Rudd: Stud or Dud?

Kevin Rudd: Stud or Dud?

I'm quite looking forward to the$900 bonus in my bank account from the economic stimulous package. The money will come in quite handy paying off bills and debt.

Is there any real economic point to giving away this money though? Will it really stimulate the economy (stud), or is Rudd trying to buy our vote for the next election (dud)?

Unfortunately the first stimulous package barely caused a ripple on the economic scene. Sure, on the day it was given out the local electrical goods stores were busy, but the package seemed to be prematurely fired off with little longevity to it. Hindsight now shows that only 20% of the package actually reached it's target.
Tha'ts a dud, Rudd.

So while I won't say no to the money, I also will not let it buy my vote. For all intents and purposes this recession will carry through to the next election. Economically, I thought it would be better to put the money into the environment. This could create jobs for those loosing them (the real needy) and also help combat global warming.

So for all of Rudds "big word", "terminology" and "bullshit", the economy is not stimulated, global warming is not combated, and Peter Garrett is still singing. This last is perhaps the worst failure of the labour government.

Oh, sure, there is not proof that the other guys can do any better but this blog is to ask the question:

Rudd: Stud or Dud?
What do you think?