Fuel tax indexation: the pressure is on
Did someone say 'tax reform'?
The term sounds so innocuous, even good, but that depends on whose mouth it comes out of. A reform that comprises the introduction of , or increase in, a regressive tax, is a reform backwards.
A rise in fuel excise is an increase in a regressive tax. Any rise or increase in the base of the GST would also be an increase in a regressive tax. These are both moves this government is contemplating, whether they admit it or not.
Regressive taxation is LNP policy whether they admit it or not. Beware of the term 'tax reform'. It is a vector concept and will therefore be progressive or regressive depending on which side of politics uses it.
Friday 31 October 2014
Monday 27 October 2014
There is always an optimum Level
Simon Cowan
"Our projected level of spending is unsustainable with our current tax base."
Contrary to LNP neo-liberal drivel, society does exist, and the electorate knows what sort of society they want to live in. This is not the harsh society of the American socio-economic experiment - the end result and ultimate inevitability of LNP policy - but a society where the government provides services which improve it.
If we accept the truth of this statement then either spending must be cut or the tax base or level must increase. The blind lunatic direction of LNP policy sees only cuts to spending as the only solution, and so protects their vested support.
Taxes need to be raised to provide the services we want our government to provide. These sevices have a price determined by the market.This means taxing those who can afford to pay without dropping into hardship. The level of spending has crossed a threshold above which a structural deficit is enmeshed in the budget.
A rebalance of the income-business tax level is required to maintain services at their present level. This will require an increase in progressive taxation rates for those who can best afford it. Only a Greens government has the guts to do this, judging from recent rhetoric.
What a mess.
"Our projected level of spending is unsustainable with our current tax base."
Contrary to LNP neo-liberal drivel, society does exist, and the electorate knows what sort of society they want to live in. This is not the harsh society of the American socio-economic experiment - the end result and ultimate inevitability of LNP policy - but a society where the government provides services which improve it.
If we accept the truth of this statement then either spending must be cut or the tax base or level must increase. The blind lunatic direction of LNP policy sees only cuts to spending as the only solution, and so protects their vested support.
Taxes need to be raised to provide the services we want our government to provide. These sevices have a price determined by the market.This means taxing those who can afford to pay without dropping into hardship. The level of spending has crossed a threshold above which a structural deficit is enmeshed in the budget.
A rebalance of the income-business tax level is required to maintain services at their present level. This will require an increase in progressive taxation rates for those who can best afford it. Only a Greens government has the guts to do this, judging from recent rhetoric.
What a mess.
Politics
Paula Matthewson
"politics (which by definition is the theory and practice of influencing people)."
"There is an alternative to conceding to popular opinion, and that is to change it, but this is akin to doing a u-turn in a cruise ship.
Getting the voting public to change its mind, not on superficial matters, but on those that tap into core values and concerns, is a slow and laborious task that can take longer than one three or four-year parliamentary term to produce results. Doing so is hard enough for a government, even with the authority that comes from being in power and having a phalanx of departments and battalions of advisers at its disposal."
Patience is a virtue.
"politics (which by definition is the theory and practice of influencing people)."
"There is an alternative to conceding to popular opinion, and that is to change it, but this is akin to doing a u-turn in a cruise ship.
Getting the voting public to change its mind, not on superficial matters, but on those that tap into core values and concerns, is a slow and laborious task that can take longer than one three or four-year parliamentary term to produce results. Doing so is hard enough for a government, even with the authority that comes from being in power and having a phalanx of departments and battalions of advisers at its disposal."
Patience is a virtue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)