&gt; Seems to be with your standard of posting. I gave up with you<p>If you start calling people names I have to assume it&#x27;s because you&#x27;ve run out of proper arguments but still feel agitated enough to keep posting.<p>&gt; The PDF by the way uses words like &quot;cost saving&quot; and &quot;efficiency&quot; quite liberally.<p>What&#x27;s your point?<p>Are you saying that because a political party use those words then they must not be misleading?<p>On a national level a &quot;cost&quot; could just as easily be renamed a &quot;stimulus&quot;, so your choice of words is based on how you want to sell an ideology.<p>The Keynesian approach is that in a down economy you apply stimulus and in boom years you cut back. The Friedman approach is somewhat different, but the key point is that none of this is provable, so politicians choose their economics based on ideology rather than choosing their ideology based on economics.<p>&quot;Efficiency&quot; is also misleading in this context. To be more efficient you actually need to deliver the same outcome for less money. If you choose to deliver less (i.e. by making cuts to services) then that&#x27;s not increasing efficiency, it&#x27;s just cuts.<p>And you&#x27;re wrong about me being a &quot;leftie&quot;, as you would find out if you chose to actually talked to me rather than just sniping.