Of course the fire fighters are right in this respect. Changes in the Fire Service could cost the lives of people in accidents and fires. This is what the Fire Service is here to do. The question behind all this is why the Fire Service should be an exception to the cuts. Saving lives, like the use of children, in argument makes the whole point emotional.
This emotional argument can be used across many different services. From Police to Hospitals to Armed Forces and the rest an argument can be put up to save all services from cuts. The alternative is to raise taxation. I will point out that to get rid of the deficit by raising taxation would mean a doubling of Income Tax. That is 20 pence rate to 40 pence. 40 pence rate to 80 pence and 50 pence rate to 100 pence.
Nowhere in any of these emotional arguments is the argument for increasing taxation to pay for these "life saving" services. It is all about "fighting cuts" instead of increasing taxation. I know what these people are worried about and that is given the choice the taxpayer will opt for cuts rather than tax increases. Easier to use the emotional argument than argue for tax increases.
This emotional argument can be used across many different services. From Police to Hospitals to Armed Forces and the rest an argument can be put up to save all services from cuts. The alternative is to raise taxation. I will point out that to get rid of the deficit by raising taxation would mean a doubling of Income Tax. That is 20 pence rate to 40 pence. 40 pence rate to 80 pence and 50 pence rate to 100 pence.
Nowhere in any of these emotional arguments is the argument for increasing taxation to pay for these "life saving" services. It is all about "fighting cuts" instead of increasing taxation. I know what these people are worried about and that is given the choice the taxpayer will opt for cuts rather than tax increases. Easier to use the emotional argument than argue for tax increases.
No comments:
Post a Comment