Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Keeping Taxes Low

By Mark Paterson - posted Friday, 15 October 1999


The government pays for nothing. Because it does not create the value that it distributes, all of its expenditures are transfers from the general public. Purchasing power is taken from private individuals who are less well off as a result. This income is then used in ways which the government has itself determined.

There are without question many activities which governments rightly undertake and there is an important role for transfer payments to supplement the incomes of the disadvantaged. National defence is the obvious example of the first kind and the social safety net is an example of the second.

But each has its limits. The privatisation programmes of the past few years have been part of a process in which activities which can be undertaken by the private sector are returned to private ownership. It is well understood that the pressures of the market do a far better job to ensure that resources are used more efficiently. So long as competition is maintained, the market will provide a better service than can be expected from publicly owned enterprises.

Advertisement

And then there are the problems with poverty traps. One of the important lessons of the thirty year experiment with a rapidly expanding welfare state has been that up to a point it provides a necessary benefit but beyond some point it actually makes conditions worse.

Where that point is and in which circumstances a withdrawal of social support is advisable are issues about which there are different opinions. But it is no longer controversial that some of the expenditure on the safety net does those who receive it no favour but creates problems for them which are difficult to undo.

It is a nice thought that we may be heading for a period of perpetual budget surplus. If so, the first priority ought to be lower taxation. There are certain circumstances in which it is well understood that governments have a role but if we are seriously interested in strongly growing economies and a self-reliant population, the aim should be to keep public spending to a minimum.

A lower level of taxation relative to total national income is an ideal towards which we should now be heading.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Mark Paterson is Chief Executive of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Related Links
Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
Photo of Mark Paterson
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy