (particularly the wealthy). And by the way there is no benefit in allowing companies to move their profits to low tax jurisdictions either.
http://taxwatch.org.au/how-john-howards-tax-cuts-undid-his-protege-tony-abbott/
And my view on Rudd's response during the GFC is that while the spending may have saved Australia from a recession it had no long term benefit because it was not directed at long term economic growth issues (infrastructure development), but more targeted at a political solution of not having the economy enter a technical recession (i.e. two quarters of negative growth) under his watch. I also recognise that a lot of posters here have selective memory on the GFC. LIBOR rates shot up obvernight and banks didn't trust lending to banks internationally, and Rudd's guarantee helped put some confidence back into the Australian banking system hence why Australia in part was cushioned from the GFC (the other was we still had a construction boom at that time buiding LNG projects). What most posters don't understand is that because our savings rate is low, Australian banks source half there monies overseas and that source dried up overnight (but the Rudd guarantee ensured they were able to attain those international banking funds subsequently further insulating the Australian economy from the adverse effects of the GFC - just remember also that some banks have an element of puttable borrowings in their portfolio, meaning the lender can ask for the money anytime which would have been a concern if those funds were called upon by international banks at that time and again Rudd's initiative helped their too in stopping those banks doing it).
But the deficit has grown under the Libs and will grow more (sub investments etc) so can't hide under its Labor's fault anymore. Of note during his speech at the Press Club Morrison said of the$80 billion in savings the Libs have made during there term they have already spent $70 billion before the latest defence program It is now the Libs deficit.
Rant over
