I'm getting very, very nervous waiting .... Howard's getting stuck into the policy before it's even be released. This had better be good, Mark!
Countdown to Latham's tax monster
(from crikey)
As you read this, a few dozen journos hold Mark Latham's immediate future in their hands. They have been locked up in a secure Sydney location and are reading and being briefed on Labor's tax package.
This is the first landmark in Campaign 2004. It is the most keenly awaited launch since...well, maybe The Beatles' follow-up to 'Abbey Road'. Or, at least, Radiohead's follow-up to 'OK Computer'.
I'm off to listen. Any minute now!
As AAP was reporting this morning: 'Latham's tax monster to be unveiled today'.
This "monster" has the power to lift Latham above the ruck and deliver him The Lodge - or destroy him politically. It's been coming out in drips and drabs - largely it seems from Simon Crean's office - and mainly through the News Ltd papers.
Paul Kelly in The Oz had the most comprehensive briefing, reporting today on analysis by the Melbourne Institute that the package would provide 72,000 jobs - read it here.
Will the package offer significant enough tax relief in the under $52,000 brackets - more than a couple of hamburgers and cokes? Will the tax rate changes for yuppies win the mortgaged swingers over from Howard?
Will Howard try and trump the package, as he did so successfully with Medicare yesterday? You betcha!
All will be revealed in an hour or so, and Crikey's second sealed edition this afternoon will bring it to you first.
`
rjb
this is pretty worthless but: WHAT DOES YALL MEAN??????
Thok, how amazing! Labor's tax policy delivered via Vienna!
Not much detailed analysis so far. Apparently the economic "experts" are wading through this very bulky document before making definitive statements. It looks pretty tame to me. But Costello (Liberal Treasurer) is already crying "dishonest!". Here's a response from Crikey:
Latham's tax surprise
Political editor Christian Kerr reports from Labor's tax launch:
And the big surprise about Labor's tax package is? Well, it's not really a tax package.
Remember the Government's environment statement a few months ago that turned out to be an energy statement? Labor's tax package is rather like that. It's more about family payments and welfare to work measures.
It's not a big bang. It's not a barbecue stopper. In fact, to mix up the barbecue metaphors, it's like a very slow roast on the Weber.
Look at the full title. It's "Labor's Tax and Better Family Payment Plan".
Labor's policy features a working tax bonus that will increase the tax-free threshold to almost $8,500 for people earning less than $52,000 a year, and offers these people a tax cut of up to $8 a week. It also increases the top tax threshold to $85,000 from July 2006.
It also includes a significant overhaul of the family payments system. The family tax benefit A and B and the $600 supplement are rolled into one fortnightly payment, and Labor says it would increase the threshold at which the welfare payments are means-tested.
The new payment system will be subject to a single means test and delivers increased fortnightly payments to nine out of ten families who now receive the family tax benefit.
The policy also offers $248 million over four years in support to parents without jobs, providing them with child care and training to help them look for work. Labor plans to introduce a working tax credit to replace the low income tax rebate of $235 a year for people earning up to $21,600 a year. The policy also allows families to pool part of their incomes and pay less tax, delivering benefits of up to $20 a week per family.
See what we mean? Families, not tax.
At the stage of the campaign, with the polls the way they are - and after some of the strategic leaks over the last few days - we expected something bigger.
There are some nice lines in there: "Labor opened up the Australian economy and made us more competitive. Labor understands that to retain our prosperity we must be competitive internationally. That's why Labor will increase the top tax threshold to $85,000 from 1 July 2006. This measure will maintain Australia as a competitive place to work and assist Australian in retaining a skilled workforce
"
Nice lines - but
This is a slow burner. It's an excellent idea to make family assistance simpler, deliver fortnightly cash assistance, improve work incentives, fix family debt traps, help with the transition from welfare to work, improve participation rates in the labour market, end entrenched welfare dependency and do everything the policy says it does - but will it win votes?
Latham announced the policy in front of a very blue backdrop today. Very reassuring. Blue shirt, blue tie. But nothing to leap out and grab you.
Labor needs to do that at the moment. It hasn't with its tax and family payments plan. It's almost boring. Will the content trickle down to voters?
Latham made a gag about the Government. "On yesterday's form they'll be out by three o'clock," he said.
He shouldn't be laughing. The Government's big spending Medicare announcement trumped his. Come Friday and the Charter of Budget Honesty figures, they'll have room to trump this, too.
Labor has more than a month to sell the package and make voters familiar with the details, true. Is there more to come? Latham dropped some hints that this will be the case, that there's more to come.
Will a softly, softly approach work? It might make the punters sit back and think, but in a six week campaign they may have just turned off and subtle policy will simply drift past them - no matter how sound it is.
That's the risk Labor and Latham seem to have taken today.
~
msolga wrote: Thok, how amazing! Labor's tax policy delivered via Vienna!
sure, or do you think Australia is isolated from the world and not remarkable?
Yeah, why should I be surprised, Thok? Oz is truly amazing! & remarkable!
COMMENT
Selling his vision will be the Opposition Leader's greatest challenge, writes Michael Gordon.
Mark Latham has delivered on his promise to "ease the squeeze" on middle Australia, but failed his first big test as a salesman.
By over-claiming the benefits of his long-awaited tax and family payment policy, he has deflected attention from its undeniable attractions. These include an $8 tax cut for the four out of five taxpayers overlooked in John Howard's last budget, an increase in the top tax threshold, the simplification of the family payments system, and incentives for people to move from welfare to work.
Deliberately, Mr Latham did not factor the Government's annual $600 family tax benefit supplement into his claim that nine out of 10 families will be better off under his policy. Why? Because he does not consider the $600 to be "real" money. And why? Because it will be eaten up by the debts of those who have received overpayments, eroded over time for the rest, and delivered in the wrong form at the wrong time.
All valid arguments, but for those who do not carry family payment debts the $600 is real, indeed. Just ask them.
When the payment is factored in, Labor says seven out of 10 families will still be better off under its policy. So why give Peter Costello ammunition to accuse Mr Latham of trying to "hoax the folks"?
The main point of political vulnerability is that, by definition, there are losers as well as winners, further highlighting the need for simplicity in selling. The great strength of the policy is that it tries to confront the entrenched poverty that should have been tackled by a government in power nearly nine years and presiding over sustained economic prosperity.
In the assessment of the respected Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, it has the potential to increase labour force participation by 71,000 and reduce jobless families by about 49,000.
If Mr Latham faltered as salesman yesterday, he impressed as conviction politician. He knows about the hurdles of those in public housing, because he was one of them.
His focus is the third generation of young Australians "who don't know what work is". The aim is to "bring these people in" and then demand responsibility and effort from them in return.
Having constructed his ladder of opportunity, Mr Latham now faces the challenge of his life in selling it and, with the certainty of more money to spend, making it more attractive.
`
In case you don't live in Oz & might be wondering why Latham's tax policy is considered to be so important:
Financial management is Labor's Achilles heel, so to speak. A legacy of some unfortunate financial "mismanagement" by particular Labor governments (eg the Whitlam federal government, the (state Labor) Kirner government, ....)
As a result, recent state & federal Labor governments have had to go to extraordinary lengths to prove themselves responsible economic managers. Sometimes far too cautious for my liking, with the emphasis on budget surpluses at the expense of much needed investment in public services ... however, economic mismanagement remains a very potent tool for the Liberals to employ in their relentless "scare campaigns" during election campaigns ..... As the current Liberal government is doing at the moment, with it's campaign on interest rates under Labor & the constant suggestion that Labor doesn't "get it's sums right". So, of course, Labor proceeds with extreme caution, as Latham is doing at the moment. Any suggestion of incompetence would be jumped on in a minute, by the media & the Liberals, scaring the living daylights out of many potential Labor voters. So the challenge for Labor is to balance "responsible financial management" with much needed social reforms. Which explains their softly, softly approach. A delicate juggling act!
Anyway, If you're interested, here's a link to readers' quick responses to Labor's tax policy from the Sydney morning Herald:
http://www.smh.com.au/yoursay2/index.html
`
... and on a more humorous note, before I go:
National Party leader, John Anderson, yesterday declared that Green voters were like "water melons"
Why, you ask?
Because "they're green on the outside & red on the inside."
These are the same sort people who voted for the Communist Party in the 1950s, he declared.
Hmmmm.....I think I am speechless on that one.
msolga wrote:He really said that.
I wonder what colour a fascist like him is??
kicking the commie watermelon? Hope he was wearing welly's.
Good morning. Still no coverage of your election in the US media. That's a pity as I find yalls posts fascinating.
A diversion for melbourniancheese re YALL: I live in the southern part of the US where all of the backward folks live. The smart and rich people are in New York and California. We talk a little funny down here compared to the sophisticated folks up north and out west. Mr Bush is from Texas which is kind of in the south but, to tell the truth, he doesn't sound like those of us who are native to Virginia, the Carolinas, Georgia etc (If you want to see where exactly we are, check out the next hurricane map. We're right above Florida).
Anyway, I might say to melcheese: "Can you get the dog out of my yard?" but if your whole family was present I would say "Can yall get..."
"You all" became "Y'all" became just "yall." Trouble with the possessive was the problem: "Y'all's dog ate my chickens" so we went to just plain
YALL. Which evolved into no apostrophes at all: "Yalls dog..."
I apologize (not really, but I'll say that) for intruding. I'll try to stay out.
I enjoy reading yalls comments. -realjohnboy-
Aggghhh ... This avalanche of words, arguments, counter-arguments, half-truths, sinister warnings about interest rates, lies, etc., etc., about financial management, whether the $6oo is "real" or not, which party will put more in your pocket? ... & tomorrow, Costello's budget outlook! ... Which will unleash more of the same.
Am I the only one whose well past overload? The cartoonists are making far more sense to me right now:
Pity help the unemployed.
Now they're getting it from both sides!
This should be very interesting to follow!
Greens ready to deal: Brown
By Meaghan Shaw/the Age
Canberra
September 9, 2004
The Greens would consider an accord with the Labor Party to form government if it held the balance of power, Greens leader Bob Brown said yesterday.
Both Prime Minister John Howard and Nationals leader John Anderson raised the prospect of a hung parliament this week after polls showed the two major parties neck and neck.
Senator Brown said he would also consider an accord with the Liberal Party but any deal would be based on the Greens' policies.
"We would look at the options that give the people the best outcome," he told the National Press Club. ........
(complete article)
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/09/08/1094530691575.html?from=moreStories#top