Labor’s Scare Campaign . . .
“This morning, we’ll be talking to prominent Coalition supporter, Mr Con Server-Tiff. Good morning.”
“Now, if I can just correct you, I’m not a Coalition supporter, I’m an independent commentator.”
“Yes, but you have been supporting Coalition policies, haven’t you? I mean it would be accurate to describe you as Right wing, wouldn’t it?”
“No, that’s the sort of bigotry that you people on the ABC indulge in!”
“But this isn’t the ABC!”
“Well, it might as well be if you’re going to attack people and suggest that they’re political views are irrelevant just because you don’t agree with them.”
“I wasn’t actually attacking your political views, I was just attempting to describe them.”
“This is the sort of stuff that the Christian Right have to put up with all the time! People describing them as the Christian Right, you don’t have the left wing described like that.”
“What about references to the ‘loony left’?”
“What about them?”
“Well, isn’t that an attack on them?”
“Go on, defend your left wing mates!”
“Can we get back to the purpose of this interview – the proposed rise in the GST?”
“An excellent idea.”
“But isn’t the Liberal Party supposed to be opposed to raising taxes, I mean, don’t they always spruik themselves as the party of lower tax?”
“Well, the important thing here is to ignore Labor’s scare campaign. This won’t be increasing taxes because the overall tax take will be the same. We have Scott Morrison’s word on that and if you can’t trust the word of a Liberal minister then they might as well be Julia Gillard who promised us that there’d be no carbon tax!”
“If you’re not increasing the overall tax take, then why is it necessary to make any changes at all?”
“To make it fairer, of course!”
“And how will raising the GST make the system fairer?”
“Well, for one thing, the government will be able to do what the Business Council asked last week and use the money to reduce company tax.”
“How is that fairer?”
“Companies will be paying less tax. You don’t get much fairer than that.”
“Yes, but how does that benefit the man in the street?”
“Well, nothing can really be done to help the homeless. If people want to sleep in the street, that’s their choice.”
“I meant the average family man. How does increasing the GST help the average family man?”
“Well, it won’t be just companies that pay lower taxes, I’m sure that Mr Morrison can find an extra billion or so to cut everyone’s tax.”
“What about the unemployed?”
“They’ll have an incentive to get a job now.”
“But if they don’t get a job, won’t the increase in the GST hit them harder than anyone?”
“Yes, but if they don’t get a job its their own fault. I mean it’s easy to get a job. Even a dud like Amanda Vanstone found work writing a column for Fairfax. And Joe’s going to be ambassador to the US. You just have to look.”
“With respect, I don’t think that the average unemployed person would find it as easy as those two to get that sort of job.”
“I was just using them as examples. Obviously not everyone can become an ambassador but there are plenty of jobs about. Why just the other day I saw a help wanted in a shop window.”
“You said something before about a scare campaign, but didn’t your side of politics run a scare campaign about the carbon tax and how Whyalla would be wiped off the map and lamb roasts would be $100 each?”
“That wasn’t a scare campaign, that was just a series of possible scenarios under the GST.”
“Rather far-fetched ones I might suggest.”
“Hey, are you here to ask questions or commentate?”
“Do you concede that those were rather far-fetched?”
“Not at all. The Liberal Party had already started printing maps with no mention of Whyalla and sooner or later lamb roasts would have got to $100.”
“Yes, how is it reasonable for you to say that the carbon tax was a great big tax on everything and not to expect that Labor would try the same tactic with the GST?”
“There’s a fundamental difference there!”
“Yes, what is it?”
“Well, Labor started running a scare campaign before the last election suggesting that if we got in we’d raise the GST.”
“But you are planning to raise the GST!”
“No, we’ve simply put it on the table. We need to have a clear, level-headed discussion without the hysterical commentary from the opposition saying that when it was first introduced Howard promised that it could never go up. That was last century and as if ‘never’ refers to a new century.”
“I think you’ll find that ‘never’ means ‘not ever’, in much the same way that ‘no’ means ‘none’ when someone says ‘no cuts’ to things.”
“If you’re referring to the so-called “no cuts to pensions, health and education” comments that Tony Abbott was alleged to have made.”
“There is film of him saying it right before the election.”
“Allegedly.”
“Are you denying that there’s film of it?”
“Look we can get bogged down by what people did or didn’t say and whether the film’s clear, but I think that it’s more important to look to the future rather than argue about a leader who’s long gone.”
“It’s only been two months!”
“Allegedly.”
“Are you saying that you don’t believe that Mr Turnbull only became PM two months ago?”
“No, I’m saying that Tony Abbott was gone a long time ago. After that Prince Sir Duke thing, nobody let him make any decisions. But let’s not talk about Mr Abbott he did some excellent things while he was PM and I’m sure that history will judge him much more kindly than many other leaders.”
“What are his achievements?”
“Well … um, he stopped the boats, and … um, he introduced knights and dames and even though, that’s been thrown out, there are a number of people who wouldn’t be knights or dames if it wasn’t for him… and… ah, he got rid of the mining and carbon taxes … and he … um, he stood up to Putin and told him that we were really cross … and did I mention stopping the boats?”
“But he didn’t get the ‘budget emergency’ under control!”
“Ah, yes, he produced a chart showing us that by 2050 Labor’s debt would be twice that of Liberal’s debt!”
“That’s all we have time for. Thank you.”
“Typical! Cut me off just when I start to talk about this government’s achievements!”
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
5 comments
Login here Register hereGovernment did get rid of carbon tax a year ago, now they are trying to tax families with raising GST to 15% and widen it to fresh food, modeling calculation has described it would hit low income householders 3 times harder than carbon tax.
Tax reform is a very sensitive issue, if any tax designed to target on low income earners and tax on their food, it will be tax backward motion and degenerate, not tax reform.
People can’t understand what the Government plan to do and they have been threatened about GST hike.
Is it a real tax reform? Why is targeted on poor?
In common sense, the Key principle for tax policy should be designed to narrow the gap between rich and poor, so that helps to build up healthy society.
Obviously, current tax reform against such common sense. Why people’s living cost should been ignored?
Government has already signal out the trend of tax reform, raise GST heavily tax to families/householders, it is doubtable about real intention of so called Tax reform.
Is Back business must based on taxing poor families?
It will be a national disaster if Austrians families don’t consume enough fresh food to avoid GST hike, it is sad.
Everyone know that previous PM Tony Abbott had promised that never raise GST under LNP which was issued on behalf of Liberal party at last election, that should still available even the party leader had been replaced. Obligation for GST unchanged should restrains to new PM, otherwise, raising GST now will be a cheat for voters who voted for Liberal party, Tony Abbott’s no change for GST promise was made on behalf of Liberal party. That was party’s promise to public, Regardless who is the leader now.
People don’t believe that compensation will make all householders better off from the GST hike , it is impossible to raise GST, raise revenue without hurt most vulnerable
The worst point in raising GST proposal is fresh food tax caused, why on earth is that Australian should pay tax because they need fresh food? That will cause health crisis national wide once applied.
From medical tax (co-payment) attempt to fresh food (GST hike) attempt, the taxing object always targeted on mid to low income earners to hit them most, people need to have a answer why? Is tax reform toward right direction to build health society? Or used as a excuse to maxim milliners’ wealth ? why not consider to introduce wealth tax instead? By the way, wealth tax has applied in other countries already, there is no lack of precedents.
Obviously, The taxing object ,is the key point for tax reform.
Tax ordinary householders with fresh food to raise revenue could be a shameful thing to do.
Guided tax debate should contains all voices from people although some ( for example: millions of pensioner) may not able to voice out on internet , that will be a pity.
.
Down Pat
http://www.photoonica.com/media-temp/OaYTjY0-0.jpg
WTF
bloody activist interviewers
What an absolute nut! I thought I was reading a script of Clarke & Dawe. These so called political commentator’s are becoming crazier by the decades…