Hi
On Fri, 7 Nov 2014, "Pidgorny, Slav(GPM)" <slav.pidgorny@anz.com> wrote:
I don't think that increasing taxes on the better off indefinitely is going to work in the long run.
There's always a balance, so "infinitely" is not a trail we need to explore. However, specifically lower taxes on the well off doesn't do anything for either the economy or society. It does not create more employment. This has been well tested in for instance the USA over many decades and although they still do it it just doesn't work. There is no "trickle down effect". In general terms, low tax countries do not have higher employment. In fact it's quite the opposite in many highly successful countries. Ref. Scandinavia and Germany, to name a few. And in interestingly, the lifestyle aspects there are also better than in other countries that have lower taxes. More comfort in general, more opportunity, better and cheaper (or free) healthcare and education. In all the abovememtioned countries the policies are to not prioritise a military industrial complex. Interesting. Did you know that in Finland, education had been taken away from political control. That is, it's regarded as too important (!) to be subject to political haggling. In Finland, anything up to university is free. While that may seem expensive, It's proven to be a worthwhile investment in the people of the country. So spending more money on the right thing can be good. On 7 November 2014 2:27:53 PM AEST, Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au> wrote:
Right wing politicians talk about running a country like a company. But their political ideas are just bad business. No responsible CEO would plan for short term profits by cutting off the potential for long term profits. But that's how Abbott et al want to run a country.
Speaking as a company owner/CEO, I fully agree with this. A country is neither a household (Thatcher) nor a company. Different scales require different strategies. Macro economics is distinct from micro economics - for real sensible reasons. I can also confirm that I see many companies do the most whacko short-term things. There are many drivers for this, including incompetence and some very bad government-created structures (on every level of government) that effectively encourage short-term weirdness. But govt policies aside, it is of course still a matter of choice for company execs what strategy they pursue. Many choose badly. And, for instance, tossing money at companies, specifically big corps, does neither drive nor support innovation. As a general guide, it's not big corps that innovate. Recognising this could save billions in expenditure and raise many times that in yield over time. But the key in terms of bad governance by the Abbott government is not the odd or even many bad policies. It's inconsistency, uncertainty and resulting instability. For companies, bad policies are not that much trouble if you just know what you're dealing with. With Abbott however, most things are up in the air most of the time, for extended periods, and that's really bad for business and employment. Uncertain companies won't invest (and that includes personnel as well). Unsurprising. Regards, Arjen.