Re: tax spending
I'm amazed these at statements by Curious:
Indirect taxes hit everyone equally, they do not hit the poorer harder.
Indirect taxes mean people pay the same absolute amount for a given item (e.g. €400 bin charges for all), but €400 means a hell of a lot more to someone on the minimum wage than it does to someone on €50,000. Indirect taxes DO HIT the poorer harder.
Why should a person who spends large amounts of money and effort in getting an education and trying to better oneself subsidise people on lower incomes.
Tell that to the generation before you whose taxes paid for most of your education!
The social welfare system and the tax system should work in harmony to
(a) Fund an adequate standard of living for those who get left behind.
(b) encourage certain socially desirable behaviour such as getting a job if you can, dealing with waste and pollution responsibly, etc.
Unfortunately when people start making suggestions about using welfare/tax to encourage socially desirable behaviour they get derided. Mary Harney suggested in 1997 that the welfare system should not encourage single parents to leave their own family unit and move into flats on their own. She was abused from on high by the other parties, and this week Labour brought it up again.
There was no discussion about the potential benefits of single parents remaining at home, the support structure of their family, the need for less social housing etc. Just the soundbite sledgehammer that "Harney wanted to punish single mothers".
Until we learn to discuss ideas, even radical ideas sensibly, we're going to be stuck with leaders who are afraid to even utter words that could potentially be turned around by others to hit them with.
-Rd