Just Left has some facts on the tax-cut debate, which provide a useful background. Contrary to DPF's assertions, the government has practised fiscal restraint. In fact, the great irony is that by doing so, they've created a rod for their own backs in the form of regular large surpluses and declining debt. As the economy slows over the next few years that's going to look like a very smart decision - but in the meantime it allows the Opposition to make promises that they can keep only by running down our public services in good times, and slashing them to the bone in bad.
But facts aside, the question of tax-cuts is really one about priorities: do you want high-quality public services (as Labour is delivering), or do you want money in the hand while your local school falls down and your local hospital can't find nurses? The rich - those who do everything through the private system to avoid mixing with the plebs - clearly prefer the latter. But I think the vast majority of new Zealanders, who benefit from and rely on those public services that National wants to cut, prefer the former.
2 comments:
yeah, dunno about the comment re: 'the rich'. i think its not so much not wanting to mix with the peasants so much as believing that more money in their hands will enable them to make their own choices about health-care, etc.
of course, it's false economy, because they fall to account for the social infrastructure public services offer.
then of course, this suggests that you're right, it's mixing with the public in these services that they want to avoid.
Posted by Anonymous : 6/16/2005 01:06:00 PM
"High quality" is something of an exaggeration, don't you think? Though certainly better than we'd get under National.
It's not a case of not wanting to mix with plebs, as knowing that public services are inadequate and preferring to pay for better services for themselves instead of improving things for everyone.
Posted by Commie Mutant Traitor : 6/16/2005 01:28:00 PM
Post a Comment
(Anonymous comments are enabled).