28-02-2025, 02:44 PM
![](https://i.imgur.com/CLvY2jA.png")
【国会】黄总理：如果不是调高消费税 我国已经出现赤字
28-02-2025, 03:11 PM
这篇文章中存在一些不一致、矛盾和缺陷：
1. 矛盾:
- 政府财政状况: 文章一开始说如果政府不提高消费税，我国的财政情况会变得更糟，也更不利于国家和人民。但随后又提到，2024财年结束时将出现赤字，2025财年的收支平衡方面预计也会出现赤字。 这两句话互相矛盾，因为如果财政状况会变得更糟，那就不应该出现赤字。
- GST上调的必要性: 文章中提到，GST上调是一个艰难的决定，并指出我国当时正处于应对冠病疫情的艰难时期。 但随后又说，如果政府因为政策不受欢迎而选择不提高消费税，或如果我国过去两年没出现企业税收意外增幅，我国在2024财年结束时将出现赤字，2025财年的收支平衡方面预计也会出现赤字。 这似乎意味着，GST上调并非应对疫情所必需，而是为了避免赤字。
2. 含糊其辞:
- 企业税收意外增幅: 文章中提到，如果我国过去两年没出现企业税收意外增幅，我国在2024财年结束时将出现赤字。 但是，文章没有具体说明这个“意外增幅”指的是多少，以及是什么原因导致的。
- 赤字和盈余的定义: 文章提到，2025年预算现在已经出现了53亿新元的盈余。 但是，文章没有明确说明这个“盈余”的具体含义，以及它与财政状况更糟的关系。
3. 带暗示性的语言:
- 短期的民粹主义，还是长期的稳定？: 文章中提到，我们要扪心自问，我们追求的是短期的民粹主义，还是长期的稳定？ 这句话带有强烈的暗示性，似乎暗示反对提高消费税的人是追求短期的民粹主义。
4. 缺陷:
- 缺乏具体的数据: 文章中只提到，政府在2020年提出了五个预算案，在2021年提出了三个预算案，以及五次征得总统批准，动用过去的储备金。 但是，文章没有提供具体的数据来支撑这些说法，例如每个预算案的金额、动用了多少储备金等等。
- 缺乏对其他财政政策的讨论: 文章只讨论了GST上调，而没有提到政府是否考虑过其他财政政策，比如调整其他税收、减少政府开支等等。
5. 宣传类型:
- 恐吓式宣传: 文章中通过强调如果政府不提高消费税，我国的财政情况会变得更糟，也更不利于国家和人民，来恐吓民众，让民众接受提高消费税的政策。
- 道德绑架式宣传: 文章中通过强调提高消费税是为了国家和人民，来进行道德绑架，让民众接受提高消费税的政策。
总体而言，这篇文章缺乏客观、理性的论据，存在诸多不一致、矛盾和缺陷，并且带有明显的宣传倾向。
希望我的分析对您有所帮助。
1. 矛盾:
- 政府财政状况: 文章一开始说如果政府不提高消费税，我国的财政情况会变得更糟，也更不利于国家和人民。但随后又提到，2024财年结束时将出现赤字，2025财年的收支平衡方面预计也会出现赤字。 这两句话互相矛盾，因为如果财政状况会变得更糟，那就不应该出现赤字。
- GST上调的必要性: 文章中提到，GST上调是一个艰难的决定，并指出我国当时正处于应对冠病疫情的艰难时期。 但随后又说，如果政府因为政策不受欢迎而选择不提高消费税，或如果我国过去两年没出现企业税收意外增幅，我国在2024财年结束时将出现赤字，2025财年的收支平衡方面预计也会出现赤字。 这似乎意味着，GST上调并非应对疫情所必需，而是为了避免赤字。
2. 含糊其辞:
- 企业税收意外增幅: 文章中提到，如果我国过去两年没出现企业税收意外增幅，我国在2024财年结束时将出现赤字。 但是，文章没有具体说明这个“意外增幅”指的是多少，以及是什么原因导致的。
- 赤字和盈余的定义: 文章提到，2025年预算现在已经出现了53亿新元的盈余。 但是，文章没有明确说明这个“盈余”的具体含义，以及它与财政状况更糟的关系。
3. 带暗示性的语言:
- 短期的民粹主义，还是长期的稳定？: 文章中提到，我们要扪心自问，我们追求的是短期的民粹主义，还是长期的稳定？ 这句话带有强烈的暗示性，似乎暗示反对提高消费税的人是追求短期的民粹主义。
4. 缺陷:
- 缺乏具体的数据: 文章中只提到，政府在2020年提出了五个预算案，在2021年提出了三个预算案，以及五次征得总统批准，动用过去的储备金。 但是，文章没有提供具体的数据来支撑这些说法，例如每个预算案的金额、动用了多少储备金等等。
- 缺乏对其他财政政策的讨论: 文章只讨论了GST上调，而没有提到政府是否考虑过其他财政政策，比如调整其他税收、减少政府开支等等。
5. 宣传类型:
- 恐吓式宣传: 文章中通过强调如果政府不提高消费税，我国的财政情况会变得更糟，也更不利于国家和人民，来恐吓民众，让民众接受提高消费税的政策。
- 道德绑架式宣传: 文章中通过强调提高消费税是为了国家和人民，来进行道德绑架，让民众接受提高消费税的政策。
总体而言，这篇文章缺乏客观、理性的论据，存在诸多不一致、矛盾和缺陷，并且带有明显的宣传倾向。
希望我的分析对您有所帮助。
28-02-2025, 03:12 PM
This article contains several inconsistencies, contradictions, and flaws:
1. Contradictions:
- Government's financial situation: The article initially claims that if the government doesn't raise the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the country's financial situation will worsen, harming both the nation and its people. However, it later states that the country is expected to run a deficit at the end of fiscal year 2024 and another deficit in fiscal year 2025 in terms of budget balance. These two statements contradict each other because if the financial situation is worsening, a deficit shouldn't be happening.
- Necessity of GST hike: The article mentions that raising the GST was a difficult decision, especially given the country's struggle to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. But later it says that if the government had chosen not to raise the GST due to its unpopularity, or if there hadn't been an unexpected surge in corporate tax revenue over the past two years, the country would have faced a deficit at the end of fiscal year 2024. This seems to imply that the GST increase was not strictly necessary to address the pandemic but rather to avoid a deficit.
2. Ambiguity:
- Unexpected surge in corporate tax revenue: The article states that if there hadn't been an unexpected surge in corporate tax revenue, the country would have run a deficit in fiscal year 2024. However, the article doesn't specify the magnitude of this "unexpected surge" or the reasons behind it.
- Definition of deficit and surplus: The article mentions that the 2025 budget now shows a surplus of 5.3 billion Singapore dollars. However, the article doesn't clearly define the specific meaning of this "surplus" and its relationship to the worsening financial situation.
3. Loaded Language:
- Short-term populism or long-term stability?: The article states that we should ask ourselves whether we seek short-term populism or long-term stability. This sentence carries a strong implication, seemingly suggesting that those who oppose the GST increase are pursuing short-term populism.
4. Flaws:
- Lack of specific data: The article only mentions that the government presented five budgets in 2020, three in 2021, and received presidential approval five times to use past reserves. However, it doesn't provide specific data to support these claims, such as the amount of each budget, the amount of reserves used, etc.
- Lack of discussion of other fiscal policies: The article only focuses on the GST increase and doesn't mention whether the government has considered other fiscal policies, such as adjusting other taxes, reducing government spending, etc.
5. Propaganda type:
- Scare tactics: The article uses fear tactics by emphasizing that if the government doesn't raise the GST, the country's financial situation will worsen, harming the nation and its people. This aims to scare citizens into accepting the GST increase.
- Moral blackmail: The article uses moral blackmail by claiming that raising the GST is for the good of the nation and its people. This attempts to make citizens feel obligated to accept the GST increase.
Overall, this article lacks objective, rational arguments and contains numerous inconsistencies, contradictions, and flaws. It also exhibits a clear propaganda bias.
I hope my analysis is helpful to you.
1. Contradictions:
- Government's financial situation: The article initially claims that if the government doesn't raise the Goods and Services Tax (GST), the country's financial situation will worsen, harming both the nation and its people. However, it later states that the country is expected to run a deficit at the end of fiscal year 2024 and another deficit in fiscal year 2025 in terms of budget balance. These two statements contradict each other because if the financial situation is worsening, a deficit shouldn't be happening.
- Necessity of GST hike: The article mentions that raising the GST was a difficult decision, especially given the country's struggle to manage the COVID-19 pandemic. But later it says that if the government had chosen not to raise the GST due to its unpopularity, or if there hadn't been an unexpected surge in corporate tax revenue over the past two years, the country would have faced a deficit at the end of fiscal year 2024. This seems to imply that the GST increase was not strictly necessary to address the pandemic but rather to avoid a deficit.
2. Ambiguity:
- Unexpected surge in corporate tax revenue: The article states that if there hadn't been an unexpected surge in corporate tax revenue, the country would have run a deficit in fiscal year 2024. However, the article doesn't specify the magnitude of this "unexpected surge" or the reasons behind it.
- Definition of deficit and surplus: The article mentions that the 2025 budget now shows a surplus of 5.3 billion Singapore dollars. However, the article doesn't clearly define the specific meaning of this "surplus" and its relationship to the worsening financial situation.
3. Loaded Language:
- Short-term populism or long-term stability?: The article states that we should ask ourselves whether we seek short-term populism or long-term stability. This sentence carries a strong implication, seemingly suggesting that those who oppose the GST increase are pursuing short-term populism.
4. Flaws:
- Lack of specific data: The article only mentions that the government presented five budgets in 2020, three in 2021, and received presidential approval five times to use past reserves. However, it doesn't provide specific data to support these claims, such as the amount of each budget, the amount of reserves used, etc.
- Lack of discussion of other fiscal policies: The article only focuses on the GST increase and doesn't mention whether the government has considered other fiscal policies, such as adjusting other taxes, reducing government spending, etc.
5. Propaganda type:
- Scare tactics: The article uses fear tactics by emphasizing that if the government doesn't raise the GST, the country's financial situation will worsen, harming the nation and its people. This aims to scare citizens into accepting the GST increase.
- Moral blackmail: The article uses moral blackmail by claiming that raising the GST is for the good of the nation and its people. This attempts to make citizens feel obligated to accept the GST increase.
Overall, this article lacks objective, rational arguments and contains numerous inconsistencies, contradictions, and flaws. It also exhibits a clear propaganda bias.
I hope my analysis is helpful to you.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
