Reserve Bank Governor Michele Bullock may need her bulletproof vest when she speaks to the media next Tuesday after the bank’s two-day board meeting.

The US Federal Reserve’s interest rate cut of a hefty 0.5 percentage point this week (contrary to most modest forecasts) will put a lot of public pressure on the RBA, which is expected to keep the official Australian interest rate at 4.35%.

Bullock (who surely needs to stop worrying about a rate hike) could argue that the situation in Australia is different: inflation is still too high and if nothing is done about it we will all be worse off.

Moreover, US tariffs are still above ours and the country is enjoying healthy productivity growth, unlike Australia. Moreover, economists say the size of the US cut is sending mixed signals, boosting confidence because tariffs are being lowered but hurting confidence because it signals a weak outlook.

Thursday’s strong Australian employment figures again highlighted the paradox of a buoyant labour market in an economy barely breathing.

Regardless of the debate over interest rates among experts, the major US move will certainly make the RBA’s position harder to explain to families struggling to meet their mortgage payments and living expenses.

Bullock recently acknowledged the position of those who are really struggling, in an analysis that inevitably shows the cold side of financial reality.

“For homeowners with variable rate loans… we estimate that about 5% are in a particularly challenging situation,” she said.

“While this group is relatively small overall, those in it have had to make some pretty painful adjustments to avoid falling behind on their mortgage payments. This includes cutting back on essentials, switching to lower-quality goods and services, dipping into their savings or working extra hours. Some will eventually make the difficult decision to sell their home.

“A really important point to note here is that lower-income borrowers are overrepresented in the group of people who are really struggling,” she said.

The person who has to sell his house does not like belonging to a small minority.

Whether or not it is right that the Reserve Bank did not cut rates on Tuesday, there could be more criticism on Wednesday, when the monthly inflation figures are released.

Westpac’s regular CPI forecast expects inflation to fall 0.2% in August, or 2.7% on an annual basis. That would put the annual rate within the 2-3% band the RBA wants. The moderation in inflation in August was the effect of the budget’s energy cost cut.

The monthly CPI figures are less reliable than the quarterly figures. But if the August figures are good, many voters will probably be angry that the bank has been sitting on its hands.

That’s especially true when they consider Finance Minister Jim Chalmers’ comment about high interest rates “crushing” the economy. Reports of disagreements between the bank and the government are likely to be in the news again.

Chalmers, meanwhile, highlights the start of Friday’s budget hike in housing benefit, as well as the latest indexation increases in various payments coming into effect. He attempts to frame the economic debate as between Labor’s cost-of-living cushions and the opposition’s quest for public spending cuts.

Peter Dutton’s strategy of withholding most of the details of what a coalition government would do until just before the election has tactical advantages and disadvantages. If you make the measures public, they are open to attack or theft by the government. If you keep them secret, they are even more vulnerable to fear campaigns.

The government already fears two things: that the liberals will take away workers’ rights introduced by the Albanian government and that they will tackle spending in key areas.

The Labor Party responded strongly to opposition finance spokeswoman Jane Hume, who told the ABC last weekend: “The government has spent an extra $315 billion since it came into power that the Coalition did not want to commit to and did not commit to at the last election.”

The government is making a big party of this, despite Hume’s claim that “we will not cut essential services”.

Albanese told a news conference on Thursday: “The Coalition is promising $315 billion in cuts. They see the indexation of age pensions, they see the increased support for childcare and aged care, they see the increased investment in social housing, they see the increased investment in a Future Made in Australia, including the National Reconstruction Fund – they see all of that as waste.”

Chalmers documented all indexation increases to be in the $315 billion range.

The Liberals will have to spell out their proposed cuts before the election. But past experience shows that whatever a party says in advance, the reality is often different later on. This applies to both sides of politics.

The government is under more pressure than at any other time in its term. The prime minister is unpopular. Time is running out and many initiatives remain unimplemented. The government is extremely frustrated that the Senate, which previously gave it an easy run, is blocking bills, particularly on housing, thanks to an unholy alliance of Coalition and Greens (the government has yet to adopt Paul Keating’s description of the Senate as “unrepresentative trash”).

The prevailing view, based on the polls, is that Labor looks set for a minority government. A Freshwater poll this week showed the Coalition leading Labor 52-48% on a two-party basis, which, if translated into an election, would give the Coalition a chance of forming a minority government.

The polls largely reflect a negative view of the government. To the extent that they can use that as a lens, the Coalition is maximising its chances of taking a good chunk of Labor’s skin off. Labor, in turn, needs to turn the fight from a referendum on itself to a choice – between a government, however flawed, that people know, and an alternative that would be a leap into the dark.