Alan Austin,
If labor Governments are as good as you trying to tell us then why is it that we're always worse off after they get in. Your academic assessments & observations do no equate & translate into reality. Australia's ranking on the world list is meaningless if we're worse off when the list says we're near the top. We now have no money left yet we're supposed to be in such good shape. I really wonder what your definition of good shape is.

"You have accurate data on the past and remarkably reliable forward estimates for the next four years, then reasonably sound 10-year projections."

And q&a says I'm delusional; the same sources, treasury, couldn't even predict a decifit or its size and Swan and his cohorts lie about revenue and other economic markers.

"reliable forward estimates"

You're out to lunch Alan, that is just nuts; living in France are you still enroled to vote; I dare say so. The Lucky Country indeed.

Hello again,

Nighttime here, so will be away for a bit. But back later with further responses.

Meanwhile, here are two more porky pies from Mr Abbott’s speech which we couldn’t squeeze into the final version of the above article. These may be relevant to some of the discussion emerging:

13. “This year’s supposed revenue shortfall went from $7 billion, to $12 billion to $17 billion in just two weeks – so how can ministers possibly predict a decade ahead?”

Easily. The difference between $7 billion and $17 billion sounds big. Ten billion dollars. That is about 0.6 of one per cent of the nation’s income. To have errors in predictions of that order is not exceptional. It happens in all countries all the time.

14. “If this had been the only dodgie promise, they might have got away with it. But this government never gets it right.”

Nonsense. It is rare for forward estimates to turn out precisely as forecast. Peter Costello never got the quantum of his deficits and surpluses exactly right. Sometimes they overshoot, sometimes undershoot and, very occasionally, are spot on. It is a transparent process, with forward estimates publicly available and revisions posted as required.

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/mf/1345.0?opendocument?opendocument

“It got the mining tax numbers wrong. It got the carbon tax numbers wrong.”

Correct. That’s two. How many more? A few, perhaps. But not more than previous administrations. If there is evidence of this it has not been presented. [end of extract]

Bon soir,

Cohenite,

Your OLO acolyte going by the tag 'imajulianutter' seems to have struck your sensitivity.

He says:

"definition of delusional ... can be applied to anyone who attacks their opponants (sic) as liars, frausters (sic) or incompetents."

You said the author is "defending liars and cheats and incompetents."

Your own follower thinks you are delusional - whether I agree or not is neither here nor there.

People do have delusions there's no denying that.
Some have delusions of grandeur.
Some have delusions of adequacy.
Delusions of adequacy maks some people feel
a lot better about themselves.
However those who can analyze their delusions
are called philosophers. ;-)

Dear Hasbeen,

I'm surprised that you're so anti the ABC.
I enjoy watching "Q and A," "Media Watch,"
"The Insiders," "News 24," and so on.
I find that it's one place that presents
diverse opinions on issues - corrects
misinformation (Media Watch), and does not
have a political bias.
I can only assume that you haven't watched any
of the programs recently.

Dear spindoc,

What's with the personal insults?
You appear to be arguing on an emotional level -
not a mature intelligent one. Of course
all opinions should be heard. Within the limits
of good taste - reasonably. Our interests are far
more complex than those who insist on seeing all
discussions through a fixed ideological view-finder.
Such one-eyed bias is a triumph of negativity,
and this country has never needed a more positive, open
and compassionate approach to differences in opinion
than now.

Dear onthebeach,

I'm surprised that you took Peter King's remark about
Graham Young so seriously. Imagine if you would have thought
that he was being facetious?

Dear Imajulianutter,

As I stated earlier - those who can analyze their
delusions are called - philosophers. ;-)

Cheers.

When AA can dismiss Saltpetre in one sentence, someone with twice the intellect of AA, then you know AA is indeed bringing down the standard of debate on OLO, regardless of how many people are reading his bs.

What is comforting for me, however, will be the Sept. 2013 election when are very poor govt gets the flick.

I still notice his holiness has still not answered whether he supports the will of the people as the ultimate arbitrator of a govt's performance. Or maybe AA and Labor should only be answerable to god.