On the eve of the 2016 General Election there is a reported tightening in the polls. This according to most major news sources, as something seems to have stimulated the interest of voters to the point that it may succeed in expanding the number of those participating in this election.
Reports are that the turnout among police and soldiers as well as election-day workers topped 50 per cent on Monday when this group voted. Typically, this is a group that votes at between 20 and 30 per cent and the general interpretation of this voting spike is that it may be a harbinger of what is to come tomorrow when the general population votes.
Pundits have it that the announcement by the Jamaica Labour Party’s Andrew Holness of a plan to remove PAYE taxes from income $1.5 million and lower, as well as a proposal to increase the minimum wage to $8,500 per week has been gaining significant traction among the electorate.
For decades, Jamaicans in the lower socio-economic bracket have been pummelled by disappearing purchasing power owing to depreciation in the value of the Jamaican currency. Government has been positing arguments of lowest reported inflation rates in more than 50 years as a counter, but it is hard to make that argument when the Jamaican dollar has devalued so much over the last four years and people are dealing with their own individual realities of a decline in their standard of living.
As it currently stands, the People’s National Party (PNP) is asking the electorate to buy into their presentation of entrenching the much-needed economic foundational stability in the immediate period. Such a sacrifice is necessary to consolidate the economic gains made over the last four years, and runs counter to what had been customary of a PNP Government known in the previous two decades for their “run wid it” mentality.
My sense is that at a certain level among our electorate, there is understanding of these issues; however, at another level, it comes down to people’s personal economy at the micro level. It does not help that the Government has been in receipt of arguments from a Jamaican private sector working group on taxation as far back as 2012 that endorsed recommendations for a comprehensive reduction in income taxes. Further, the World Bank had similarly suggested tax reforms as “a critical action to remove what they have identified as one of the primary ‘binding constraints’ to economic growth in Jamaica”. These revelations may eventually be interpreted by some as government intransigence at addressing the vexing tax problem which, at the top of the scale ($1.5 million), translates to approximately $18,000 per month in additional disposable income for those earners.
It is difficult to imagine Jamaicans, constantly under financial pressure, refusing such an inducement to come out and vote, as at the end of the day, it is all about disposable income. Jamaicans would have to come into possession of a hell of a lot of “nationalism” — which cyaan carry go a shop — to reject this offer. To most of them, it is not their responsibility to have to figure out how the Government will make up any associated revenue shortfall. In straight political language, this tactic by the Holness team is basic “benefits politics 101”, and it appears to be gaining traction among the undecided.
The PNP may well rue not addressing this directly, as well as not coming to the debates, which could have been used as an opportunity to make an alternative offer to the electorate. Remember, a voter turnout greater than 60 per cent is a JLP advantage.
Richard Hugh Blackford
Coral Springs, Florida
richardhblackford@gmail.com
Reports are that the turnout among police and soldiers as well as election-day workers topped 50 per cent on Monday when this group voted. Typically, this is a group that votes at between 20 and 30 per cent and the general interpretation of this voting spike is that it may be a harbinger of what is to come tomorrow when the general population votes.
Pundits have it that the announcement by the Jamaica Labour Party’s Andrew Holness of a plan to remove PAYE taxes from income $1.5 million and lower, as well as a proposal to increase the minimum wage to $8,500 per week has been gaining significant traction among the electorate.
For decades, Jamaicans in the lower socio-economic bracket have been pummelled by disappearing purchasing power owing to depreciation in the value of the Jamaican currency. Government has been positing arguments of lowest reported inflation rates in more than 50 years as a counter, but it is hard to make that argument when the Jamaican dollar has devalued so much over the last four years and people are dealing with their own individual realities of a decline in their standard of living.
As it currently stands, the People’s National Party (PNP) is asking the electorate to buy into their presentation of entrenching the much-needed economic foundational stability in the immediate period. Such a sacrifice is necessary to consolidate the economic gains made over the last four years, and runs counter to what had been customary of a PNP Government known in the previous two decades for their “run wid it” mentality.
My sense is that at a certain level among our electorate, there is understanding of these issues; however, at another level, it comes down to people’s personal economy at the micro level. It does not help that the Government has been in receipt of arguments from a Jamaican private sector working group on taxation as far back as 2012 that endorsed recommendations for a comprehensive reduction in income taxes. Further, the World Bank had similarly suggested tax reforms as “a critical action to remove what they have identified as one of the primary ‘binding constraints’ to economic growth in Jamaica”. These revelations may eventually be interpreted by some as government intransigence at addressing the vexing tax problem which, at the top of the scale ($1.5 million), translates to approximately $18,000 per month in additional disposable income for those earners.
It is difficult to imagine Jamaicans, constantly under financial pressure, refusing such an inducement to come out and vote, as at the end of the day, it is all about disposable income. Jamaicans would have to come into possession of a hell of a lot of “nationalism” — which cyaan carry go a shop — to reject this offer. To most of them, it is not their responsibility to have to figure out how the Government will make up any associated revenue shortfall. In straight political language, this tactic by the Holness team is basic “benefits politics 101”, and it appears to be gaining traction among the undecided.
The PNP may well rue not addressing this directly, as well as not coming to the debates, which could have been used as an opportunity to make an alternative offer to the electorate. Remember, a voter turnout greater than 60 per cent is a JLP advantage.
Richard Hugh Blackford
Coral Springs, Florida
richardhblackford@gmail.com