Comments on: Why is opinion on taxing and spending changing? http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/ Observations from Carlton's Lone Classical Liberal Mon, 01 Dec 2008 18:37:49 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Andrew Norton » Blog Archive » A silver lining in the ideological storm clouds? http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-51213 Andrew Norton » Blog Archive » A silver lining in the ideological storm clouds? Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:36:23 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-51213 [...] the precise cause) will push down the revenues that inflate the size of government and, if my theories about tax-and-spend opinion are correct, also create more popular support for lower [...] [...] the precise cause) will push down the revenues that inflate the size of government and, if my theories about tax-and-spend opinion are correct, also create more popular support for lower [...]

]]> By: Andrew Norton http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-18144 Andrew Norton Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:58:12 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-18144 Temujin/John - The altruism hypothesis probably has something to it, but support for more spending collapses when the money is destined directly for the pockets of poor people. For example, in the 2007 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes 90% of people wanted more spending on health. But only just over half wanted more spending on old age pensions, and only 12% wanted more spending on unemployment benefits. Perhaps people see less of a moral hazard when services are given away compared to when people are given cash. Overall, though, I think it is not coincidence that support for more spending is concentrated in areas with the greatest reach into the taxpaying population such as health and education (80%). Temujin/John - The altruism hypothesis probably has something to it, but support for more spending collapses when the money is destined directly for the pockets of poor people. For example, in the 2007 Australian Survey of Social Attitudes 90% of people wanted more spending on health. But only just over half wanted more spending on old age pensions, and only 12% wanted more spending on unemployment benefits.

Perhaps people see less of a moral hazard when services are given away compared to when people are given cash.

Overall, though, I think it is not coincidence that support for more spending is concentrated in areas with the greatest reach into the taxpaying population such as health and education (80%).

]]> By: Temujin (John Humphreys) http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-18117 Temujin (John Humphreys) Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:59:29 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-18117 If you're saying people want more govt spending on health because they're rich and therefore want more health, I disagree. I think people want more spending on public health because they see it as a thing that helps those mysterious "other people" that drive so much of political thinking. Once your position is stable, you want to help the "other people" who are starving on the streets. So if there's a spare $1 being debated and you're doing well, give it to the "others". If there's a spare $1 and you're feeling poor, then you want it back. Of course, very few people have actually ever met one of these "others". They need to be found and subject to rigorous scientific experiments. If you’re saying people want more govt spending on health because they’re rich and therefore want more health, I disagree.

I think people want more spending on public health because they see it as a thing that helps those mysterious “other people” that drive so much of political thinking.

Once your position is stable, you want to help the “other people” who are starving on the streets. So if there’s a spare $1 being debated and you’re doing well, give it to the “others”. If there’s a spare $1 and you’re feeling poor, then you want it back.

Of course, very few people have actually ever met one of these “others”. They need to be found and subject to rigorous scientific experiments.

]]> By: Winton Bates http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-18081 Winton Bates Mon, 07 Jul 2008 07:08:04 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-18081 I suspect that you are right, Andrew. It will be interesting to see what happens. I suspect that you are right, Andrew. It will be interesting to see what happens.

]]> By: Andrew Elder http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-17991 Andrew Elder Sun, 06 Jul 2008 12:16:46 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-17991 "Negative attitudes towards proposed privatisations long predate changed opinion on taxing and spending." I think there has been a cumulative effect where privatisations may not have delivered as much as was promised. People seem less prepared for increased spending on facilities such as transport which have remained constant or declined in real terms (e.g. a new freeway attracts more traffic which negates it as an improvement; public transport increases in price without improving in reliability). In terms of education and health, a declining state sector 'competing' with a private sector obliged only to be slightly better than the public sector does not necessarily mean an overall increase in service. Besides, after reading Bonnor & Caro on education, it is hard to effectively demarcate 'public' and 'private'; with similar funding and administrative tangles in health, the same problems apply. “Negative attitudes towards proposed privatisations long predate changed opinion on taxing and spending.”

I think there has been a cumulative effect where privatisations may not have delivered as much as was promised. People seem less prepared for increased spending on facilities such as transport which have remained constant or declined in real terms (e.g. a new freeway attracts more traffic which negates it as an improvement; public transport increases in price without improving in reliability).

In terms of education and health, a declining state sector ‘competing’ with a private sector obliged only to be slightly better than the public sector does not necessarily mean an overall increase in service. Besides, after reading Bonnor & Caro on education, it is hard to effectively demarcate ‘public’ and ‘private’; with similar funding and administrative tangles in health, the same problems apply.

]]> By: TerjeP http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-17985 TerjeP Sun, 06 Jul 2008 10:27:38 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-17985 Add in the effect of the LITO and the tax free threshold isn't really at $6000. For a look at the numbers see the following:- http://alsblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/lito-2009-09-take-2/ Add in the effect of the LITO and the tax free threshold isn’t really at $6000. For a look at the numbers see the following:-

http://alsblog.wordpress.com/2008/06/19/lito-2009-09-take-2/

]]> By: Andrew Norton http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-17961 Andrew Norton Sun, 06 Jul 2008 04:05:46 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-17961 Mitch - Yes, that was it. Sorry, I cut and pasted an old and now dead link. It's corrected now. Mitch - Yes, that was it. Sorry, I cut and pasted an old and now dead link. It’s corrected now.

]]> By: Mitch http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-17959 Mitch Sun, 06 Jul 2008 03:47:10 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-17959 I think what we need is a complete freeze (at least in real terms) on public social spending and as much focus as possible on encouraging people into the private sector. That way, even with no spending increase overall the public health, education and welfare systems more money can be spent on each person. This also gets around the problem of increased public spending encouraging people from the private sector into the public sector, which puts an unneccessary burden on the system. Raising the tax free threshold (and the lower tax rates in general) would do a lot to help facilitate that. I really am quite disappointed that the TFT is still only $6000. I think what we need is a complete freeze (at least in real terms) on public social spending and as much focus as possible on encouraging people into the private sector. That way, even with no spending increase overall the public health, education and welfare systems more money can be spent on each person. This also gets around the problem of increased public spending encouraging people from the private sector into the public sector, which puts an unneccessary burden on the system.

Raising the tax free threshold (and the lower tax rates in general) would do a lot to help facilitate that. I really am quite disappointed that the TFT is still only $6000.

]]> By: entropy http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-17958 entropy Sun, 06 Jul 2008 03:33:49 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-17958 I agree. Just Maslow's heirachy of needs in action. I agree. Just Maslow’s heirachy of needs in action.

]]> By: Mitch http://andrewnorton.info/2008/07/why-is-opinion-on-taxing-and-spending-changing/#comment-17957 Mitch Sun, 06 Jul 2008 03:32:10 +0000 http://andrewnorton.info/?p=503#comment-17957 The link to your paper didn't work for me. I suspect this was it though for anyone else with the same problem: http://www.cis.org.au/policy_monographs/pm65.pdf The link to your paper didn’t work for me. I suspect this was it though for anyone else with the same problem:

http://www.cis.org.au/policy_monographs/pm65.pdf

]]>