A second strategic blunder?

I labelled the budget “tax cut” a strategic blunder within 24 hours as the initial reaction was so negative – not that people were not getting something, but at the tactics of Labour trying to have it both ways.

I wonder whether yesterday’s extension to working for families may also be a strategic blunder. The talkback is incredibly hostile, almost everyone without kids is complaining that the Government is using them as cash cows, and the well off families being targeted are saying that they would rather not be dependent on state support.

This may just blow up big time.

Damian Christie at Public Address gives an excellent viewpoint on why he doesn’t like the package. He also works out that even families earning $150,000 will receive a benefit if this is implemented.

I think that New Zealanders have an innate sense of fairness. I hope they will see the massive inequality in taking tax off some New Zealanders to give it to people earning even more than they do, just in the hope of getting their votes.

Even as a semi-libertarian I am happy to pay taxes to support the family on $28,000 income with a couple of kids. I want those kids to grow up well looked after. But I am furious at the thought that a Catholic lawyer on $140,000 will be getting a subsidy from me, because he or she has chosen to have a big family.