This week: Moochers, midwifes and a Mayor
1. (OTAGO DAILY TIMES) “Labour’s Bold New Brand” – Goff and his party do U-turns from policies they thought were so important until they lost power…
THE DOCTOR SAYS: In full damage control after the Chris Carter debacle, Goff and King do flip-flops on some policies, while pandering to traditional parasitic Labour voters in others.
To quote the NZPA article:
Their position is quite simply that Labour lost the last election and intends to win the
next one. It won’t achieve that by dishing up the same policies voters were
obviously unimpressed with in 2008.
They seem to be conflicted over whether to punish the private sector or save it. After claiming:
An aggressive approach is needed to deal with inappropriate regulatory burdens
which constrain businesses,
Labour then launches an attack on those who succeed:
Tax avoidance will be stopped, including through trusts, and the IRD will be given
more resources. That is … to make sure wealthy people … don’t get the chance to
hide their income.
I wonder if Phil Goff could give us his word that no Labour MPs in the Clark administration, or under his watch as leader, have set up family trusts or other tax avoidance schemes, and have ensured that they have paid the maximum possible tax on their family income.
Goff is not beneath pandering to rednecks and racists:
Labour would impose much stricter controls on overseas purchases of farmland and
is promising to reverse the current trend.
What trend? Overseas buyers have already been blocked from purchasing land here by bureaucrats. And would Goff punish New Zealanders who tried to buy farm land overseas?
Labour harks back to its Nanny roots in some areas:
Kiwisaver will be expanded and upgraded with compulsory retirement savings
under consideration.
Fuck you, Phil. I already have my own voluntary retirement savings plan underway – and I don’t leech off others through Kiwisaver. And I would no longer consider investing money with organisations like Fisher Funds or Gareth Morgan Investments (and, sadly, the Medical Assurance Society) who promote this sort of economic cannibalism.
Goff plays the envy card:
There could be a higher tax rate on top-end earners, which some delegates
argued for.
But here’s an idea my Libz Party could endorse:
Tax thresholds would be rebalanced to relieve hard-working families. Tax cuts
for low income earners are being considered.
Why not give everyone a tax break? Make the first $50k of income tax-free. You could then do away with Welfare for Working Families which degrades wage and salary earners by transforming them into welfare recipients (and therefore more likely Labour voters, as the framers of those tax laws intended).
No-one can say Goff doesn’t have a sense of humour:
Another way [to mark out Labour as significantly different from National] is to
become the champion of those Labour says were the losers in “the great tax swindle”
that gave nearly all the tax cuts to the wealthy.
Now I think I’ve heard it all. Easing the tax burden on high earners, who generally work hard for their money and create wealth and jobs for others, is a “tax swindle”?? How about the swindle that relieved these earners of their private property in the first place?
Let’s give Phil a lesson in elementary economics. He says:
Prime Minister John Key won’t stand up for Kiwi workers who want wages to rise
faster than prices.
The way to do that, Phil, is to stop the Reserve Bank debasing the currency by printing worthless paper money, to encourage industries to settle here and to raise productivity, to ensure bureaucrats don’t get in the way, and generally to make sure businesses aren’t punished for turning a profit.
You want wages to rise, then that’s this doctor’s prescription.
2. (DOM POST) “New Mayor Says No To Overseas Trip” – New Wellington mayor Celia Wade-Brown has turned down an overseas trip and says she will not seek a mayoral credit card…
THE DOCTOR SAYS: Dear Celia: Well done! A promising start. One and a half marks out of two from the Libz Party (since we noticed you didn’t totally rule out accepting a ratepayer-funded credit card if one was offered to you).
As you pointed out, liaising with people overseas can by done using Skype. How about pledging to remove ratepayers from the burden of funding any overseas trips or credit card use during your entire time in office?
P.S. As a member of the Green Party, I hope you ride a bike like this to work every morning.
3. (CHCH PRESS) “Major Changes Needed – MPs” – A report to parliament suggests giving the government more control over the activities of midwives following some adverse outcomes in the delivery of babies…
THE DOCTOR SAYS: Yep, doesn’t matter what the perceived problem is, according to mainstream political parties the answer is always “giving the government more control.” It’s either prohibition and/or compulsion and/or and/or regulation and/or higher taxation.
This time in the firing line it’s midwives—already one of the most regulated no-markets in the country.
I wonder if anyone has considered perhaps creating a free market in obstetric care for pregnant women: protecting mothers and their babies by allowing the good midwives and GP obstetricians to flourish without interference; helping to ensure the enforcement of contractual agreements between women and those who provide maternity care; allowing professional groups to discipline their membership without interference while prosecuting those who defraud or assault their customers; and allowing consumer watchdogs to advertise just who have the skills to deliver babies safely and who are simply dangerous and should be avoided.
How about giving that a trial run?
All too often, the free market option is ignored by people who have a low opinion of their fellow humans, but consider themselves to be of such superior intelligence and knowledge that they can decide how the rest of us should function.
What a bunch of arrogant, supercilious bastards. “More control” indeed.
When the people fear the government, there is tyranny – when
the government fears the people, there is liberty.
- attributed to Thomas Jefferson
No comments:
Post a Comment