Consequently, while trolling for content for Guest Week, he received this very well thought-out email from mother-of-three N. Tranter in which she quite stridently told him not to bother trying to promote his pro-Labour/Green agenda at her because she'd already fought off the most seasoned debaters in her circle of friends. The post covers off matters relating to Market Signals, Mineral Extraction and Wealth Creation, Conservation, education funding and Choice thereof, and the labour market, all in casual, plain English.
It is reproduced below, with her permission, with only minor edits for formatting and clarity. Emphasis is added in bold by [Arthur] to highlight what he sees as key points.
|"A bored teenage student in Britain was taken to hospital after she yawned so deeply during a class that her mouth got stuck wide open" -Deccan Chronicle|
All my Wellington friends have well lectured me [as to why the Centre-Left bloc of parties is superior to National (Ed.)]. Please don't take offence, but there are cities in NZ which are strongly [politically opinionated] one way or another.
Not that this affected my voting. What strongly affected my voting was the fact that if people earn more than others, they are subjected to paying a higher percentage of tax than lower earners. Given that, there is no incentive for the average Joe to work harder, and so earn more.
The average Joe decides that, so he can avoid paying more tax, he will either work the same hours he currently is and so earn the same amount of money, or just decide not to work at all. As a country, having people strongly opposed to working more or harder, or even not at all, the amount of money the citizens earn and spend is less, which has a negative impact on our countries' economy.
Spending more means more money is available to the public to potentially earn and spend, thus creating more jobs, etc, and so the cycle keeps going on. If people have the incentive to earn more money, paying the same rate of tax as everyone else (note: higher earning potential at a same percent tax still means more money is paid in tax anyway) [Editor note: Here, N. is making a case for a flat tax rate, instead of the graduated tax rate New Zealand currently employs], they are still paying more in Tax.
The socio-economic downfall is that in order to have this fair same rate tax for all, the country still gets in debt to keep up the same level of spending. Debts must be paid, so to stay on top of debts, [government spending needs to be cut (Ed.)] and things like kindergarten funding or community education funding gets pulled.
Being a mum of 3 and having 1 of those in kindy and 1 in school, I am not opposed to paying more to kindy in order to pay less in tax. I feel that funding really should be pulled from things like the unemployment and sickness benefits, but if that happened the country would collapse into chaos given that most of those service users are criminals.
And as such I agreed with Nationals policies that people on Unemployment benefits should do drug tests, and if their tests fail, or they do not show up for court dates, their benes will be cut. I do not want my country to end up how Greece has ended up bankrupt.
100's of thousands of people would be made homeless and starving, so paying back the countries debt is an important issue, which is also why I support mining our country. Norway is a beautiful country, with beautiful scenery about the size of NZ with the same size population. They mined their country and found oil. They are now the second highest petrol exporters in the world, and one of the richest countries. Their women take paid maternity leave for 52 weeks! A whole year of paid leave to care for their child, which in a socio-economic sense is fantastic given that children thrive more when they are at home with their parents longer, and children in centres have all sorts of behavioural and learning problems.
In NZ you get 14 weeks paid leave. My baby is 7 weeks old. I would have to return to work before my baby even starts eating solid foods. My baby would still be waking in the night for milk. My baby is breast fed so would have to use a bottle, not to mention the extra time at work I would have to spend expressing milk.
I voted for National, I feel that John Key is a wonderful front man, and I'm not ashamed of my decision.
No offence, but if you're trying to tell me labour is better, you're wasting your time, and I don't mean to be rude, but I'm just not interested. I paid close attention to the news and the papers and debates, and made a very informed decision. My second choice would have been Act or NZ1st. The greens and Labour have their hearts in the right place, but having good intentions and hopes doesn't make well for running a country.
If my girlfriend fell in love with good intentions, with a guy who massaged her feet, bought her flowers, took her on amazing holidays and bought her lovely gifts, who wanted to marry her and raise children with her, but then slept with hookers behind her back and beat her, I wouldn't be voting for him either.
I'd be voting for the guy that forgot her birthday, but never forgot to ring and let her know he was going to be late from work, a guy who worked hard and could be relied upon.
Labour is unstable at the mo, National is not. I want to be able to trust and rely on my government..
Sorry if my emails have let you down [Ed note: They haven't. They so, so haven't.]
Image Source- the picture is meant to illustrate N. Tranter's boredom with her friend's lectures only and not the whole political process. -Ed.