Quote:
Originally Posted by Guardian Enzo
Honestly, I don't really see anything "fiscally conservative" in Satsuki's platform at all, based on what we've seen so far. Looks like straight up redistribution of wealth to me.
|
Well, I don't know if they have the authority to "raise taxes" (or lower them), as it were, or if they have any provision for deficit spending in the first place, so there's a limit to how far we can take the analogies as far as "fiscal conservatism" goes. (All the candidates are probably obligated to have a balanced budget.) If it were something like, "eliminate the financial aid program and lower tuition, and provide incentives to private individuals and groups to donate to a scholarship fund", that might be the more overall-conservative position. Here, though, it's basically eliminating one flawed "social program" and replacing it with a new one that will cost more. But, because raising taxes isn't an option, they're trimming "the fat" in other areas (specifically, student clubs) to balance the budget. So, on a fiscal conservative scale, I'm not really sure how it measures, but it is introducing a new, more expensive social program that is paid for by the "taxpayers" (tuition).
On another topic, in addition to realizing Satsuki's point regarding her scholarship plan, his encounter with the "Air Sumo" club also makes him have to admit that there are actually "pointless" clubs out there after all, and his overriding policy of "I'll save all the clubs!" may not actually be The Right Thing To Do (TM). So I wonder if, in addition to thinking that Satsuki may be doing the right thing for the scholarship program, he's probably also thinking that she's got a point he can't deny about some of the clubs. In other words, it's sort of like "if I didn't have to come out against her, I'd probably vote for her because she's on the right track".
