I for one welcome today’s announcement about freezing taxes. No doubt the usual sorts will complain that this is simply a case of pledging to underfund public services in perpetuity, and that the poor will lose out, while the wealthy gain – they may even go so far as to claim that this is the whole point, in fact; but they are wrong, as usual.
Do we really need public services at all? For example, hospitals – is it really beyond the pale to suggest that people who are ill should simply take half a paracetamol, and just find a quiet place to lie down, so that the rest of us will not be bothered by them? I have certainly never been ill myself – because I had more sense. Besides, if I did spend time on a recovery ward of one kind or another, it has no bearing on the present.
Schools are an unnecessary expense for a prosperous nation as well. I received little formal education, but have found that skim-reading the papers now and then is a very good way to compensate for this. Just look at the virtuous wealth creators in the City, for example, who do so much for the good of the people: you would be hard-pressed to find anybody among them who had so much as read a book; let alone idled about reading several, or even been within walking-distance of an educational establishment. They certainly didn’t waste time ‘studying’ mickey-mouse degrees in chemistry, or literature, unlike GPs and teachers, or similar nefarious sorts.
And what of the police? Can society function without them? Well, if we are honest with ourselves, don’t we know exactly what type of person will go on to lead a life of crime well beforehand? We can do away with expenditure on the police force, simply by taking anybody called Darren or ‘Shaz’, and locking them up from day one.
All told, this is a bold, optimistic, carefully considered, election-winning promise: and it simply serves to show how hollow the pretensions of these so-called liberals are – that they talk about equality, while demanding that the wealthy pay a higher-rate of tax than the poor.