BROADCASTS.com

Another debate we might want to have before too long is the old "who is paying for this mess" debate.
You'll note so far, despite the billions borrowed, no one has mentioned the bill. We are in an election campaign, and yet no tax policy, and no spending policy other than the old "there is more where that came from.”
The fact we will end up, on current forecasts, at over 50 percent of GDP as far as debt goes, is little short of a disaster. No it's not as bad as some other countries, but all that shows is their disaster is bigger than ours, and that is nothing to aspire to. You don't explain to your bank that the trouble you're having paying your mortgage isn't really a big deal, given your neighbour next door went broke, so you're smelling of roses.
In Britain, to their credit, they have at least started down the track of fiscal repatriation. Chancellor Rishi Sunak is talking of tax increases. This is controversial at the best of times, far less when the idea comes from a Conservative.
Norman Lamont, a former Chancellor, has taken to the papers to mount a defence. He won't be the last. Lamont was Chancellor under Sir John Major but was in power with Margaret Thatcher, who would be turning in her grave over tax increases for debt.
There is more than one way to skin a cat. Tax is but one. Another, of course, is to cut spending. Another is to grow the pie, in other words grow the economy, and gather the increased taxes that come from it.
The greatest argument against tax increases is it kills the economy. In this country the sort of people you would tax aren't actually rich, the top tax rate cuts in at $70,000. No one in urban New Zealand on $70,000 or so regards themselves as rich.
Further those on the sort of money that might be attractive for a government are few and far between. The people on hundreds of thousands, and perhaps even millions are, in comparison, handfuls.
More tax is based largely on envy not sound economic principle. "They can afford it." That's not actually an argument, it’s a statement of jealousy. And look at the stats, it doesn’t actually raise all that much money.
A capital gains tax is often mooted, and it was three years ago, until it got shoved back in Labour's face and the promise was made never to revisit it again.
With spending, are there areas of savings? Of course there are. The Provincial Growth Fund alone was $3 billion that, sadly, never really produced anything close to what it was supposed to.
But most importantly tax increases are a sign of defeat. Aspirational countries look to grow and expand, they create their own wealth they don’t prevent it by taxing it
Norman Lamont understands that, hopefully if we ever get around to it here, whoever is running the place will too.