Nice letter, but many of the assumptions are flat out wrong.
Thatcher / Reagan went full hog on neoliberal economics. The result is what we see now in both countries.
Who thinks this looks good?
Both countries are rotting from the inside out, due specifically because of unfair economic decisions made by the wicked witch Thatcher and movie star Reagan.
Thatcher said, "There is no such thing as society." Only worry about yourself. Isn't this the exact opposite of what Christianity teaches? Or, are we all brain dead now?
Trickle down economics is a myth. It has never worked. Except in the university system that was bought and paid for years ago.
Most tycoons in the world got to where they are by unprecedented government giveaways, such as the billionaires Russia produced.
Most wealth in the world is now from inheritance, not hard work.
I agree we have a government that doesn't understand economics, nor is wise enough to hire experts willing to tell them the truth.
But the Bahamian problem has now trickled down to the entire nation, as in the fish rots from the head down. We have too many people on the government payroll who have poor work ethics and even worse societal responsibility.
Too many of our own people, who are not politicians, are not honest and are stealing too much, and have no care about the society they live in.
Overall, I agree with the premise of your invoking the Laffer Curve to explain a major problem in The Bahamas.
However, besides taxation, the government clearly crossed the line in allowing the criminal class to legalize webshops by purchasing the pirates who run the government.
There is no greater harm done to our nation than we are experiencing from the gambling epidemic.
Save for maybe alcohol consumption, unchecked violence, unheeded laws on our roads, lack of accountability in all government offices, an uneducated workforce, taxation without representation, poor leadership, teen pregnancies and children raising children.
It is not difficult to imagine a society that worked towards producing a higher standard of living for everyone, instead of one that was really good at producing tycoons and ignoring the masses.
But then again, who is it that the politicians listen too?
Yes, the government is taxing the people to death and killing our economy, and our quality of life.
However, they were raised in an environment that does not seem to value honesty, integrity, proficiency, and basic democratic values. It almost seems like our politicians were schooled by Margaret Thatcher, in simply not caring about anyone but themselves.

Porkipine; you make some good points. Margaret, the wicked witch, Thatcher is famed for the economic evil of burdening the country that she governed with the iniquitous VAT, just like Christie and Davis did in the Bahamas when they wre governing. VAT in the UK is now 20% on everything; this country will most probably end up the same in the pursuit of satisfying the bottomless pit of government greed.

The VAT was put in place in 1973 when Edward Heath was prime minister. The same year the Bahamas became independent and the UK joined the European Economic Community. Mrs.Thatcher was a cabinet minister then and not prime minister then.Labour and and as well as the Liberal Democrats have made no attempt to repeal it

Gonefish; the UK is governed by the collective responsibility of the Cabinet. Thatcher was just as responsible as Heath, just as Davis is just as responsible as Christie for inflicting VAT on the Bahamas. Your point about the Liberal Democrats is totally irrelevant; firstly because they held very little power as the minor player in a coalition government for a fairly short time; and secondly, because governments never repeal taxes, except in the rare occasions when a tax is repealed and replaced with a more burdensome one; Thatcher's failed attempt at the Poll Tax comes to mind.

Bahamian Tycoon, your Laffer curve theory is sound and a very good explanation for the Government past and present is doing to the Bahamian people. It all boils down to the economic policies implemented by the various administrations (PLP and FNM) from we achieved majority rule in 1967.

While the period from 1967 to 1992, and especially after independence in 1973, remains “the most transformational time in our post-independence history”, Ingraham administration policies meant that those who already had significant capital did very well, and there was no significant positive impact on national development under a Minnis administration.
Families who benefited from the country’s natural resources via shares in those companies , were given an enormous head start, in terms of the ability to accumulate capital and wealth.

while education gave thousands of Bahamians new paths to self-empowerment and opportunity, the economy was not sufficiently expanded and diversified in order to accommodate them.
“After the initial group of middle-class success who all had political connections, educated Bahamians were later encouraged to become ‘jobseekers’, rather than people with high ambitions to pursue careers and create wealth,”
Financial and personal discipline played a role in those who today can be said to have succeeded and those who lost it all. Let us not forget that the drug era fueled a fake illusion of a vast underground economy for many who have either passed on and was not able to transfer their wealth to the next gene
The arrival of the Ingraham in 1992 signaled many changes that today still have a profound effect of the Bahamian Population. One such policy is the amount of consumer loans or consumer credit Bahamian workers are allowed to access. Consumer debt in 1991 was about $271Million or about $2,000 for every working person. By the end of 2014, the level of consumer debts had increase to almost $2.3 Billion Dollars or about $11,500 for every working person.

Thus, from 1991 to 2014, our average income after taxes increased by about 8 percent but the level of our consumer loans went up by almost 500 percent.
The true position is worse.

How did this explosion in consumer credit really begin?

In 1991 to secure a consumer loan, government policy was that you had to have first saved something. Specially, if you wanted to borrow $1,000, you had have at least $350 of your own. Beginning in 1992 or early 1993, the Government decided that this policy was a "harsh restriction". So the need for any deposit was eliminated. You no longer had to save anything.
For workers It Drastically Worsened Their Financial Position. The maximum amount of a salary which could be paid via an authorization for "salary deduction" was 45%. Over a period of time, even that policy has changed. With excuses like exemptions for emergencies, The typical Government employee is actually seeing only 28% of his or her income as take home pay.

So we are in this situation today because of bad government policies which is causing the suffering of the Masses because a politicians job is to create an illusion of success to satisfy the masses to stay in power, all the while the majority of the population suffers, and they blame it on inflation and tax us all from cradle to grave.

Who will pay for the roads the schools and the hospitL and clinics civil servants

Least we forget the food coupons children breakfast program

I agree with the letter writer.

It seems as if we switched the UBP in 1967 for the PLP/FNM, but 85% of the macro-economic policies and national economic philosophy have remained the same.

We just switch the white Bay Street Boys for the black Sunshine Boys.

The masses are still been oppressed by institutional corruption, regressive taxes & national monopolies & an unproductive civil service hamstring the nation. Add to that high debt & crime and poorly educated & adjusted youth.

A recipe for a national disaster ........