Help Crowd Fund The Jacksonville Book Here
They sometimes say less is more.
However nobody seems to say it quite as often as the Coalition and the right-wing commentators who sell its message.
Currently we are hearing a lot about “living within our means” in relation to why our State governments are being starved of funds for little things like schools and hospitals.
Some think the suggestion by Turnbull for the states to create their own tax revenues was a ploy to take the GST rise off the table, as he doesn’t feel he has the political capital to win that fight any more. When the states rejected his idea he was quick to tell them to live within their means, which could be perceived as saying not to expect any extra GST revenue so don’t bother asking.
We hear how these schools and hospitals will benefit from receiving less. It will improve efficiency, cut down on bureaucracy and red tape. It will also help them become more self-sufficient and find other ways of raising revenue for things like class rooms and life-saving equipment.
Sometimes they will offer examples to support their theories that cuts are good and that less money in the public system will mean better outcomes for the public. We will see four examples of schools that have achieved higher grades despite receiving less money. These are the schools they want the public to look at, not the thousands of schools that cuts have had a negative impact on.
There will be the odd hospital that since funding cuts have a shorter emergency wait time on a Tuesday night than prior to the cuts.
We’ll just tell them that giving the less money will be better for them
The public aren’t really that stupid, they do have the ability to recognise the obvious.
But could there be any merit at all in the Coalition claims that cuts have helped the public sector?
I think we would be foolish to dismiss these cases without having a look into them for any clues that may be used to improve outcomes in other areas, however I don’t think I’m alone in believing that the theory behind it is politically opportunistic and smells more than a little fishy.
In fact I’m sure the Coalition don’t believe their own hype on this issue either.
If having less money was truly a good thing for improving efficiency and improving results then the Coalition seem to have their lines crossed in relation to some of the other agenda’s they promote.
If less money was a good thing then the last thing the Coalition would want for their big donating buddies in big business is a company tax rate cut. Instead they are pushing for cuts in health, education, and welfare to fund tax cuts for those profit hiding, tax evading, Cayman Islands account holding companies that make up their core supporters. Surely given the Coalitions rational on funding public education and health this extra money in the hands of the millionaires would only be detrimental to their businesses?
Imagine how much the gaming industry could have benefitted without all of that unnecessary money from problem gamblers to have had to deal with. Imagine how efficiently they’d be running now. But the Coalition missed that opportunity and I’m sure the clubs are still a bit sore at the Coalition for fighting to ensure that they still bear the heavy burden of the weight of all that dirty cash prised from the wallets of those with mental health issues while their kids go hungry.
Another missed opportunity to help out some pals was the Mining Super-Profits Tax. You would think that the words “Super Profits” would have raised alarm bells in the Coalition regarding the havoc that having too many funds would create, but alas… People like Andrew “Twiggy” Forest who has stated that he should pay more tax and Gina Rinehart now are faced with the problem of what to do with that troublesome cash that is starving them of efficiency.
I’m trying to remember the last time I heard Barnaby Joyce promising to deliver less funding for rural Australia, but I just can’t seem to recall it strangely.
I think in all of this there are two options
- The Coalition have great envy for every one they put below the poverty line
- They are talking shit
I know which one I’m leaning towards.
Like Wixxyleaks on Facebook here
Follow @madwixxy
Turnbull still working from the neo conservative bible. Now where have we heard this before! Why just yesterday from Turnbull and Pyne on Whyalla. These greed exalting bastards wont give up. A lie is a lie.
This first aired 26 years ago https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hmfBtk0WaE The ‘80s was the first round of USA plant closings to move jobs overseas in a big way!?
Surely the businesses and corporate people know they have too much money ..that must be the reason they give it to the poor struggling party ,they must be so miffed that it comes back to them 200 fold ……They need to give it directly to hospitals and schools if they were serious about having less so they can do better…It would surely improve their own public image!
“The public aren’t really that stupid, they do have the ability to recognise the obvious.”
That’s what worries me Wixxy. Those people voted for Abbott!
The old policy of the “trickle down” effect is coming back with a vengeance. The last eminent economist to completely demolish the “trickle down” argument was J.K. Galbraith. Thanks for another well-written riposte to the spurious claims of this very bad government, Peter. Whenever will they learn that they need to provide concrete empirical evidence for their claims. It’s not Amanda Vanstone’s “adults” we need to be in charge, but people who both believe in a fair go for all and know their economics. Chris Bowen and Andrew Leigh fill the bill but Morrison and Turnbull certainly do not.
The Coalition while in Opposition said the mining tax would wipe Whyalla (in South Australia) off the map. Whyalla was still there. Now the Coalition is in gov’t, Whyalla is being wiped off the map by the closure of the steelworks. All they have to do is make sure Australian steel is used on Australian infrastructure projects, which will save the Whyalla steelworks and ensure Australia keeps its steel-making capacity.
But hey, that is too hard.