Wednesday, August 29, 2012

To David Cunliffe: Deep Tax Cuts For Rich Sensible


As my ban from posting is still in place at Labour’s blog, Red Alert, a ban I earned some years ago from MP Trevor Mallard simply for voicing my view on how unjust the blog’s moderation policy was, allowing Labour stalwarts to post in real time, while dissenting posts were held in moderation; and thus as Labour’s all inclusive view, apparently doesn’t include my views, despite when they win in 2014, they’ll be taking my money in frightening amounts to fund their view of a society, one which free men like myself view as a nightmare, I shall have to post my quick response to David’s current post, here (sorry for the big sentence, I know that will sorely test the Left’s attention span):


Let's change the rhetoric a wee bit. Tax cuts aren't making the rich, richer; it just means the state is not taking so much of the money they've earned. And all income levels are keeping more of their money under the tax cuts. Don’t get all tied up in the envy stakes, take a big breath and realise  not only the middle class, but even beneficiaries, have a better standard of living, now, than any generation before them, and the more unfettered capitalism has been allowed to be by men like you, the more prosperous, overall, the people have been. That’s why no boat-people are trying to get into third world countries, they're trying to get into the capitalist ones.

Let's not forget that the top 10% of NZ taxpayers, pay 50% of the total tax take.

Better be careful, David, you're scaring the horses again. Have you been reading the stats on the exodus of the wealthy from Hollande's France? With his 75% tax, and their new tobin tax, the city of London is laughing all the way to the bank.


Although, I sadly note that London has its problems also, on Nick Clegg deciding to feel, rather than think, about the important issues, and chase envy taxing also. If either of these men were to think, they might realise that perhaps the best stimulus for depressed economies, rather than the artificial stimulunacy of government spending, would be deep tax cuts for the 'rich', as they tend to spend their tax cuts - which are true discretionary dollars - in the economy, compared to those on lower incomes who (wisely) put their cuts simply into the mortgage.

Why will politicians never learn there’s not just a big pot of money sitting out there they can go and take without consequences: it’s people’s property – that’s real human beings with goals and desires, just like people with less money.

2 comments:

  1. Pretty sad, as you admit above, that Labour led coalition will win in 2014.
    Surprised that more was never made of P J O'Rourke's "Would you take that money off your dear, sweet old granny for that project?"

    ReplyDelete