With elections looming Labor is trying hard to sell the message that their policies are good for Australia. However, it would appear that the problem that Labor has is that Australians have already judged Labor's policies and found their lives the worse for it.

"AUSTRALIANS are increasingly concerned they are over taxed and not receiving value for their dollar in public spending by government.

In another blow to the Gillard government's ability to sell its message, the annual Per Capita Tax Survey shows almost half of all Australians households believe they have received no compensation from the carbon tax - when around 90 per cent of households have received some sort of recompense.

The survey found the Coalition's negativity and call for "no more big new taxes" is clearly resonating with the electorate as as the majority of Australian believe the balance of tax and spending is not treating them fairly, almost 60 per cent of respondents surveyed stated that Australia was a "high-taxing, big government country".

Overall the survey shows that most Australians believe they pay too much tax, especially among the highest earners above $150,000, while support for increased spending in health, education, social security, defence and foreign aid have slumped, albeit from high levels. David Hetherington executive director of Per Capita, a progressive think tank, said Australians want to see a greater level of prudence from the government."

Shadow how could Labor ever deliver value for money?

Ever since Richardson found stupid policies could buy a few more votes than they lost, it has been all down hill.

Julia is using every penny she can get her hands on to but yet another special interest groups vote, & to hell with the good of the country. As long as the majority, or a high percent minority didn't look at politics other than on election day, they were continuing to get away with it.

Julia & Kevvy have stuffed up so badly that even that majority have noticed, & they are all saying no, Labor doesn't deliver value for money, & must be gone.

Actually they do!
Gillards plea, for solidarity from one who has not yet wiped the blood from her hands is great comedy.
Unfortunately Labors policy,s, not all but many are great.
However waiting for the bus, to run over Gillard, seems to be a hobby within the ALP believe me, no leader ever has more within the party wanting to drive the bus.

Belly, I'll bite old mate.

Give us a list of what you consider the Labor government's current good policies.

I am not having a go, I genuinely want to know what you see as good. I'd also like to hear what other contributors see as good policy coming from Julia.

Do Labor deliver value for money?

I really can't see them going against their own policy.

Dear Shadow Minister,

An interesting post, not so much for what was in it but rather what you left out.

What the original article said was;

“Objectively, this does not make sense. The tax take in Australia, measured by the tax-to-GDP ratio, has hit long-term lows in the last few years. Australia now has the fifth lowest tax burden of the 34 OECD countries, higher only than South Korea, Chile, the United States and Mexico. Recent public spending cuts, particularly in health and education, would normally be expected to lift support for greater spending.”

“However, it is perception rather than fact that drives attitudes...”

http://www.percapita.org.au/01_cms/details.asp?ID=578

So why have you put the spin on it that you did? Was it so OLO's grumpy old men could flap their gums in chorus? I can't really blame them because they are reacting to what you have fed them.

You were on pretty safe ground with both Hasbeen and Individual because they were unlikely to challenge anything that feeds their intense and quite frankly irrational hatred of Gillard, but how do you do it? You read it, you saw what it actually said yet you set about selectively quoting to promote a lie.

In fact it is really quite disgraceful. Are you a politician? The coalition may well feel they need to peddle this message as disingenuous as it is but why on earth are you conducting yourself in this manner?

It reflects more than a little poorly on you.

Shameful, really shameful.

I think the word 'can' should be reserved for an incoming government and the word 'have' would be more appropriate for a current government.

So using that example, the answer is a definite NO!

Even if labor did have a few good ideas, it's their lack of ability to implement them that has failed them, time and time again.

Steely old chap you must be confused.

Gillard could never raise such a strong emotion in me as hate. I most definitely despise her, & that is something she has most assuredly earned, from all thinking people.

Csteele,

Thanks for pointing out the blindingly obvious in that I don't reproduce entire articles in my posts.

If you could lift your head above nitpicking, you would see that the article was precisely about voters' perceptions, and the caveats that the author included, such as a drop in government revenue from corporate tax, were meaningless when the personal tax burden and cost of living increased.

Voters quite rightly compare themselves against how they were, not against someone in the OECD or Asia. People are feeling "buyers remorse." They elected Labor and are now wishing they hadn't.

The latest polls are the clearest indication.

Belly>> Actually they do!<<

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah.

Really Belly give it a rest, you keep mouthing fact deficit rubbish, like Gillard.

I have told you Belly that you are nothing to the party you blindly support, but like the drovers dog you keep barking like a four legged accolyte.

Belly you have the SAME rationality of that mental giant Bill Shorten:

"I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PRIME MINISTER SAID, BUT I SUPPORT IT"

"I DON'T KNOW WHAT SHE SAID BUT I AM SURE SHE IS RIGHT"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kf4nlIEHfaU

Belly have you ever had an original thought in your life, or do they just wind you up each morning to get your mouth flapping tiger?

csteele,
c'on, you post is nothing but a typical leftie panicky rambling of denouncing anything to do with sense.
Your mob can't manage, simple. You don't like people waking up to the fact that your mob is utterly incompetent, stiff ! Don't forget that the ultimate vote changer is after all the back pocket. You know the one Labor is failing to top up whilst their own are bulging.

Dear Individual,

Hardly my mob but really just have a look at your post. I come on here and provide source documents and you reply with platitudes. If it makes you feel good then fine but it was just lightweight fluff. How about posting something a little more substantial once in a while. I won't hurt you and it just might help you move away from the vacuous, tedious sniping you are constantly engaging in.

In other words how about giving the rest of us readers value for money?

It is amazing how many commentators ignore the reality of the global situation. Our economy and the economies of most of the developed world has fallen for the mantra and propaganda of the right wing think tanks and business 'policy' councils.

Contrary to the Reagan/Thatcher nonsense of "trickle down" the more egalitarian the society the easier it is for a sovereign (money issuing) government to ensure a smoothly running economy and provide a reasonably high standard of living for all citizens.

People who do not understand want a balanced budget or austerity, both sure to cause a turn-down in the economy. Any budget surplus means the private sector loses financial assets if the current account is in balance. That does not mean that real assets can not increase in value particularly if the banks lower their lending criterion and take more risks, such as led to the GFC, and which under Howard and Costello started to price young working people out of the housing market.

Both major parties advocate a balanced budget over the business cycle whereas the budget deficit over the business cycle can at least match the total growth over that cycle. Every comment so far today shows that the commentator needs to read up on money theory. The primer by Professor Randall Wray might be a start.

Please, Foyle, there is absolutely no need to introduce either facts or common sense into this discussion.

>>Every comment so far today shows that the commentator needs to read up on money theory<<

This thread is for one-eyed, rusted-on ideological bigots only, providing a vehicle that allows them to parade their blind allegiances and media-fed preconceptions. The blustering braggadocio of armchair triumphalists, or the bitter backlash of trashed expectations - that's all we can expect, I'm afraid.

In other words how about giving the rest of us readers value for money?
csteele,
I do constantly you just fail to comprehend. Do you think it value for money to build a school for 42 million dollars for a 400 strong community with some 85 children ? Do you think it value for money to pay half a million to the CEO of a 5000 strong community which has no internal revenue i.e. no ratepayers etc ?
Btw that's our inheritance from a dumbcrap Labor Government.

Gee Pericles, get out of bed on the wrong side did you lovey. Never mind we love you, & your fool mate Foyle, even if you can't understand you can't spend money you don't have forever.

Oh, & Foyle you have to try to understand that governments can't hold the hands of everyone forever. Their job is to set the scene for everyone to prosper, and then get out of the blood way, & let them. The more they interfere the more the system fails.

I would have thought you would still be able to remember communism, it was not that long ago it failed, using those ideas you now push.

There is one group who are very happy with the labor government - namely the approx 2,000 WELFARE FOR LIFERS WHO HAVE ARRIVED THIS MONTH ALONE, THIS IS THE MONSOON SEASON - I DREAD TO SEE WHAT WILL COME WHEN IT IS OVER IN APRIL.

All the homeless will be unhappy because these 2,000 will now be given priority housing at taxpayer expense thus putting further pressure on the cost of renting for average Australians.

GOODBYE JULIAR FOREVER.

I'm wondering what organisation with a monopoly and or the ability to force compliance ever delivers real value for money.

I think the original thread was targeting relative value for money along partisan lines but I suspect that debate will be largely lost along the lines of political preferences. For the record as someone who normally votes for the coalition voter I'm not convinced they give me value for money either.

I think there is a tendency for any group that is able to use other peoples money without the other have much effective choice in the matter to fail to deliver value for money.

I don't think that's just about government inefficiency either, outsourcing (or selling) to private companies never seems to genuinely drive costs down or deliver improved services, at best it's a short term cash injection to the government of the day and maybe a sweet deal to mates running the companies involved.

While people don't have real choice about the services they use there is little motivation to really deliver value for money.

R0bert

someone who normally votes for the coalition voter I'm not convinced they give me value for money either.
R0bert,
I'm more inclined to say that the Coalition gives some value for money whereas Labor (I can only speak from personal experience) gives none to those who deserve & goes over the top to reward those who chose to be a burden to the rest of us.

Obviously most people have no idea about the real purposes of debt and revenue in an economy and their relationship to employment, interest rates and infrastructure.

the real purposes of debt and revenue in an economy
wobbles,
It's a totally artificial system which only serves those who pursue money for the sake of pursuing money. It really doesn't seem to address sustainability etc for society otherwise we would be better off wouldn't we ?
What is a cracking business to one is a sweat shop hell hole to another. If you really want value for money you'd need a flat tax & a user pays system.
Where's the value in having so many people being kept ? Where is the value when incentive has gone out the window ? Where's the value when your people pay more than 50% of their income in rent ? Where's the value in Governments not cracking down on Superannuation bosses shooting through with the money ? Where's the value in a Law & Order system that doesn't provide Law & order ? Where's the value in the massive cost for keeping more than half a dozen ex Prime Ministers ? Where's the value in having a Defence Force when all the invaders have to do is jump on an old boat & simply sail here ? etc. etc. etc.

https://www.quibids.com/en/landing/index.php?mb=hla
wobbles,
now there's an idea, check that link.

individual, we do seem to get a lot more "government" with Labor, not sure how that effects the value for money proposition.

I see people bragging about the number of laws passed by the current federal government as though that was a good thing. I'm more of the view that I'd like a lot less laws so I don't see that as a good thing unless there is reason to believe all those laws somehow make Australia a better place - an unlikely proposition for those who value freedom.

R0bert

Does Labor deliver value for money?

The short answer is NO!

Nor can Mr Rabbott’s mob or the Greens or the KAP. We can give legitimate examples of waste and stupidity from the four corners of politics.

It should not be lost that Mr Rabbott had as much potential power in this parliament as Gillard but did not have the skill to play the cross benches and for that matter Labor. Blind ambition and inflexibility, does not a good Prime Minister make.

The only way to minimise loss and improve value for money is to make government a small as possible. Don’t forget when both sides say “we will” they really mean “you will”, pay that is! Change will involve average Joe Blow giving up the national sport of apathy, others removing the eye patches that obviously many of the contributors to OLO wear. Embrace a DIY philosophy as much as one can, with a good dose of compassion and good will.

Meanwhile until we can achieve proportional representation, I say HANG EM! A hung parliament is our only defence against the corporate parties and their respective vested interests.

Producer

My slant on this (ignoring the current mob) is that any party should be able to govern, that is not value for money. Value for money is that they not only govern but they improve the nation in some way.

In context the ALP fail both scores, they fail to govern and they fail to improve the nation. They have a big laundry list of policies they have even rejected themselves.

This government has a far bigger spending foot print but no real benefit I can see, so vale and the ALP are words that seem to have no association.

WRT the opposition .... hopefully they can at least govern and keep a lid on spending..... anything positive beyond that would be added value.

The labor government is not perfect, that’s for sure, what choice do we have? Look at Queensland since the Liberal took over!Many jobs cuts and all in the most important department,health, education, now it look like Mr.Newman want to privatise the health system, Queenslander would be in the same position than people in the US,no private health insurance, no treatment! I am currently in Queensland to provide help and support to my daughter and grand son who is in the Royal Brisbane Hospital with cancer, after my arrival I had a terrible tooth ache and a very swollen face, I was refused emergency treatment because I was not a Queenslander (I hold an age pension card) it seem that Mr. Newman is trying to build an independent state within Australia with his own rules and laws).
It gives a taste of what’s to under the Liberal, especially under Mr. Abbott who can't be trusted, he is never willing to say what his future government plans are, his comments are “all will be revelled in good time”! then it will be too late for the majority of Australian people.The Liberal want to keep the rich richer and the poor poorer, we paid to much taxes, if the big companies were paying there fare share things could changes. To get rich you need workers, if you look after your workers your company will flourish but when enough is enough the people fight back and you have strikes with lots of working days lost this equal lost of money for the rich.

It is time for them to remember we are in the 21st century not in medieval time. Yes the Labor party is not perfect but as much as it can it protects the workers and this is the majority of the population.

Who to vote for at the next election? Good question as we do not have much choice, Labor or Liberal? Forget the green and there hidden agenda, maybe it is where we should use the old say “BETTER THE DEVIL YOU KNOW THAN THE ONE YOU DON’T”

moucheninette you ain't seen nothing yet, when it comes to cuts to the Public service.

Whether it be Newman, or someone else, we need to reduce the bureaucracy by at least another 35% in Queensland. The only question is, will we do it very soon, or will the international monetary fund force us to do it in another few years.

Nationally it is more like 45% that we need to shed.

The latest figure I saw was 45% now work for government, or collect welfare from it. That's nearly one each to keep. How many are you paying for mate.

dear hasbeen,
I do agree there is to many public servant, but no government want to cut where it is needed. Sadly it is always the same who are cut out and they are the one we do need the most, POLICE, HEALTH AND EDUCATION.Until government decide to cut on useless bureaucracies it will not achieve any thing excepted hurting the majority of the population and the other one will keep there cushioned job, paid high wages and doing very little.
We do need doctors, our children need teacher and sadly we need police to keep bad guys off the street,

moucheninette, sadly, many have the opinion, 'it's my given right' to expect that everything treatment wise is free.

Well, let's go back twenty plus years and see why what should now be free to all, is no longer affordable.

During this period I have lost count of how many times the suggestion of work for the dole has been raised, only to be squashed, repeatedly by do-gooders.

We have also seen a few generations, who prior were unaffordable, but thanks to welfare, could now be affordable, cause someone else pays the bill, even when some of the parents refussed to work and were rewarded for it.

We saw the introduction of means testing, whereby those who contributed the most, were rewarded the least, so those who contributed less, received more. Back to front thinking if ever I saw it.

So the flip side of this saw many wealthy people find ways to minimize contributions(tax), so the candel started burning from both ends. Less revenue, more hand outs.

We have seen attempt after attempt to help indigenous communities lift themselves from the gutter, at a cost of billions and an apology, with the end result being that most people generally accept that this crowd ( and Im generalizing) are beyond help and we simply accept that they won't change. Their unemployment is not counted in our stats.

Continued

Continued by Rehctub
In recent times we have seen the worst government in history waste billions, on failure after failure, at a time when tax revenues have been in decline, further amplifying the waste, as the are less chances of replacing what's been wasted.

And of cause, there is the illegals debacle, again courtiousy of this imcompitent government, something that has the potential to break this nation.

You know it's a sad state when of the hundred odd thousand homeless, not one arrived illegally on a boat, or that while the illegals enjoy these tax payer funded benefits, our own pensioners often choose between the TV or the fan, as they can't afford both.

So the decline of affordable health care started twenty years ago, and failed policies, from both sides have caused this mess.

Picture us in another twenty years if little changes, but only if you're game.

Now can anyone tell me why they would risk voting for labor again, other than using Blimd instinct.

Rehctub – you do a bit of a dance around the relevant issues of make and take.

Firstly nothings free. Someone has to do it or make it and they have to be fed and live somewhere. The cause of the decrease in services that where available in the past, is that now there are more takers taking more and less makers who are getting less for what they make.

The concept of welfare is flawed. There should be “no sit down” money (the dole) but should be replaced by a minimum wage that is higher than the dole. It is “sit down” money and only this that causes welfare dependency whether it is on a remote aboriginal settlement or the suburbs of Sydney. I believe every person of working age in this country is entitled to a fair share of this countries productivity however should be required to do something meaningful for it, for a prescribed amount of time. Most importantly these activities should be controlled and tailored at local level, not centralised government. Some activities that come to mind are SES, volunteer fire brigade, public housing, child care and elder care. Everybody has the ability to do something meaningful, whereas work for the dole is seen and is demeaning. The minimum wage should rise and fall with our nation’s productivity.

Means testing (although it is better than nothing) is a ham fisted method as it penalises productive activities as well as the parasitic ones. It should be noted, just because an individual has accrued a lot of money doesn’t mean they have earned it or deserve it. I would much prefer to see a maximum income linked to sustainable productivity that can only be achieved by productive persons. Parasite activities on the other hand, should only achieve a medium level of income. This would encourage productive activities and decrease parasitic ones. The maximum wage like the minimum should rise and fall with our nation’s productivity.

Until we have a proportional voting system we will continue to get the Ineptocracy we didn’t vote for, irrespective of the franchise.