The party’s over for Kevin Rudd. He’s no longer Prime Minister. In his place is Julia Gillard, Australia’s first female Prime Minister.

So just what went wrong for Rudd? Why did his popularity and support implode in such spectacular style?

Largely it was a matter of untrammeled hubris. In a sense he was a victim of his own early success. So convincing was his win, so clear his apparent mandate, that anything became possible. His detractors were belittled and bullied, his key allies were disenfranchised by his dictatorial style.

Such was the level of his misplaced self belief that he attempted to railroad the mining industry with an experimental resources tax. His miscalculation of their reaction beggars belief.

Earlier, through Minister Peter Garret, he presided over the home insulation fiasco. And let’s not forget the great moral imperative of our time, the Emissions Trading Scheme. Where once it held a central place in Labor policy, under Rudd’s rule, it was brushed aside, something to do on another, calmer day.

That the end came with such a wimper comes as no surprise. The shrill speech given to a hastily convened press conference on the eve of his departure smacked of a man who knew his time was up. Rudd’s last moments sounded like a football coach imploring a team being thrashed. He knew the game was lost.

Only Gillard could blow the final siren.

I’ve read some rubbish masquerading as journalism but this one takes the cake. Here’s a few excerpts from an article on BRW entitled Betting Against The House.

There is one group of punters, however, who are pinning their hopes on the failure of the housing market…If you hear a strange counter-call, it’s probably Generation Y, sitting in the nosebleed section, hoping, pleading, fingers-crossed; building up a constant chant: “Crash, crash, crash, crash.”

Genration Y want, no scratch that, need to see property prices come tumbling down. We’ve had the obsession of home ownership instilled in us, but we just can’t afford to get on board.

With each news report of a stumble in building approvals here or skittish investors there, we are willing the whole property market to come tumbling down like a house of cards.

I wonder if she realises that if the housing market crashes her job will go too. So too that of thousands of other Australians. And that list would probably include her parents leading very possibly to them losing their home. There won’t be anyone worrying betting on the housing market , they’ll be too worried about feeding the kids.

I’m sure you get the picture.

My hope is that the article was a satirical piece and I missed the satire. Somehow I doubt it.

Alan Greenspan’s admission that he was “partially” wrong to resist calls for more regulation that may have averted the financial crisis in the US shows why it’s important to change governments on a regular basis. Without the closet cleaning that goes on during the transition problems become exacerbated by being ignored. In the case of the US mess there were plenty of signs pointing to a problem but the system of government and governance ignored them.

On the back of the news that “Geothermal energy developer Geodynamics is preparing to put its technology to the test and power up the South Australian town of Innamincka”, I question if there’s a serious future for this technology. To me it makes much more sense than being held to ransom by OPEC who, despite the world’s financial problems, are planning to cut production. Surely it makes more sense to put some serious efforts into this form of technology rather than developing nuclear power stations. If there is a future for geothermal lets put some effort into developing it now.

Concerned industry leaders believe that an information vacuum is creating unnecessary worry and the Rudd government should now reveal the information that informed their decision to announce a $10.4 billion economic stimulus package.

The failure of the government to release this information invites skepticism and suspicion about the real motives behind the package.

Headlines that ANZ economists expect the official cash rate to fall to 4.5% by the middle of next year should be welcome news to home owners.

With many real estate markets suffering from a glut of stock sharp reductions in interest rates together with a temporary doubling of grants available to first home buyers could be the stimulus for increased demand, lower stock levels, and higher prices.

I believe the next 3-6 months will present prime opportunities for people looking to make profits from the real estate market in the near term.

Kevin Rudd is at his populist best in tarring Australian banking executives with the same brush as their free-wheeling US counterparts.

There are no indications to this point that any of the Australian banks are at risk of failure despite international problems with liquidity; and yet that hasn’t stopped Rudd calling for a cap on executive payouts. Of course Rudd’s posturing panders to the always left wing Greens and the unions; but then again bank bashing always scores political points.

If Rudd is arguing for an international agreement on the remuneration of bank executives then the Australian banking industry has nothing to fear; and Rudd will be on the right track by taking steps to urge tighter controls in countries where banking regulations are more relaxed. But, as appears to be the case, Rudd is maneuvering for change specifically for the Australian banking system; and that makes no sense considering the way our banks have held up under extraordinary pressure.

Of course Rudd’s populist rhetoric will probably end up being little more than hot air. If it isn’t then we may see a brain drain from the banking industry as executives seek better remuneration in industries where the government doesn’t restrict their legitimate rights to earn a market-based salary.

Even in the midst of a national security crisis it pays to create someone or something as “the enemy”. Its easier to sell the message that greedy bankers are at fault then attempt to explain the intricacies of the credit crisis in a 1o second sound bite.

What is the government hiding. If they can spend $10.4 billion to rescue the country why can’t they level with us now and outline, at least in broad terms, how they came to the decisions and what impacts they see the package having on the economy.

I’m smelling obfuscation, deception, and incompetence. I hope I’m wrong.

Govt accuses Coalition of division over spending plan – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation): “Treasurer Wayne Swan said no details will be released until the Government’s mid-year economic outlook update is released next month.

‘That’s the reasonable thing to do, that’s the sensible thing to do,’ he said.

‘We will put it out there in plenty of time for there to be plenty of scrutiny because we do believe in transparency.”

Rudd slams ‘obscene failures’ in banking system – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Yesterday the Government also announced a $10.5 billion stimulus package to help Australia cope with the meltdown.

Mr Rudd says the package has come at the right time.

“As Prime Minister I will not sit idly by and watch Australian households suffer the worst effects of a global crisis we did not create,” he said.

One wonders why, given the economic crisis is not of our making, why the US is government is not being asked to pay the $10.5 billion the Australian government is being forced to spend on a stimulus package.

Our blind fawning to all things American is now paying its expected dividend of fear and anxiety.

Turnbull, Costello want release of Treasury advice – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation): “Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull and former treasurer Peter Costello have urged the Government to release the advice which led to the decision to spend nearly half the surplus on a $10.4 billion economic stimulus package.”

I’m with Turnbull on this issue. What is served by the government not disclosing that which has informed a major shift in the economic management of the country? Is it a way of hiding from the Australian people the dire truth of our circumstances? Or is it the government taking reckless action and avoiding accountability? I suspect that Wayne Swan has discussed the matter with his G20 counter-parts and they’ve agreed that the problems in the economy are less a matter of fundamentals and more a crisis of confidence. To restore confidence sudden and massive action is needed so the government can be seen to be doing something which, in turn, gives the person on the street the impression that the government has things under control and it’s ok to keep spending. But I believe this strategy is not wise. The Australian people are not easily taken for fools and any questions about how the government went about making these decisions will quickly undermine any short term consumer confidence.