It's really dumb to celebrate this "victory," since a lot of the people voting against the HST were actually voting against paying any tax at all.
Flat-out government lying, as was involved in the HST affair, should be punished by that government losing power, not by the ham-handed interventions of referenda. Otherwise you get a situation like in California, where the electorate both wants government services and refuses to pay for them.
Obviously a California-style combination of conflicting and ongoing initiatives would be a serious problem. But this is a single decision which doesn't have the same effect.
And I'm less concerned with why some people voted for the referendum than the fact that it succeeded: if anything anti-taxers would have had reason to switch to a "no" vote in search of a lower rate, while it's a combination of general justified outrage and concern about a tax shift onto individuals from business that carried the day.
It's really dumb to celebrate this "victory," since a lot of the people voting against the HST were actually voting against paying any tax at all.
ReplyDeleteFlat-out government lying, as was involved in the HST affair, should be punished by that government losing power, not by the ham-handed interventions of referenda. Otherwise you get a situation like in California, where the electorate both wants government services and refuses to pay for them.
Obviously a California-style combination of conflicting and ongoing initiatives would be a serious problem. But this is a single decision which doesn't have the same effect.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm less concerned with why some people voted for the referendum than the fact that it succeeded: if anything anti-taxers would have had reason to switch to a "no" vote in search of a lower rate, while it's a combination of general justified outrage and concern about a tax shift onto individuals from business that carried the day.