Sunday, May 02, 2004
Perhaps if you take a little less that might help...
There is a good and long overdue article in the SST emphasising that a earned dollar is worth less under Labour. This article is bound to cause a lot of discussion, and so it should. Steve 'let me create the problem and tinker to fix it' Maharey's response did more to outline the problem than it did put forward a solution;
Maharey said a start had been made to improve the lot of families but "no one is saying we are finished yet in terms of trying to transfer the prosperity of the country into the pockets of middle-income families like this".Who exactly are the current holders of this so called 'prosperity' that can be so readily 'transfered'? His answer I imagine would be 'the rich' - i.e. those in the upper tax bracket No Right Turn might say? That is a poultry $5,000 more than this battling family is currently earning.
Let's say that Mr Gilbert's income raised to $65,000 and he had a student loan. Many would consider him to be well off, clearly they are not currently, so how much difference would that extra $10,000 make? I estimate about $6,000 in the bank. My point is that of his last $5,000 of income, what does he get? 51% of it (and he get's to pay more for a few social services on account of this new found 'wealth'). $65,000 per annum does not make a family rich - they should not be taxed as if they are. Labour once set a limit for the number of people in the top tax bracket, it is now more than double the number they stipulated.
Steve, stop playing monopoly with our cash, give the social engineering a break, and just leave a little more in our pockets. Does everyone being equally poor represent social justice? More to follow...
