Politicians talk about making “tough decisions” as if they put in a 12-hour day of hard labour swinging a sledgehammer under force of a whip.
“How was your day at the quarry, dear?”
“Hard. We had to make some tough decisions. My back is killing me.”
Whenever you hear the banal claim of “tough decision,” replace it with “wrong decision,” and the situation will become clearer.
“We made some wrong decisions, and now we have to staunchly defend them so we don’t look like bumbling amateurs.”
Bennett could have made the right decisions in the first place and avoided being the target of angry protesters.
Bennett and Ball’s first tough decision was straightforward. It was to determine who is more important: the people of this province, or the credit-rating agencies in New York?
B&B got that one wrong. Slapping additional taxes onto people who earn $20,000 a year is like something in a Charles Dickens novel. As if a throwback to the 1800s isn’t bad enough, the Liberals reached back to the feudal era to revive the head tax.
These decisions weren’t “tough.” They were simply wrong. The day-to-day lives of the people of the province are more important than what Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s think about the government’s financial statements.
Let’s see, hundreds or perhaps thousands of people will be in danger of missing mortgage payments, but what the heck — at least Bennett is making sure the government’s credit rating doesn’t slip too far and cost the government more money in higher interest payments. It’s better that you lose money rather than the government, after all. That’s a tough decision.
Since Budget 2016 was announced three weeks ago, it has become a popular pastime to complain — with justification — about the amount taxes will increase per household. The figure $3,000 seems to be common. That’s approximately a year’s tuition at Memorial University. Or 30 dinner dates for two at a decent restaurant. Or a year of car insurance payments … oops, not anymore, now that the HST will apply to insurance.
Whatever you planned or hoped to do with your $3,000 — or $8,000 as one person publicly lamented — Bennett and Ball know a better use for it. They know it is better to pay that money in new taxes and fees, so the government can stay in the good books of the credit-rating agencies.
As anti-budget protests take place regularly, trolls, Liberal diehards and people secretly ashamed of having voted for Ball spout predictable putdowns.
“What’s your solution?” they demand, as if any and all alternative suggestions are automatically unrealistic and impossible.
Well, not piling additional taxes on people at the lower end of the income scale would be a good start.
Then, it you really want to solve the ongoing deficit and debt crisis — rather than merely spew “tough decisions” rhetoric — you could implement a truly progressive income tax system.
“We already have that.”
No, we don’t. No government has yet made that tough decision.
As for anti-budget protests getting personal (i.e., taking place outside some McDonald’s restaurants owned by Bennett), you have to wonder why some people criticize such protests as “too personal,” but don’t see swiping money from household budgets as personal.
Taking money otherwise destined for a rent or mortgage payment is personal. Taking a kid’s tuition money is personal. Bennett and Ball’s myopic, mean-spirited budget is intensely personal. The anger it spawned is understandable, yet B&B apparently think they should be admired and thanked for their “tough decisions.”
Brian Jones is a copy editor at The Telegram. He can be reached at [email protected].
