Less tax, more revenue?

THE CPS has today launched a report outlining how "slimmer governments" have been able to boost funding to public services more than their "fatter" counterparts.

Keith Marsden, the author of the report, states that...

"This evidence firmly rejects the widely held view that lower taxes inevitably result in cuts in public services, or at best their slower growth, and wide income disparities."

Although I'd never doubt Mr Marden's findings, I have a problem with public spending plain and simple. As much as I support cutting taxes and most of what the supply siders are saying, why should the government reap yet more of our hard earned labour?

Cutting taxes may pay for more spending, but this is also surely based on a pro-growth assumption? Although a supporter of pro-growth economics I'm also well aware that the market slows down. It's just the nature of the market to do so. Therefore if a bloated government was reliant on low taxes and the economy grew at a slow pace, public debt would spiral out of control.

I find it odd that those who believe in cutting taxes also don't believe in small government, which is a tax on liberty in itself. Maybe I've missed something and the Cameroons have won the day - big government is here to stay?!

Big government is the main enemy here, not taxes.