© Provided by The GuardianPhotograph: Mick Tsikas/EPA
Call it the original spin: is the glass half empty or half full?
While the conundrum is bookmarked as a showdown between the optimist and the pessimist, there is so much more going on below the surface: the size of the vessel, who is pouring the drink and, critically, how it's presented to the thirsty punter.
Tuesday's budget is being presented as the proverbial "cup runneth over" with all the pre-budget posturing about pumping billions into politically problematic areas under the cover of blank cheque pandemic politics.
Related: Guardian Essential poll: Australians divided over government's ban on travel from India
Meanwhile, treasurer Josh Frydenberg is hosing down the deficit hawks with his upbeat "no austerity" messaging with no intention of plugging any fiscal leaks until well into the next electoral cycle.
But is anyone listening? Judging from this week's Guardian Essential Report, the government positioning is setting up a disconnect with public expectations, where the majority of respondents are expecting a much drier offering.
Two things stand out in this table. The first is that half of respondents have neutral or no expectations on the impact on the budget on them personally. The second is that the only groups who a majority think will prosper are those who are already doing well.
What is less clear is whether a budget that runs so against the conservative grain proves to be a tonic for a still-anxious electorate, or just another fizzy sugar hit that washes through media cycle.
While expectations on the budget are not particularly high, the public does believe there is important work to be done, none more so than in aged care and women's safety.
In this context, and judging by past performance, the prime minister is likely to gush that this budget puts these issues to bed, with the billions over the four years swamping any more granular analysis of the real challenges these sectors face.
Yet behind the pre-budget headlines of cash splash, there's the sobering reality that the billions announced will not touch the sides. Experts say the spending foreshadowed will not address the crisis on aged care nor have the transformative effect on early learning that would set up the nation for a new generation of prosperity.
Which brings us to the credibility of the person pouring out the cash. Liberal governments have the luxury of being able to spray things around because they carry the mantle of "better economic manager" as a brand attribute that stubbornly transcends objective performance.
© Photograph: Mick Tsikas/EPA'Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is hosing down the deficit hawks with his upbeat "no austerity" messaging with no intention of plugging any fiscal leaks until well into the next electoral cycle.'
For its part Labor appears marooned. Arguing the budget is "half-empty" opens up the attack that the ALP is the one that spills the fiscal drinks and can't be trusted with economic management. The same arguments will be made if they call the government for walking away from its debt commitments with the well-tested mantra that "the Liberals will always have smaller deficits".
An alternate strategy might be to focus on the water quality. That's what the Liberals did under Tony Abbott when Labor served up its successful GFC stimulus package, boiling it down to over-priced school canteens and pink batt snafus. Rather than debating how full the glass is, Labor can follow a similar tack and put the microscope on the current slush: rorts and boondoggles and saturation payments to top end of town consultants that seem inherent in Coalition spending initiatives.
Given much of these budget promises will not wash through until after the next election, the real action may be down the other end of the bar where the challenge is to roll out a credible vaccination program and scale quarantine so that Australia can begin to reengage with the rest of the world.
Right now, we are happily sailing solo, and while this has been a winning course to date, separate figures in this week's report suggest mixed feelings on the Fortress Australia approach to Australian citizens in India.
While there is more support for the government's bans and sanctions on returning citizens, it is not a resounding majority and counter messages that Australian citizens should find a way home have the strongest level of support.
The truth is that where Australia lands with its borders will ultimately have a deeper impact on both the economy and politics of Australia over the next 12 months than any line item in Tuesday's budget.
Can the government keep its population safe by building supply and confidence in vaccines? Can it build robust quarantine to reengage with other nations without risking further lockdown? Can it manage its fraying relations with China and newfound tensions India? Or will it take refuge in prolonged isolation, even at the risk of long-term economic interests.
This remains a heady cocktail of wicked problems for the Morrison government, for which this week's budget will only be the aperitif.