John Winston Howard - what is his legacy?

[SBD Gonzalez]

This'll be good.

Will eagerly read it, with latex gloves on.

 

[kickazz]

This'll be good.

It will be a must read.

Maybe a good xmas stocking stuffer as well.

Don't know if it will be good or just depressing though.

 

[Gough]

It will be a must read.

Maybe a good xmas stocking stuffer as well.

Don't know if it will be good or just depressing though.

I'm glad someone's going on the record about something that's been ignored for years amid the mostly hagiographic treatment of Howard. Hopefully it might launch a broader conversation about his legacy.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Will eagerly read it, with latex gloves on.

Could have a read of this in the meantime to set the scene a bit and get a contemporary perspective of the Howard era (think it came out around 2004?)

The Howard Years by Robert Manne - 9780975076910 - QBD Books

A powerful collection of essays by Australia's leading thinkers on what the Howard years have meant for Australia, edited by renowned political commentator, Robert Manne. Contributors include: Mungo MacCallum, Judith Brett, Mick Dodson, Helen ... - 9780975076910

www.qbd.com.au

 

[Permission Capable]

Made our country a worse place. So that’s not a good legacy.

Made the Coalition in time an uncompetitive and barely relevant 'major' political party. Not a great legacy either.

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

I'm glad someone's going on the record about something that's been ignored for years amid the mostly hagiographic treatment of Howard. Hopefully it might launch a broader conversation about his legacy.

He's most loyal fanbase won't believe it anyway, they will believe this is all a concocted left wing conspiracy to denigrate a legend.

 

[kickazz]

Made the Coalition in time an uncompetitive and barely relevant 'major' political party. Not a great legacy either.

His thinking was stuck in the fifties, no vision for the country or the party going forward.

 

[kickazz]

If PHON really do end up getting more seats than Libs at next election (still doubt this very much) I hope the pundits make clear the rot he started and that he is still alive to witness it.

 

[QuietB]

 

[Demonic Ascent]

Capital gains discount and negative gearing turbocharged property speculation and pushed up prices, analysis finds

Exclusive: Landlords ‘leveraging up’ by exploiting property tax rules are fuelling Australia’s housing affordability crisis, e61 Institute finds

www.theguardian.com

 

[kickazz]

This'll be good.

Ok so I have now had the opportunity read this.


Overall it was pretty good, but not great. I recon the proofreading wasn't done well as there were at least two or three grammatical errors and some of the sentences either didn't make sense, or a misplaced word resulted in it meaning the opposite of what point she was making, or were just a bit unwieldy. The tone at times was a bit casual if I may say for what I think is a very serious topic. It felt like you are listening to a first year uni student saying '**** Howard'. Which is fine, but if you are going to convert anyone I think that sort of tone will be off putting and make you take the book less seriously. Better to present the arguments, and let the reader come to their own "well he really was a campaigner wasn't he" themselves.

Not great in that it could have gone deeper or prosecuted its points a little better - the bit on privatisation for example kind of preached to the converted, without actually describing in simple terms why privatisation can be bad, particularly in the Australian 21st century context.

What I really think is good about this book though is it is quite accessible - so perhaps for people who know little about Howard or have just swallowed the idea that "he was PM for a long time during good times so must have been good", this might be a good way to at least start asking some questions.

On economic management - she explained with simple examples how he set up the country with structural deficits, and reminded us that surplus=good, deficit=bad is a massive oversimplification that has become a kind of 'truth'. This chapter alone should be compulsory reading because it explains so much why we are where we are now.


Other points raised that I kind of forgot about or didn't realise at the time:

• His ability/propensity to make his values Australia's values - almost by decree. It somehow worked (media helped I guess)
• He was never wrong, and even today admits to very, very few mistakes.
• When presented with either strong evidence or a logical argument he didn't like, he'd often just say "I don't accept that ...." without really justifying it.
• His mastery at letting others do the dog whistling for him on matters less palatable.
• How autocratic he was - he strongly pursued things that aligned with his values, regardless of what anyone else (voters, experts, his own party even) thought; whilst being a bit 'whatever' about things that weren't core to his thinking.
• The whole sporty vibe and how embarrassing it was - be it the citizenship test questions about Bradman or how he tried to suck up to the USA in speeches to their parliament, or just being in his ****ing tracksuit watching the Socceroos whilst having NFI. It was a bit cringe really.
• The creation of Centrelink to replace a system that worked with one that doesn't

It's an easy enough read, some good, some not so good but overall worth putting a reserve at your local library or purchasing for friends and family.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Ok so I have now had the opportunity read this.


Overall it was pretty good, but not great. I recon the proofreading wasn't done well as there were at least two or three grammatical errors and some of the sentences either didn't make sense, or a misplaced word resulted in it meaning the opposite of what point she was making, or were just a bit unwieldy. The tone at times was a bit casual if I may say for what I think is a very serious topic. It felt like you are listening to a first year uni student saying '**** Howard'. Which is fine, but if you are going to convert anyone I think that sort of tone will be off putting and make you take the book less seriously. Better to present the arguments, and let the reader come to their own "well he really was a campaigner wasn't he" themselves.

Not great in that it could have gone deeper or prosecuted its points a little better - the bit on privatisation for example kind of preached to the converted, without actually describing in simple terms why privatisation can be bad, particularly in the Australian 21st century context.

What I really think is good about this book though is it is quite accessible - so perhaps for people who know little about Howard or have just swallowed the idea that "he was PM for a long time during good times so must have been good", this might be a good way to at least start asking some questions.

On economic management - she explained with simple examples how he set up the country with structural deficits, and reminded us that surplus=good, deficit=bad is a massive oversimplification that has become a kind of 'truth'. This chapter alone should be compulsory reading because it explains so much why we are where we are now.


Other points raised that I kind of forgot about or didn't realise at the time:

• His ability/propensity to make his values Australia's values - almost by decree. It somehow worked (media helped I guess)
• He was never wrong, and even today admits to very, very few mistakes.
• When presented with either strong evidence or a logical argument he didn't like, he'd often just say "I don't accept that ...." without really justifying it.
• His mastery at letting others do the dog whistling for him on matters less palatable.
• How autocratic he was - he strongly pursued things that aligned with his values, regardless of what anyone else (voters, experts, his own party even) thought; whilst being a bit 'whatever' about things that weren't core to his thinking.
• The whole sporty vibe and how embarrassing it was - be it the citizenship test questions about Bradman or how he tried to suck up to the USA in speeches to their parliament, or just being in his ****ing tracksuit watching the Socceroos whilst having NFI. It was a bit cringe really.
• The creation of Centrelink to replace a system that worked with one that doesn't

It's an easy enough read, some good, some not so good but overall worth putting a reserve at your local library or purchasing for friends and family.

Howard's eroding of Aussie culture really is whole other book.

And the structural damage he did to this nation just is so unforgivable and considering that he had a structural surplus when the flog came in.

 

[Mighty Eagles]

On economic management - she explained with simple examples how he set up the country with structural deficits, and reminded us that surplus=good, deficit=bad is a massive oversimplification that has become a kind of 'truth'. This chapter alone should be compulsory reading because it explains so much why we are where we are now.

My immediate repsonse to this is, why haven't a series of Labor PMs, namely Rudd, Gillard and Albanese, used any of their political capital to try and bring the public in a new direction?

I can only concur, at least primarily with Albanese, he simply doesn't have the stomach for such a debate.

 

[kickazz]

My immediate repsonse to this is, why haven't a series of Labor PMs, namely Rudd, Gillard and Albanese, used any of their political capital to try and bring the public in a new direction?

I can only concur, at least primarily with Albanese, he simply doesn't have the stomach for such a debate.

She talks about that. The evil genius of Howard was not just that he did those things, but convinced so many people it was a good idea. We've been indoctrinated.

The people just accepted it, and I guess the Right shift of the ALP and trying to look like good economic managers in the eyes of the hoi polloi can be added to the list of answers to the question that this thread title asks.

Electoral suicide to try and fix it. Only now, with the consequences really starting to come home to roost, combined with a completely, laughably useless LNP, does it seem the ALP might finally have the courage to do it.

 

[Mighty Eagles]

Electoral suicide to try and fix it. Only now, with the consequences really starting to come home to roost, combined with a completely, laughably useless LNP, does it seem the ALP might finally have the courage to do it.

I don't agree with this at all. The lack of planning for population growth - which is essentially what has drive demand post-pandemic - is because of a lack of quality planning by most state governments. Howard left office more than 18 years ago. I don't think blaming him for the housing shortage we're currently experiencing uncovers the depths of the problems for mine.

 

[kickazz]

I don't agree with this at all. The lack of planning for population growth - which is essentially what has drive demand post-pandemic - is because of a lack of quality planning by most state governments. Howard left office more than 18 years ago. I don't think blaming him for the housing shortage we're currently experiencing uncovers the depths of the problems for mine.

Maybe, but for example the Henry Tax Review stuff, which many economists have called for as being a key reform, has been largely ignored by both sides, and it is a federal matter.

It was delivered in 2010.

Post pandemic demand is also heavily due to the monetary policy at the time. Basically the government/bankers put lots of money in our bank accounts to stop the economy going **** up, now they have to find a way to take it back.

 

[Mighty Eagles]

Maybe, but for example the Henry Tax Review stuff, which many economists have called for as being a key reform, has been largely ignored by both sides, and it is a federal matter.

Oh, I completely agree, it’s disappointing and weak that both persuasions have ignored key recommendations of the Henry Tax Review.

But it’s still a massive oversight to blame a PM or Fed Govt for the housing shortage of today having left office more than 18 years ago.

 

[Gough]

Looking really unwell these days.

 

[peetoo]

When asked about port Arthur, weaved terrorism (Bali) into the conversation. Never change honest John

 

[Gough]

When asked about port Arthur, weaved terrorism (Bali) into the conversation. Never change honest John

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Looking really unwell these days.

I worked a function last year that he was at, and I couldn’t believe how decrepit he had become. He was still mobile but I reckon the walking frame is coming very soon.

He still summoned his massive reserves of rancour a few months later with his response to the Bondi massacre.

 

[RedOrWhite]

I worked a function last year that he was at, and I couldn’t believe how decrepit he had become. He was still mobile but I reckon the walking frame is coming very soon.

He still summoned his massive reserves of rancour a few months later with his response to the Bondi massacre.

He also wandered uninvited into the Fox cricket comms box in the Sydney test too. I always think of this Simpsons episode when old mate comes up.

 

[revo333]

Oh, I completely agree, it’s disappointing and weak that both persuasions have ignored key recommendations of the Henry Tax Review.

But it’s still a massive oversight to blame a PM or Fed Govt for the housing shortage of today having left office more than 18 years ago.

Just love how people put their head in the sand and ignore the last 20 years to take pot shots at a PM from the 90's.

If they held recent PM's to those standards maybe we wouldn't have these issues anymore.

FYI I never voted for Howard once.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Just love how people put their head in the sand and ignore the last 20 years to take pot shots at a PM from the 90's.

If they held recent PM's to those standards maybe we wouldn't have these issues anymore.

FYI I never voted for Howard once.

Yes and no. Significant legislation that Howard passed is still law in Australia, and having a deletirious effect on, to give one example, housing affordability.

It's not like Howard's legislative record got wiped the moment he lost office.

 

[peetoo]

Yes and no. Significant legislation that Howard passed is still law in Australia, and having a deletirious effect on, to give one example, housing affordability.

It's not like Howard's legislative record got wiped the moment he lost office.

It’s a thing in parts of the world with no neg gearing too. But no doubt it’s corrupting the market here. And we don’t often hear the stories where bad housing investments have wiped people out financially.

There was a guy on insight who somehow used his super to get lots of properties and it wiped out. Seemed too clever for his own good. No amount of tax dodges will compensate for bad investments nor should they (govt incentives)

But why, if you have a residence and possibly a rental would you also link all your super to property? Much better to be a little bit diversified