Wednesday, October 08, 2008
I can accept the idea of specific tax cuts or rebates for people who one thinks deserve special treatments. Although as far as poverty goes you can just directly give people far more money than they'll ever be able to get by cutting taxes.
But National has really jumped the shark on this with their independent earner rebate. "Personal income-tax payers with an annual income between $24,000 and $50,000 and who do not receive any form of financial entitlements from the government". That's singling out people for special treatment just because they don't already get special treatment. Y'know, just letting the people who haven't been deemed to require extra support catch up with everyone else.
There wouldn't seem to be a policy goal there. Could it be about votes?
[Update: Dim has a compelling theory.]
Looking at the 'Paying for Tax Cuts' table here, which boast about how they're cutting more spending than they need...
Leaving aside, of course, any other extra spending they might be planning. Which is an important point, but not the one I'm thinking of.
... I thought, aren't the Labour programmes they're cutting basically all tax changes? So National would actually be cutting taxes overall less than Labour.
You'd have to check the details. Just a thinks.