Dear Yabby,

Wrong again. I do not rely on the information of
only one academic. I merely quoted one finance
expert to you. However, I do my research from a
wide variety of sources - having access to many
databases as part and parcel of my job as an
information provider. Again, I stress I frankly
don't care what you think. You're entitled to your
opinions. It's only your facts that need correcting
and that is something that I feel compelled to do.
But possibly not for long. Especially as I can see
that I am wasting my time.

*Wrong again. I do not rely on the information of
only one academic.*

Dear Lexi, given that you have quote the same academic twice in the
same thread, with the same old stuff, clearly your understanding
of economics is quite limited. Stick to sorting books on shelves.

You are clearly out of your depth.

Dear Yabby,

Poor show.

And - to correct you again - (getting a bit tedious)...

Libaries have junior and casual staff for book shelving.
You should visit one sometime.
However, take your own advice. Stick to what I assume you
know - farming.

You're not only out of your depth - you sinking in it.
We'd hate to have you disappear altogether.

Dear Lexi,

So now we can add poor judgement to your list of abilities.

Clearly you have not yet clicked that farming is simply my hobby
and not how I make serious money.

Back to sorting books for you, its what librarians are good at.

Now back to the economy. 11 years of Costello achieved results for
all to see and know. Give credit to Kevie if you will, but even
librarians should understand that economies, investment etc, are
about years and years of confidence and sound policies, not pulling
magic rabbits out of hands, which might fool some voters.

The world "gullible" comes to mind.

Dear Yabby,

Wrong again.

Librarians are not book sorters. They are information
providers.

As I've told you previously - you are entitled to your
opinion - but not your facts.

See ya.

For once your correct Yabby.

Economics is a long term thing. Which is precisely why it is correct to say that the prosperity you felt in the Howard years, was because of the policies of the previous Keating regime.

Late in the Howard's term and continuing onwards we are experiencing the effects of the Howard policy settings today.

The Govt of today however is effectively legless and armless, in that the regulatory regimes are virtually non existent after being smashed by Howard and Costello, the public wealth all but gone. . This is the Howard legacy.

And finally when Keating took over from the Howard Treasury, inflation alone was running at somewhere in the late teens. The economy was in fact stuffed. It took Keating nearly 13 years to fix it.

It took Howard less than that to stuff it up again.

I can provide the figures that prove this Yabby, but in your case, I couldn't be bothered, because your ideological (quasi religious) faith is unshakeable, even if the proof could be provided for you by a count of bales of hay.

Perhaps confusion is created by watching to much TV or reading the Murdoch press.

Musicians and Librarians are generally people who don't do much of that.

Perhaps a new Govt could be made from people who don't watch much TV. If that were possible we might actually get somewhere for a change.