Yes Gus …. we can only hope that little johnee’s battlers have finally seen through the royal flim-flam perpetrated on them for more than a decade …. seems more than a few do ….

from Crikey ….

Feed the machine and play the policy pokies

Christian Kerr writes -

“If people are arguing there hasn't been a strategic long-term change to our tax system, I don't agree with them,” the Prime Minister told ABC Radio this morning.

Well, the average weekly windfall from last night will be a mighty $16. True, that’s better than Amanda Vanstone’s famous “a sandwich and a milkshake if you’re lucky” - but it’s only two sandwiches and a milkshake.

The simple fact remains it’s dead easy to run a surplus and give away goodies at budget-time when you are over-taxing the electorate.

The Budget papers spell it out very clearly. Personal income tax continues to be the Government’s largest source of revenue.

It’s likely to remain that way. There’s been a lot of talk about a boom in revenue from company tax, but this always ebbs and flows.

Hitting the punters remains the Government’s best source of revenue. Last night's tax cuts barely give away bracket creep.

I hate to invoke Sharan Burrow in any economic argument, but it’s hard not to agree with her comments that the tax cuts are too little, too late “when we know that average-income earners will get only $14 and they are paying up to $100 extra in interest-rate increases, in petrol, in rising costs of food and services”.

Much is made, however, of John Howard’s empathy with middle Australia, and he seems to have made a remarkable observation.

He seems to have noticed just how many Australians know that playing the pokies is dumb, but keep feeding in the coins in the hope of hitting the jackpot once in a while. He’s realised that for them the magic of the moment overcomes the logic of the economics.

Come budget-time, he and his Treasurer provide bells and whistles and flashing lights.

Some lucky punters get a handful of coins -- but everyone is entertained.

and ….

No budget for middle-class Sapphists

Jody Ekert, a partnered, childless, middle-income-earning lesbian, writes:

For most of the year I can convince myself that I'm actually a pretty ordinary Aussie citizen, but there's nothing like a Budget announcement to show how little I matter -- as a partnered, childless, middle-income-earning lesbian.

Forget the fact that the "family" parts of the Budget won't include two women - let's just look at some of the things I've heard or seen this morning (mostly on Sunrise or in the SMH, so trust them at your peril!)

Increase in child-care rebate and a change in the way it's paid. Oh goody. Now even more money can flow through into the hands of the care-for-profit-child-care centres like ABC Learning, where the dude in charge already has his own private jet - last year $128 million of the rebate went straight to them.

$1 billion on obesity programs - gee, I wonder how that stacks up against advertising campaigns of the big junk food companies. I've read KFC is around $100 million so combined with all the other evil, but yummy, places it's probably not even a dollar-for-dollar battle.

$5 billion endowment fund for universities. It's aimed at providing buildings and the like I think - pity though, that no one can afford uni anymore with Hecs hanging over their heads, and even if they do go they can't enjoy it, given that there are no great on-campus activities funded by unions any more.

$700 for out-of-school tuition. Hmmm...why not give the money to the bloody teachers or schools, rather than private tutoring companies that pay bored uni students $40 a hour to write HSC papers for their students.

$8000 for solar panels. Pity I can't afford a bloody HOUSE isn't it? What about more first homeowner help - or abolishment of stamp duty - which was promised with the introduction of GST anyhow.

Extra super co-contribution. I now earn too much for this, which means I'm in the no-woman’s land of no help for anything really. And if you really think workers on $28,000 a year are going to give a toss about this and add $1000 to their super, then you've never tried to actually live on $28,000. It all goes on things like, der, FOOD.

$500 bribe for seniors - never mind the fact that most of them already hog all the property, and these days are retiring baby boomers with $$$ hidden everywhere -- good way to buy votes!

What I would do with the money:

A HEAP of dollars to get people out of the city into large towns and even smaller towns to try and “drought proof” those communities - more people living there would mean more services, jobs, business etc. Also would lower pressure on rent and property prices in the cities. As a bonus we could send entire sub-cultures - Emos would probably like their own pain-filled dust bowl.

LOTS of that obesity money into after-school sports and PE teachers for schools - every kid must be sweating at least an hour a day. This is a bonus because it would also employ lots of lesbians. You could also ban junk ads aimed at kids - although that may result in loss of advertising jobs for poofs.

HELP me with my super - even though I earn a decent amount I can't contribute to super AND save for a house. PLEASE pick one of these areas for some assistance cause I KNOW you know that there won't be a pension when I'm old.

Government-funded-community-not-for-profit-child-care centres only please. Free if possible. Why do we have all of our intelligent mums locked away at home when they could be out back at work?

And if you don’t have kids, which is probably the best thing to do for our environment, you get a bonus for being unselfish, and can spend that on expensive champagne and good nights out about the town. Or spend it on pampering your pets, who are much more fun than a drooling toddler.

Thanks for nothing, Johnnie!

We got it wrong on AWA fairness, Hockey says

Workplace Relations Minister Joe Hockey says the Federal Government got it wrong when it failed to include a safety net for workers on Australian Workplace Agreements (AWA).

The Government is currently undertaking a $4.1 million advertising blitz to explain the new fairness test for low and middle income workers on AWAs.

Mr Hockey says workers will now have better protection than when the legislation was first introduced.

"I wasn't the Minister for Workplace Relations but if you're saying to me that we got it wrong in the past, well we did," he said.

"We got it wrong. We underestimated what would have happened if we put in place a system that may lead to people trading away penality rates without fair compensation."

---------------------

Gus: How come the Government admits now "it got it wrong"? With all their management skills "they got it wrong"? says nothing much for the skills.... But... Is this a ploy to woo voteers back to the fold and then, after the elections, putting some acid back in the bathtub? You better believe it...