Hello to Ireland,
Are you suggesting laziness on a forum of developers that give their time, effort and knowledge for free?
No that is not the reason.
yes, this is part of the reason, Journal has taken the work of other developers - this is very annoying - it is unethical in every business field, software is no different.
But actually, as is being explained over and over again .. the problem with Journal and specifically with the point asked in this thread - IT IS TOO HEAVY - it loads the kitchen sink and if it was written better and only used what is required there would not be so much of an issue.
Caching caching and caching is not supposed to solve overloaded sites, it is supposed to be the final finishing.
Yes it offers the end user and quick and cheap way of throwing something that looks half decent together, that is unfortunately all the end user cares about until they have to pay Journal for support (this is not directed the the OP who has been very pleasant, honest and is not at fault) - and come here expecting (! often with criticism and no thanks) free support .. this is a very reasonable problem to have with them.
That is my rant over,
To increase speed of your site, minimise what is loaded, ensure your images are the correct size & compress them (tinypng.com) and if you really want to reduce the loading time, you need to remove Journal and find something less cumbersome (or hire a developer to remove the bloat for you) viewforum.php?f=88