Johan Norberg kommentoi taas osuvasti
WHAT THE MINISTERS SHOULD HAVE SAID:
"Yes, we broke the law when we gave nannies money under the table. But the big crime is the grotesque taxes you in previous governments introduced, that moved all service jobs like this to the informal sector. If a nanny is supposed to get as much as the buyer do after tax, the buyer has to make six times more than that before tax to pay her. In this way, you destroyed the belief in the tax system, you destroyed jobs for people and you made it impossible for more women to combine kids and career.
Everybody knows that this is an informal sector, that the workers would hate us if we asked for a receipt and that this is your fault. They also know that the only reason why some actually contact the tax board to register these jobs is that they have planned a political career their whole life - like our colleague, the prime minister, for example. Well, we didn´t and we don´t want to go along with such a charade.
We are not proud of what we did, but neither are we ashamed. YOU should be ashamed. And now we will work hard to dismantle this perverse system and legalise all those workers, and if we have any say, we will introduce a general amnesty for all who commited the crime of working and buying services despite your attempts to sabotage it.
PS. Why Cecilia didn´t pay her TV-licence? Well, listen to that word again. A ´licence´ for owning a TV-set? As if it was a dangerous chemical or a gun. As if you should be forced to pay for shows that you have never asked for. The only mistake she did was to begin to pay it again when she became a minister, and now her priority is to relieve everybody else of this stupid extra tax."
Sure, that would also have been hugely controversial. But then the debate would have been about the right things.
http://www.johannorberg.net/
WHAT THE MINISTERS SHOULD HAVE SAID:
"Yes, we broke the law when we gave nannies money under the table. But the big crime is the grotesque taxes you in previous governments introduced, that moved all service jobs like this to the informal sector. If a nanny is supposed to get as much as the buyer do after tax, the buyer has to make six times more than that before tax to pay her. In this way, you destroyed the belief in the tax system, you destroyed jobs for people and you made it impossible for more women to combine kids and career.
Everybody knows that this is an informal sector, that the workers would hate us if we asked for a receipt and that this is your fault. They also know that the only reason why some actually contact the tax board to register these jobs is that they have planned a political career their whole life - like our colleague, the prime minister, for example. Well, we didn´t and we don´t want to go along with such a charade.
We are not proud of what we did, but neither are we ashamed. YOU should be ashamed. And now we will work hard to dismantle this perverse system and legalise all those workers, and if we have any say, we will introduce a general amnesty for all who commited the crime of working and buying services despite your attempts to sabotage it.
PS. Why Cecilia didn´t pay her TV-licence? Well, listen to that word again. A ´licence´ for owning a TV-set? As if it was a dangerous chemical or a gun. As if you should be forced to pay for shows that you have never asked for. The only mistake she did was to begin to pay it again when she became a minister, and now her priority is to relieve everybody else of this stupid extra tax."
Sure, that would also have been hugely controversial. But then the debate would have been about the right things.
http://www.johannorberg.net/
Vastaukset
Vanhimmat
Ei vielä vastauksia
Aloittaja odottaa vastauksia. Kerro oma näkemyksesi ensimmäisenä.