"...the solutions to our challenges around child poverty, youth employment and housing—The Salvation Amy considers it’s naïve to believe and dishonest to suggest that these solutions do not require more tax dollars. The source of these extra tax dollars is, of course, a problem particularly considering the global economic situation. In our view the need for a society that is just and gives every citizen the right to participate economically and socially is so important, that ways must be found to find this additional tax revenue."As Michael Laws commented yesterday, when did the Sallies become communist?
And in the related matter of a living wage, at last Bill English is pointing out that many people have their minimum wage topped up with various forms of government assistance.
Here's the problem for the living wage campaigners. If a worker receives a higher wage, he will lose his means-tested government assistance. He'll quite probably be no better off.
I'm quite happy for the employer to pay more so the tax payer pays less. It's is the employer that benefits from the labour purchased. But the bottom line is, the worker is no better off. And isn't improving worker well-being and prosperity the whole aim of this campaign?