Many a word spoken in jest…


I was having a chat to the old man yesterday about the direction politics was going.

 

Eventually I said “Well why not run 2 opt in types of Australia, one where the government takes 80% of your income but mothers you, and one where they take 25% and leave you the f*ck alone”

 

My old man didn’t miss a beat and said, “I think we already do that, just the percentages are reversed”….

Till the pips squeak!

Till the pips squeak!

Got me thinking though, many people hate having to chose for themselves, even basic things like phone services, internet carrier, bill paying etc.

Why not let the government manage the lives of those to weak or unwilling to look after themselves, but charge them a tax rate for the assistance?

 

Meanwhile at the other end can be the “no fee no service” people, those who want minimal government interference, but also deny them access to government services? (beyond the policing/legal varieties). I think it would be a wonderful experiment in governance.

 

The comparison between a “cradle to grave welfare” 80% tax regime and a “don’t tread on me” 25% tax regime would pretty quickly show up the strengths and weaknesses of both sides, and might lead to more realistic government policies.

And just for reference, Im on the 25% leave me alone side…

A little closer to my position...

A little closer to my position...

6 Responses to “Many a word spoken in jest…”

  1. bingbing Says:

    Fuckin’ oath.

  2. Rebecca H Says:

    As far as I’m concerned, government is good for maintaining highways, overseeing food, construction, and medicinal drug safety, and guarding the borders. Possibly the necessary war on occasion. Otherwise, they should just bugger off.

  3. SonyaSunny Says:

    tizona.wordpress.com – da best. Keep it going!
    Thank you
    SonyaSunny

    • bingbing Says:

      Cheers, Sonya!🙂

  4. Kaboom Says:

    Frollick, a reasonable system proposed, but sadly unworkable.

    I find the best proposal for taxation and representation is, ahem, mine.

    This is how it would work. You voting power is related to the average of your last three years’ tax paid. If you have been on the dole for that time – zzzt!

    OTOH, if you have successfully minimised your tax through offshore corporate trustees, income splitting and family trusts ad infinitum, then sorry, zzzt!

    The tax paid, over a three year period, sorts your worth as a voter. Easy to monitor (shit, they’ve got the records, after all!), and means that those who pay have a say!

    I have raised this proposal many times, to often aghast dinner-party acquaintances, and I have invited serious criticism of the concept. Apart from it being “undemocratic”, no-one has raised any reasonable argument against it.

    My 2c worth.

  5. thefrollickingmole Says:

    Nah, Id go for that one as well. Pay to play, no earnings, no voice.


Well, SAY something...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: