Rick Lowe
I re-worked this post from a few days back and sent the following Letter to the Editor of the local newspapers:
Dear Sir/Madam:
In spite of tariffs being the major source of revenue, when revenue drops government spending continues at the same rate, or even higher. Where does the extra money come from? You guessed it - the tax shortfall is covered by money borrowed from the credit markets.
"Shouldn't the country expect a "shadow budget" from the official opposition?"
The country is now informed that taxes/revenue are only 19% as a percentage of GDP, and in the scheme of things we're under taxed compared to other nations. However, GDP has grown substantially over the years, so shouldn't government revenue have done the same?
Well it did. From 2003 through 2008 government revenues totaled just over $7 billion. But spending was over $8 billion.
So as the debate turns to changing the tax regime (read higher taxes), and citizens are told that import taxes are not enough to maintain the country, its worth remembering those numbers for some fact checking in the future.
But, isn't GDP declining as a result of the economic downturn since the fall of 2008? If so, shouldn't taxes/revenue as a percentage of that GDP be rising since, according to some reports, revenue has been stable?
While all taxpayers should fully understand the economic troubles the country faces, should citizens be required to pay more taxes because of the profligacy of successive governments?
The answer, that is well known, is to reign government in as Canada did in the 1990's. The Government of The Bahamas is far too big and it consumes and wastes far too many valuable tax dollars to be trusted with even more of the proceeds of picking taxpayer pockets, just because they can.
In other words, higher taxes are not the best idea in these economic times. Winston Churchill seemed to know better. He's quoted as saying:
"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle."
With all that said, this would be the perfect time for the official opposition PLP to prove their ability to lead the country out of this mess. Will the PLP show in this matter as the Conservatives supported the Liberals in Canada with their initiatives to sort out their long running fiscal problems. Or, will the country get anything other than eloquent polemic debate from them? That's what's been offered up so far, and they say that's what's required from the official opposition.
They can read the scorecard (economy) as well as, or better than most so why can't they make suggestions on what they would do if they were the government of the day? Are they bereft of ideas or are they just hoping the FNM will fall on its proverbial sword?
Both political parties are in a quandary over this mess. If they say too much, they'll be charged with mishandling the country for decades. But the governing party has presented its ideas in the form of the 2010/2011 Budget. Shouldn't the country expect a "shadow budget" from the official opposition?
Maybe if Parliament were to go on vacation for a year or so, the patient just might heal itself.
So, where to now Parliament? It's all in your hands.
