![Picture](/uploads/8/4/1/7/8417532/4043345.jpg)
It would never occur to them that deficits are necessary, that the wealthy mostly create more wealth for themselves (and little for the nation as a whole), and the market needs to be regulated to ensure we get fair and appropriate social outcomes.
The latest example that underlines the fact that the Tories don't get it was delivered with Smokin' Joe's first budget, his two finger salute to Average Australians. There is no doubt it was all about ideology and has next to nothing to do with - a considered view of our present situation, consultation with experts in the field, and a plan to do what is in the best interests of all Australians.
It is clear that Abbott has lifted some of his political tricks straight from David Cameron's Tories. Repeal day is one example. A second example is one of the philosophies that underpins the budget, an idea that is lifted from both John Howard and David Cameron... reduce public sector debt by shifting it to the private sector (all of us).
Howard's boom was underpinned by a massive growth in private debt, largely debt related to housing. Private debt more than doubled during Howard's time in office (see graph below).
David Cameron's UK has recently seen an improvement in its financial performance following austerity, but according to Steve Keen, this has been in spite of austerity, not because of it. What Cameron has done is to encourage more private debt, which has resulted in rising house prices, and follows the Howard cycle mentioned above. Keen calculates that for Hockey's plan to work, house prices in Australia will need to rise at 10% P.A. for the next decade (or if you ask Smokin' Joe... at Eleventy percent for the next Eleventy years). Keen makes a lot of sense.
You can review his thoughts on the budget here.
![Picture](/uploads/8/4/1/7/8417532/4386278.jpg?532)
People like Smokin' Joe Hockey are inspired by long dead philosophers like John Stuart Mill, but ignore important recent work, like that of Thomas Piketty.
It is a coincidence that Piketty's important book came out just prior to the budget, but there is much to admire in it. From a process perspective, Piketty looked back on 200 years of data in an effort to find a link between inequality and impacts on democracy, opportunity and growth.
He found increasing inequality had an adverse effect on all three.
Rather than a focus directly on income, Piketty suggests taxing capital - for people who have a large share portfolio, or own a great deal of land or property, they should pay tax on that.
And there is a great deal of sense in that argument. You can hide a bank account in the Cayman Islands, you can channel profits offshore (in the same way Apple and Google did), you can do cash jobs and hide income, but if you own a mansion with views of Sydney harbour... good luck trying to hide that. If you own a private jet, tonnes of gold bullion, the latest Lamborghini, rare artworks (which are likely insured), or share portfolios - not hard to identify, to value, or to tax.
Check out the video below it's a compelling argument. It would reduce inequality. The Liberal party will never go there... which is also a compelling argument why a reasonable, egalitarian nation should.
It is certainly a better option than continuing to allow 75 ultra high earning Australians to pay no tax at all. No heavy lifting or shared pain for them.