Comments on: Bracket creeps

By: mark

mark — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

One wonders why, when you consider that their response to the poll would always be “cut taxes”, they comissioned it in the first place?

By: Geoff Honnor

Geoff Honnor — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

I’m not sure what your point is Rob. Are you saying that a desire to reduce personal taxation levels whilst simultaneously supporting increasing tax-sourced expenditure wouldn’t result in a mutually exclusive outcome?

Whether this dichotomy is driven by ‘political correctness’ or ’social acceptability’ is perhaps less important than the fact that it is, ultimately, dichotomous. Isn’t that what Lebovic is saying?

By: Norman

Norman — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

It has zilch to do with political correctness, Rob, and you, not the item, are the one raising that issue. People do NOT think analytically. Emotions are a more comfortable means of reaching conclusions. almost everybody wants to take more, almost everybody wants to give less.
They’re comfortable “thinking” that more taxes should be paid by some [i.e. others] lower taxes should be paid by others [i.e. themselves] and it’s “obvious” that large sums of taxation should be taken from areas THEY deem unimportant, and given to areas THEY deem important.
But ask that they CAREFULLY ANALYSE their beliefs? What an unreasonable stipulation that would be.

By: Robert

Robert — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

Geoff, the news article pointed out that people had contradictory desires, the editorial dismissed the most popular desire on the grounds that people didn’t really want it. My point is that people want all kinds of things — tax cuts on the one hand, and health, education, defence, what-have-you spending on the other. Ultimately they have to prioritise their desires, and it’s clear that health and education have been prioritised by most people.

Norman, claiming that people are giving the “socially acceptable” response is the same as saying they are victims of political correctness. I didn’t raise it, I just pointed out that’s what the editorial said.

By: Observa

Observa — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

Streuth, and we whinge about politicians flip flopping!

By: David Tiley

David Tiley — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

And Norman, you are thinking it through. Why don’t other people?

By: Norman

Norman — Wed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 +0000

Rob, political correctness is a powerful force, but NOT because it has the support of the majority of the plebs like myself. On th other hand socially acceptable ideas can include attitudes about factors beneath the dignity of P.C. ideology.
David, when someone can’t play football very well, he can often convince himself he isn’t too bad. When you can’t run very fast, it’s a little more difficult to convince yourself that you can. On the other hand, if you can’t swim, it takes special sort of confidence to convince yourself that you’re not drowning.
What does this have to do with thinking?
Thinking is a complex cognitive process ideally suited to the desire to think we’re thinking clearly and analytically, regardless of whether or nor we are. Since our species also seems far more reluctant about admitting any weakness in this area than we are about admitting to non-cognitive weaknesses, it’s especially tempting to proceed gaily through life pretending to ourselves whatever makes us comfortable.
If you want to put the blame for this somewhere, I suggest it’s either God or evolution.