Given the innate contradictions of Hockeynomics as we know them, it's understandable that he would like as little scrutiny as possible of whatever it is that an Abbott government might promise – in writing – to actually do. As they stand, Hockeynomics are the generalisations of opposition and work well in that context, decrying the government's shortcomings, offering comfort to any and all vested interests, promising without detail a better and easier life for all. With Hockeynomics, you are promised that you can indeed have your cake and eat it too. That may be enough for the many who know no better or don't want to know better – yes, The Daily Telegraph hacks doing Murdoch's bidding come to mind – but there's an impressionable minority who don't want to vote for Labor but fear the apparent randomness of Abbott. The Hockeynomics contradictions were front and centre on Friday. You can either be appalled by the forecast rise in unemployment and give the impression you would reduce it, or you can be appalled by the larger deficit and give the impression you would reduce it – but you can't do both at the same time. If you accept that the economy will grow more slowly this financial year, that there's a bit of a gap in the transition from the resources construction boom to the rest of the economy lifting its game, the very good news in Friday's economic statement was that the deficit is indeed being allowed to grow. After heading in opposite directions over the past year, fiscal and monetary policy are now aligned, both providing stimulus for a year when growth will be softer. Just as the politics overshadowed the most important economics in the May budget, the higher deficit and unemployment rate grabbed the economic statement's headlines – they're the two simple issues that dominate the political screaming match.

Lost was the admission that the record fiscal contraction was even worse than published in May. The budget papers estimated 2012-13's public final demand (net state and federal government spending) would shrink by 0.5 per cent. The economic statement says it actually contracted by 1.5 per cent. The budget intended to keep public final demand flat this year. After the revised shortfall in revenue, the government is letting the “automatic stabilisers” do their stuff and public final demand is forecast to rise by 0.75 per cent this year and by 0.5 per cent next year before efforts to reduce the deficit kick in. VIDEO: 'Labor will never deliver a surplus' The new deficit forecast of $30.1 billion represents 1.9 per cent of gross domestic product, compared with the May prediction of an $18 billion deficit worth 1.1 per cent. Any business doing it tough should be grateful for that extra 0.8 percentage points, given that the economy is only expected to grow by 2.5 per cent. Yes, if a lunatic took control and immediately cut spending by $30 billion to balance the budget, GDP would theoretically grow by just 0.6 per cent at best – and actually by considerably less due to knock-on impact. So if the forecast 6.25 per cent unemployment rate is displeasing, there's no point demanding an immediately smaller deficit.

That's only the most obvious contradiction in Hockeynomics' standard chanting. The totality is worse. Even allowing for politicians' exaggerations, there's plenty in Penny Wong's claim of a $70 billion price tag on the Coalition's “everyone wins a prize” policies – promising to scrap taxes but maintain the spending, flip-flopping on Gonski despite Christopher Pyne's valid points about the funds available and efficiency of the spending, keeping open the loop holes, topped off by a “big new tax” to pay for a maternity leave policy that would cost $5 billion a year – and that's according to the Parliamentary Budget Office, the mob Hockey says he trusts, unlike Treasury. (It's some sort of measure of Abbott's maternity leave policy that the Liberal Party doesn't really want it but the Greens do.) And that's why it's possible that this is all very unfair to Joe Hockey, that he's just carrying the can for his leader as “Abbottnomics” doesn't sound as nifty. The Joe Hockey who declared the end of the age of entitlement doesn't fit with a shadow treasurer promising to go along with all Labor's big new giveaways and undoing their attempts to tighten up on the odd lurk and trim a little middle-class welfare. Still, it's Hockey who is searching for someone, anyone, to provide figures that he would like to believe. After the last election's effort of hiring a rubber stamp from an inconsequential firm of Perth accountants, you might think he would know better. Smart consultants provide the answers their employers are looking for and Australia has no shortage of that sort of consultant. A consultant here, a friendly state government there and even the Parliamentary Budget Office on a select policy or two can be fiddled into a mix-and-match set of rubber stamps before September 7, but they won't make Abbottnomics credible. As long as the contradictions remain so blatant and the would-be treasurer refuses to face the Treasury, Joe Hockey won't be alone in saying “I don't believe it”. Michael Pascoe is a BusinessDay contributing editor.