investorpolitico

Yesterday I saw in The Australian a poll that indicates that John Howard has been considered the best prime Minister of Australia, ever.

On the economic side of view, I tend to disagree.

People might think that he was the best PM because everyone felt rich and happy during his “kingdom”.

In reality he is the one that planted the seeds of this Australian Crisis by opting to give tax breaks and cash rebates with the surplus instead of reinvesting in an Australia post mining boom.

In history every boom has a  bust, so it is not extremely difficult to forecast that a boom cannot go on forever -specially if it is based on something on which you have absolutely no control (China). Instead of employing the massive profits and surplus to create a more like-Germany Australia (in an economic sense), he just bribed his way to the next election win.

But in reality that is not is fault. He simply used the system with extreme intelligence and egoism.

Every Australian PM last just 3 years. 1 year he settles in the political arena with its best team, the second year can do some mild policies and the third year is already in re-election mode.

So practically you have just one year to make tough economic reforms and hoping that the electorate will forget. So if you get a lot of cash and like to be re elected it is just better and easier to bribe the electorate in another win….hoping that the issues will blow up in the face of someone else.

It worked perfectly for John Howard – much less for Australia. Specially if China will have the contraction that it has to have.

It would be better if the electorate start to think …not just follow.

PS. I think myself as independent. Yes I would think myself more Liberal than Labor if there was such things as differences. Currently I call them Libeor (Liberal-Labor). Waiting for the next party “None of the other two”