There’s a lot of talk about the rich getting “unfair” tax cuts, that they should be taxed more to fund deficits and anything else that the critic might want. It’s illustrated in this picture:
Could this be paraphrased? “I want to take other people’s money to make things easier for myself”.
From the same ones who criticise people for taking money off the poor so they can get rich.
- Tax the rich, fund education
- Tax the rich, fund poverty
- Tax the rich, fund multi (non-contributing) father beneficiary families
- Tax the rich, fund education…while I’m a student
- Tax the rich, fund education while I’m poor
- Tax the rich, fund me?
alex
/ June 3, 2012Are you defending the tax cuts instituted by the National government on top earners during the recession? Those tax cuts have left a pretty big hole in our budget, and its not like the high earners were struggling under Labour.
Pete George
/ June 3, 2012I supported them at the time. It’s impossible to say whether the recession would be worse or not without that potential stimulus. Private debt has improved, so a lot has been diverted to retiring debt rather than spending us way out, that has slowed the recovery but it’s addressing a much more deepseated problem.
Can you say that the tax cuts (not just for the rich) have had a totally negative effect?
BTW, if you’re the same Alex that pops up on a number of blogs, good on you, it’s good to have reasonable differing views, clarifications and holding to account around. It makes a refreshing change from a lot of the blog clutter. If not, thanks anyway for your comments here. It’s healthy to differ, and it’s much more productive being civil.
alex
/ June 4, 2012Same alex, yes.
And of course the tax cuts haven’t had a totally negative effect, if you are one of the rich who got a huge tax cut that is. I’m not suggesting that we should have a top tax rate of 75% or anything silly like that, but heading into an economic downturn it is just lunacy to tell those who can afford to pay more tax that they don’t have to. If I were in National’s shoes in 2008 I certainly wouldn’t have raised taxes on the wealthy, but to give them a cut was just economically irresponsible and looked like they were giving their mates a leg up at everyone else’s expense.
Pete George
/ June 4, 2012There had been pressure for years for Cullen to ease tax, to at least compensate for bracket creep (people across the tax bands were gradually paying more tax). Labour belatedly moved a bit, but there were distortions due to disparate rates of personal versus business and trust rates, National addressed that.
No one was to know that the 2008 hiccup would turn into an extended recession/slowdown. There were widespread calls for some sort of stimulus. There was not much stimulation but at least we didn’t end up with anywhere near the problems some other countries crashed into.
alex
/ June 5, 2012Actually a lot of people were pretty sure this wasn’t going to be just an economic blip, way back at the start of the recession. I remember watching CNN at work when Lehmen Bros fell apart, and the reporters were practically predicting the end of Western civilisation due to the impending financial apocalypse. Of course, that was usual hyperbolic media talk, but the incoming National government should at least read the signs and been more cautious. Cutting top income taxes was just reckless.