I am no economist or financial whiz, but I cannot see the logic in closing the Keith hospital to save $300,000 a year. I don't know how many people are employed there, but nurses and doctors are a specialised area, so close down the hospital and at least 50% (maybe more) of those employed will have to leave town. The rest will either go on the dole, revert to one income households, or the lucky ones will find other employment. So, if less people are employed there is less disposable income, therefore most businesses will suffer and some might even close. Some people will not be able to keep up their mortgages, so will have to leave town. Then what happens to the empty houses, empty closed shops and even the empty hospital? They will be left to deteriorate because the town is dying and nobody wants them. Like I said, I am not an economist, but how is putting more people on the dole, closing down businesses that have been paying taxes etc, and letting a town die, cost cutting?
What is even more confusing is that this hospital is situated in a town where the two of the most notorious roads in SA meet. Is this another example of Labour "moving forward"?
No comments:
Post a Comment