Quote:
Originally Posted by Daradon
Exactly, there have been many conservative governments on both sides of the border that have preached fiscal conservatism, but have been far from it. The problem is a lot of the base doesn't pay attention to this and still equates what they learned in grade eight social studies on the right left scale.
|
'Fiscal conservatism' is a term that is not universally defined and it typically gets bent to fit convinently with the ideology of the person using the term.
Some believe 'fiscal conservatism' is only about aligning government revenue with operating and capital expenses and the process of budgeting in prudent ways. They leave out of their definition considerations of the size and scope of government in the economy and the extent of services the government provides and how the level of taxation effects the overall economy. The inherent vice of this view is that costs typically are not kept that well in check because on the margin it fits this ideology better to just go into red ink or increase taxes/user fees to meet their growing expenses.
On the other side of the coin, Wildrose and other right wing party supporters consider the term to mean more than the inherant position of government finances in balanced terms. They view 'fiscal conservatism' as spending the least amount of taxpayers money so that they can keep taxation and the role of government to a minumum. The focus is exclusively on spending the least so they can tax the least. The inherent vice of this viewpoint is that in pursuit of reducing the tax burden they cut both expenses and taxes too much to keep the budget balanced and it fits the ideology better to on the margin go into the red ink or hack away at what most deem essential services than demand more money from the taxpayers.