Many commentators seem to be interested in how these initiatives will be paid for by Australia, and to expect Tristan to give details of that.

I have already given my opinion that there are numerous potential income streams. Tristan no doubt has some ideas of his own.

However I should note that many politicians with much more access to policy experts than Tristan feel free to promise initiatives without explaining how they will be paid for. Tony Abbot's Liberals are famous for that.

I would also point out that some areas of spending seem to go under people's radars, and not at all connected to the immense effect they have on dispersing precious taxpayer's revenue.

I give as an example the $1.7 billion dollars currently being spent every year on the war in Afghanistan. The cost of that war to Australia currently exceeds $7 billion dollars.

The value of this spendingt is highly disputed. I don't remember any discussion of costings takeing place before the Liberal government committed Australia's troops to Afghanistan (not to mention Iraq). There are many other examples.

I suggest that a call for costing seems to be highly selective for many people, and depends on the worth they see in the project at question.

imajulianutter,

You say that I “have had to subscribe to Crikey”. I have not had to subscribe to Crikey and I have never subscribed to Crikey. I just post on Poll Bludger every now and again – and for free.

Election results are a fair assessment of the public’s judgement of a government’s performance, but you listed a number of factors which you said explained those results. I replied re one state and one of those issues, with specific facts. The facts on Victorian Labor’s achievements in education cannot be disputed. The issues that were covered in the election are also facts, available to anyone who perused the media. The evidence that education was not an issue that cost Victorian Labor the election is contained in the posts I linked to; viz, the many times that other issues are mentioned but education is not. I understand you to be a Queensland resident, so I do not expect you to have daily access to the 2010 election campaign in Victoria.

I have no idea what your “federal trashing of grants to private schools means”. The Coalition brought in a funding model, the SES model, that is so bad for private schools that it underfunds half of them, yet it poses as their defender. Labor had a model that funded them more generously, the ERI model, and which continues to apply to half of them because they are so badly treated by the SES model, yet it is portrayed as the threat to them. I expect the Liberal Party’s scare campaign on private school funding to collapse once the Gonski implementation details are announced.

The real problem that all state governments have is the expectation for better services, lower taxes and no debt –no government can make those three things work together, as Ted Baillieu is finding out now. When he fails to “fix the problems”, he too will be gone, and at some future date the Labor government that replaces his will also be gone. That’s how it works.

Chris you go on about everything but the election results? Aren't they the key fact here?

It's not about how successful labor's implementation of good policy.

It's all about public perception and how the public votes.

That tells us how we all feel about labor and it's performance.

You don't have to pay a subscription to Crikey. Wow. Then why do they always want to charge me for access? Are they free to those they see as labor spin merchants?

-

*It’s the role of those who design policy to analyse those before a policy is put in place. This will mostly government employees*

Well there is the rub, Let's Talk. Govt employees mostly don't have
the foggiest idea as to how smart investors think, or they would
not be Govt employees. So they generally stuff it up and the debacles
are for all to see in the real world. But by then its all to late.

Somehow you think that smart and productive people will just sit
there and get screwed by the likes of you. Well I have news for you.
They will react in ways that you have not even dreamed of, it they
think that you are being unfair, to feather your own little pet nest.

*Well, I propose they start with their senior management salaries, which are famously colossal in size*

This is where you show your ignorance. Even if all four CEOs of our
biggest banks worked for free, given that their gross assets managed
amount to a couple of trillion $, that would not even be a pimple
on the bottom line. But one wrong decision by any of those 4 people,
could easily cost the bank a billion and that would be paid for by
average Australians who have a super fund investment.

*Secondly, you claim that “most bank shares are owned by super funds”. Do you offer any proof for that claim?*

I am not here to write you a detailed report, Let's Talk. You would
have to pay me for that. It is common knowledge in the financial
world

imajulianutter,

I have no idea why Crikey wants to charge you for access. The Poll Bludger site existed long before it became part of Crikey. I just clicked on http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollbludger and went directly to Poll Bludger. There is no subscription or fee. You can try the same. If you can’t get on, I do not know why. I make comments because I registered years ago before Poll Bludger had anything to do with Crikey.

I do not go on about “everything but the election results”. I mentioned poll results: “Election results are a fair assessment of the public’s judgement of a government’s performance”. I made a specific argument that education was not the cause of the Victorian Labor government’s election loss. In order to make that argument, I gave links to show that Labor’s education policy, which I detailed, was so successful that the Coalition did not even campaign on the issue and to election commentary that did not bother mentioning education, something that has been an issue in every previous state election I have observed – and that goes back more than 40 years. Had Labor performed as well in the other areas you mentioned as it did in education, it would still be in government.

People’s perceptions are formed partly by the media, and the media published attack after attack on the Victorian Labor government but refused to publish letters pointing out the falseness of those attacks. I have given examples in the links above.

Also, do not forget that Victorian Labor lost by only one seat and the current opinion polls put it behind only 49-51 on a two-party preferred vote.

*Govt employees mostly don't have
the foggiest idea as to how smart investors think, or they would
not be Govt employees. So they generally stuff it up and the debacles
are for all to see in the real world. But by then its all to late.*

- Yes of course. The GFC was all the fault of government employees, wasn't it. Not rich execs in highly profitable finance corporations being greedy. No, they're too smart to fxxk things up that much.

*Well, I propose they start with their senior management salaries, which are famously colossal in size

This is where you show your ignorance. Even if all four CEOs of our
biggest banks worked for free, given that their gross assets managed
amount to a couple of trillion $, that would not even be a pimple
on the bottom line. *

- A pimple well worth squeezing, and good evidence that big 4 banks have plenty of fat ready to trim.

*I am not here to write you a detailed report [on Big Bank Shareholders], Let's Talk. You would
have to pay me for that. It is common knowledge in the financial
world.*

Well then allow me to offer you some information - for free! I know, actually sharing information (or anything) without charging for it is bizarre to you, but hey, I'm all heart.

Top Shareholders of all Big 4 Banks?
HSBC Custody Nominees (Australia) Limited
JP Morgan Nominees Australia Limited
National Nominees Limited
Citicorp Nominees Pty Limited

The biggest of all of them?
Mega International Bank HBSC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hsbc
17.46% of ANZ 13.59% of CBA 16.86% of NAB 14.88% of WBC

"As of 2011 it was the world's second-largest banking and financial services group and second-largest public company"

Oh yeah, I'd weep if anything the government did cut into their profits and paid for much needed Australian services. That would be such a terrible unintended consequence.