Wednesday, October 1, 2008

Liarbour's tax cuts

Fairfacts is taking great amusement at the large banner ads on the Herald and stuff websites promoting the taxcuts which come into effect this week.
The ads talk about taxcuts for families, etc, etc, the usual drivel we expect. Mike Williams has also personally approved the ad as well.
Of course, we need to remember how Liarbour had to be pushed into delivering these belated taxcuts. And it does seem cynical in the extreme, that after nine long years we finally get taxcuts a few weeks before polling day.
The Herald notes the taxcuts have arrived late and Liarbour only has itself to blame if people are underwhelmed by them.
Indeed, to reassure the public, Michael Cullen is now saying the taxcuts are 'locked in.' Remember Liarbour passing a bill to make the taxcuts law? We all remember how Liarbour pledged taxcuts in 2005 and then cancelled the chewing gum taxcuts after it was elected.
Could they do so again?
Indeed, in an election about trust, we need to remember how Liarbour reneged on these taxcuts. Furthermore, as soon as it was elected way back in 1999, Liarbour raised the top rate of tax out of sheer spite, not to raise extra revenue.
But the move proved costly for us all, since all it did was make landlordism more profitable and housing more expensive. Home ownership became too dear for many hard working families, the working poor, Liarbour supposedly cares for. Thus, the young and the poor paid for Liarbour's tax increase. For homeowners, their higher property values just fuelled a credit boom, something we are all paying for dearly today.
Indeed, as we hear Liarbour trumpeting its taxcuts, we should remember what Helen Clark and Michael Cullen really believe on tax and ask ourselves whether we can trust Liarbour on tax.
Dear Leader: Liarbour Summer Conference, 2000.
And we have Michael Cullen also from a while back:
"We just don't believe in tax cuts - it's against our fundamental philosophy - after all we are socialists and proud of it".
And in 2006, when the government had a large operating surplus, Cullen said:
"anybody who thinks there are large fiscal surpluses to be spent now by means of large tax reductions should be taken out and quietly drowned"
Remember, this election is about trust.


ISeeRed said...

Do NOT start referring to yourself in the third person, FairFacts. It's pretentious.

As for the tax cuts, I consider them more like tax trims or tax shaves. Only ACT is supporting real CUTS in tax. In fact, for the difficult times ahead, the next government is going to have to slash both taxes and regulations, so we can remain competitive and sell to the world. Just look at any globe and see how small and distant we are. We need an economic recipe for sustained, long-term growth. Under Labour, the government's been eating all the seed corn for 9 years. Tax surpluses have been funnelled into public consumption, largesse and outright bribery, or siphoned off overseas into risky loss-making ventures like the Cullen Fund. Exploiting as much of our mineral wealth on the continental shelf as we can would be another great start.epyhyitv

Anonymous said...

As for the tax cuts, I consider them more like tax trims or tax shaves

CRAP. Labour haven't cut taxes.

Labour's tax scheme - when fully implemented in 2 years time - leaves hardworking Kiwi taxpayers significantly more highly taxed than we were in 1999 when Labour came to power.

That's not tax cuts: that's just a slightly slower rate of tax increases

ISeeRed said...

Actually, anonymous, are the rates being cut, or the thresholds just raised? I certainly agree Kiwis much more heavily taxed than 9 years ago.

Anonymous said...

Hasn't ACT totted up all the extra taxes Liarbore has introduced over the past 9 years?
Don't they have some figures showing our growing tax burden under Liarbore?