Aussies want public services over tax cuts

By Leith van Onselen

According to a Newspoll of more than 1500 people, Australian voters are more interested in spending on public services than personal income tax cuts or cutting government debt.

33% believe increased funding for services should be the top priority, followed by 30% who want government debt to be dealt with. Coming in third was slashing income taxes, which was the top priority for 27% of voters. From The Australian:

The result differs along party lines, however, with 45% of Coalition voters nominating paying down debt as their top concern, whereas 49% of Labor and 45% of Greens voters nominating increased public services as their top priority.

Thus, it appears most Australians do not believe that in an era of Budget deficits and acute pressures across public services, that it is appropriate to spend scarce taxpayer funds on reducing personal tax rates.

MB is also concerned that the Federal Budget is not yet on a sustainable footing. Therefore, any tax cut would merely worsen the Budget deficit.

[email protected]


    • “Is that Mr. Ackbar? Mrs. Slocombe here, your next-door neighbor. I wonder, would you do me a favour? Would you go to my front door, bend down, and look through the letter-box? And if you can see my pussy, would you drop a sardine on the mat?”

  1. meh, Aussies are always happy to pay higher taxes for climate change/schools/hospitals etc until they’re asked to pony up the cash. Then the worm suddenly turns and the Opposition plays merry hell.

    Not saying in the current climate Labor’s focus on schools, hospitals and Medicare isn’t a winner, because it definitely is. With the Income Recession eating away at household’s ability to fend for themselves more and more households are looking to the Government to provide a safety net.

    However if the safety net gets bad press and an Opposition presents “cash in your pocket, next pay” as a viable alternative the angry, self-centered voters can switch sides pretty quickly.

    • I want tax cuts and more stuff. Can I get both?
      On a more serious note I don’t think that we can really repair the household balance sheet without some big deficits like they are doing in the US and other Western countries.

    • The public usually pay no mind to “bracket creep” until the opposition or media ring alarm bells about it.
      You’d think the government would just keep quiet as its an easy way to increase tax revenue.

  2. Leith

    The result of this survey is because about 60% of Australians pay no net tax. The game for older,richer Australians is franking credits and cash rebates= no tax. For poorer, older Australians it is all the money in the family house = no tax give money to the children with cash back when needed, get a health care card and go on the pension and cruise on ships. For the real poor there is free health even if no good and disability pension if you can get it -if not then the pension. Pity the poor taxpayer who pays for all this with 40-50% tax rates.

    • ” For the real poor there is free health even if no good and disability pension if you can get it -if not then the pension”

      For the real poor, I don’t mind paying taxes to contribute to a civil society, that includes raising newstart.

      However, I also want my cake too – preferably a vegan raw one by Coco – and that delicious serve would include inheritence/wealth tax, slashing all the loopholes (including franking cash rebates, CGT, NG etc etc etc), making corporates pay proper tax (hat tip michael west) and yep that’d probably pay for a tax cut for me, but if it doesn’t, I’m ok with that.

      • Inheritance/wealth tax…are you kidding? As you build wealth through life you are already paying income tax, capital gains tax, consumption taxes etc. What is left over after paying those taxes is what your ‘wealth’ is based on. Levying an inheritance tax after you’ve already paid all those other taxes is just plain old double taxation on wealth that has ALREADY been taxed during the wealth accumulation phase.

      • Yes but wouldn’t a wealth tax on old man Lang’s estate have had implications for Mrs Porteous as well?
        And what about all the lawyers retained by both Gina and Rose to fight over the estate – not much point if the ATO grabs too big a chunk? Won’t somebody think of the lawyers?
        Or is that a feature, not a bug?

  3. DefinitelyNotTheHorribleScottMorrisonPM

    Public services are universally awful regardless of how much cash you spunk on them. See NHS.

  4. This does not compute to Scummo. His value set does not include services especially to the Poor who in his view are responsible for their own poverty. He only understands the virtues of cutting taxes and services.

  5. Slash all the middle class welfare first. Then I don’t see any reason why we wouldn’t be able to do both.

  6. Yes, i’m sure all those millions of new PR’s working cash jobs would rather I pay more tax so their elderly parents can get free healthcare.

    • Scrap family reunions. If you want your parents to help when you have a baby, the parents can come out on a 3 month tourist visa. Significantly reduce the maximum applicant age for migrants – we shouldn’t be accepting migrants at 50 years old who end up doing low skilled / low tax contributing work.

    • Kinda like the banking sector aye? Getting 10c to the dollar back from Lehman Brothers would’ve been a pretty good deal..

  7. Meaningless virtue signal from the left and right. Right: I’d prefer to pay down debt. Left: I’d prefer bigger government.

    Best taken with a grain of salt.

  8. Surprised?? Of course they do, f$#% all people actually pay net tax to the government. More free services for the masses that I can fund. Of course it will be means tested so I wont get the new services. Socialism is great!