Col Rouge

I am also one of those who advocate some sort of taxation to aid renewable energy, so you would probably disagree with me on that issue.

However, as a political scientist, I have to call it the way it is rather than merely putting forward a biased view about how it should be. Political science should always be about policy possibilities and limitations, key ingedients that the simplistic Left needs to pay greater attention to.

The facts do suggest that the Howard govt was a successful performer if one looks at a variety of OECD data. Remember Australia is still one of the five greatest destinations for immigrants in per capita terms, including for all regions, accepts a large trade defit which helps fuel the international economy and the plight of millions of people, and does not use nuclear energy as many rich countries do.

Of course, policies can always be better. But there are strengths and weaknesses to all arguments and policy stances.

There's nothing like looking at the profits of a business without taking into account the side-effects.

They are called "externalities" and include the cost of drying rivers, erosion, destructon of timber.....think Tasmanian pulp mill etc.

The Howard government stayed in power partly because it put dollars into pockets.

But at what cost to the environment?

Point to one major Howard initiative to protect Australia for future generations.

I am always intrigued by people who base their arguments on statistics, particularly employment statistics. You only have to be working for a very short time each week to be regarded as employed.

As the old saying goes, "There are liars, damned liars, and statisticians"

David

Howard produced the first class of people that could really be termed the "underclass" with WorkChoices legislation. Yes he created many jobs, that were underpaid without important social conditions. Hence we have a permanent underclass of legitimate poor. Families tearing themselves apart through lack of income, while some who were prepared to exploit their fellow human being prospered. Wicked wicked people were the Howard Government. The economy is only one way to measure progress.

Lets see, Mr Howard's performance

- unemployment (anyone who breathes and wants work could get it)
- interest rates (very low in comparison to Hawke/Keating)
- foreign policy (debatable although many Iraq's now are far better off and Mr Rudd would not of done any different)
- reducing abortions (total failure)
- welfare (handed out more than any previous Governments)
- Health (made mistake by not taking it away by pathetically incompetent State Labour Governments.
- Indigenous Affairs - failed as every other Government has in the past. Gave lots of money to corrupt organizations. In his favour he abolished ATSIC. Mal Brough did something (to little to late)
- Immigration -failed in that he let to many Muslims in the country

Even the poor are not that poor in Oz. The best selling items in the supermarkets after cigarettes, are soft drinks, lollies and biscuits. If you don't believe me, then go and look at the aisles of them.

David