July 15, 2011 Economic arguments aside for a moment The framework around the economic debate in this election campaign is that we have to rebuild Christchurch and we have to pay for it. National intends to do so via partial sale of state-owned assets; Labour by implementing a Capital Gains Tax. The Prime Minister's objection to the CGT is that it will be a 'bonanza for accountants and lawyers.' Well, maybe so. But last time I looked, his Finance Minister had budgeted around quarter of a billion dollars in consulting fees around the sale of state assets. Now I'm not a fancy lawyer or a big city accountant, but I'm pretty sure the bulk of that eye-watering sum will be going to fancy lawyers and big-city accountants. You might almost call it 'a bonanza'. The other problem with the 'lawyers and accountants love capital gains' argument is that all of the most prominent opponents of capital gains -- the people threatening to leave the country if it's implemented happen to be . . . lawyers and accountants. I am suspicious. And also kind of repulsed. Because what this amounts to is a statement from these individuals that they would rather leave the country than pay a single extra cent in tax to rebuild Christchurch. My gut reaction to this argument is: 'The airport is thataway. We'll try and get along without you, somehow.' Putting economic arguments aside for a moment, the Labour tax package has an air of surreal unreality