They could have done things differently if their ideology was not one of centralised control. How about lowering taxes and incentivising savings through modified taxation legislation and let people decide what they need to do?
That sounds a bit like the Henry Review proposals (judging by the introduction, which is as far as I've got) which will no doubt be consigned to the bottomless filing cabinet marked 'reports from experts who made valid points and were ignored by the government that commisioned them'. Tell me if I'm wrong.
- it doesn't give the sugar high instant gratification that politicians need to convince people to vote for them again -
The weird thing about politicians over the last ten years or so is that none of these sugar highs last until the next election. The bubbles always burst well before that. I'm stuck trying to identify their objectives, whether they just want the media grabs, or whether they seek instant support in the hope that enough of it will stick come election time. It's like government has become some strange sort of reality show where you get to vote each week. Maybe they're all using the same media advisors
.