Judith Sloane, the oo's new "
Contributing Economics Editor" has decided to ignore her own new papers articles, and join in with the rest of the conga line of ruperts historians repainting the pallette of recent events, hoping against hope one would suggest that nobody cares to examine their claims to closely. In her
recent outing, she makes the following claim, pushed, interestingly enough, the claims favoured by three stooges of Australia's economic current debate
Larry,
Curly and
Moe.
But as a stimulus spending program, the problem was that the buildings were still being constructed well after the crisis had passed.
In fact, as history actually shows, the timing and extent of the fiscal stimulus, and, more importantly, the impact on our economy, was weighted almost perfectly, and tapered of at precisley the time the economy begun recovering, as was shown in the
very paper she is writing in.
The main prop for the economy in the first quarter was the government’s national school’s spending program, which added 0.9 percentage points to GDP. Consumer demand held up, despite the impact of aggressive interest rate hikes by the Reserve Bank of Australia.
