I am a doctor, though not a specialist in infectious diseases. I think that we should now stop mass testing for Covid; it should, of course continue where patients are being admitted or where there is diagnostic uncertainty, and in some very high risk patients. The public should isolate for five days if they have any recent onset respiratory symptoms, etc. Obviously that would mean that some people with other conditions would have to stay at home, but they would be people with other respiratory infections which they shouldn't be spreading through the workplace or on public transport in any case. Test and Trace should also be wound up. The enormous financial saving would allow people at risk to be provided with FFP3 masks, which are expensive but very much more effective.
I am not sure that is practical as a long term policy in the real world. Every public service / business that has to have staff on site would constantly be suffering staff shortages.
I don't think its practical as a short term policy, let alone long term.
Absolutely agreed on giving FFP3 masks to those who are worried about Covid - but the quid pro quo is letting those who are not worried about Covid live entirely normally. No restrictions, nothing.
If you are worried, get your vaccine and wear your own mask. Don't expect others to live their life for you.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Persuading every last SCon voter out on a cold wet winter's day in Glasgow is quite impressive.
You vs HYUFD is very tiring to read.
I have the utmost respect for HYUFD and I would hope he has no problem with my posts. If he is offended by my quip I am genuinely sorry as no offence was intended. I do not agree with much of HY's commentary, however his knowledge of polling and extrapolating polls is impressive, and I believe he is aware that I consider his knowledge to be valuable. I have posted as much on here.
You are quite at liberty not to read my posts. For the most part they are bollocks, but occasionally I try to make some serious points. Sorry to have disappointed you.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Peter Mandelson grins as Jeffrey Epstein blows out the candles on a birthday cake in a photo taken after the paedophile had been charged in an underage sex probe
Yes but read further down to: "There is no suggestion Lord Mandelson had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. The Sun on Sunday yesterday approached Mandelson for comment."
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Peter Mandelson grins as Jeffrey Epstein blows out the candles on a birthday cake in a photo taken after the paedophile had been charged in an underage sex probe
Yes but read further down to: "There is no suggestion Lord Mandelson had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. The Sun on Sunday yesterday approached Mandelson for comment."
Am I misremembering that a few days ago the oft heard (on here) accusation of antisemitism was flung when a poster highlighted an association between Epstein and Mandelson?
Peter Mandelson grins as Jeffrey Epstein blows out the candles on a birthday cake in a photo taken after the paedophile had been charged in an underage sex probe
Yes but read further down to: "There is no suggestion Lord Mandelson had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. The Sun on Sunday yesterday approached Mandelson for comment."
Which is effectively to protect themselves against libel. But, if they are publishing the photo, it’s essentially pushing the link.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
Morning Bart 🙂
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The UK in the eighties had huge one off factors. Specifically privatisation receipts and a vast ocean of oil revenue. It isn't a good control experiment. However. You are spot on to highlight the outrageous marginal tax rates faced by the low paid, underemployed and unemployed.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
Economic growth has been not been politically feasible since 2016. Look at U.K. productivity stagnation and the drop in FDI. It’s amazing how quickly you can screw a country.
Peter Mandelson grins as Jeffrey Epstein blows out the candles on a birthday cake in a photo taken after the paedophile had been charged in an underage sex probe
Yes but read further down to: "There is no suggestion Lord Mandelson had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. The Sun on Sunday yesterday approached Mandelson for comment."
Which is effectively to protect themselves against libel. But, if they are publishing the photo, it’s essentially pushing the link.
Yes, there was a link but whether that link involved sex is unlikely since Mandelson is gay, and the Sun admits it does not have evidence that Mandelson even knew Epstein was up to no good.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
Morning Bart 🙂
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
Morning. I'm staying up watching the Ashes so have more time to write on here this evening.
If we invoke Article 16 we get to rewrite the rules (temporarily, officially) unilaterally in a way that suits us best. Of course the EU can retaliate, but there's very little they can do to retaliate in reality (others mileage may vary on that). A trade dispute could follow, that could potentially last just weeks, or could be years or decades even. But in the mean time the UK's solution to the NI situation would be the one that is happening since we have that power under Article 16 - and since NI is part of the UK and its on us to enforce it, they have no ability to overrule us.
What makes matters worse for the EU is their bluff has been that the border needs enforcing in the Irish Sea because otherwise it'd need to be done at the EU/Eire border - but we all know full well they're never going to do that, so its a bluff. If we call the bluff, then there'll be no Irish Sea border, no Ireland border, and the bogeyman of Irish violence goes away and the EU lose that card forever.
As a result we may not need to actually invoke it. If we can threaten to invoke and be taken seriously in that threat, then the EU might give us whatever we want in order to avoid it being triggered.
And in the time I've written that, we've lost another wicket. Malan out.
I think there's an Opinium poll tonight, here's some of the supplementaries.
an Opinium poll for the Observer suggests households are already noticing price inflation. About 70% of voters said they had seen their cost of living increase more than their income over the last 12 months, despite reports of pay rises. A majority who voted Tory at the last election (57%) said they backed removing VAT from energy bills.
One in eight voters (12%) would now describe their financial situation as “struggling”, up slightly from 9% from the end of lockdown in April. A huge majority of the public say they have noticed price rises. About 86% have noticed a rise in the overall cost of living, 83% a rise in grocery bills, 80% a rise in energy bills and 59% a rise in council tax.
The issue with removing VAT is it’s gesture politics.
I remember reading that the average bill is going to double from £600 to £1,200. No idea if that is true but let’s use fir illustrative purposes.
Cutting 5% off the £1,200 saves £60 - which won’t be noticed by the average person in the context of a £600 rise and will benefit the rich more (on the assumption they have higher energy bills).
Far better to use the money - I think someone said £1.4bn - for targeted help at those who need it rather than middle class journalists
I disagree. The doubling of rates is I believe based on some extreme examples, eg being on a very heavily discounted rate from one of the aggressive retailers and then ending up on the price cap instead.
But "targeted help" is in general the worst possible thing that creates the poverty trap.
The rich will benefit the least because the amount of tax removed will be a tiny proportion of their income, a bigger proportion of middle incomes and a much bigger proportion of poor ones.
VAT on energy is a regressive tax not a progressive one.
A one time targeted payment is fine re poverty trap and it eliminates the deadweight cost. I would get something like £180 from eliminating VAT on fuel which I would save.
It just kicks the can down the road though. This is unlikely to go away in the next few years. We will still need gas, and plenty of it, to generate electricity and for domestic heating and cooking as well as industry. A one off payment really is just short termism. There needs to be something to manage the transition, affordable, to self sufficient renewables.
There's metric shit tonnes of gas in the world - the problem is that electricity generators have been able to make more money by buying spot than entering into long term supply contracts.
If you were at Centrica in 2007 and bought a 10 year gas supply contract, you lost your job in 2009 because spot gas prices were a quarter of where you'd committed to buy gas.
The UK retail electricity market has encouraged people to buy short and sell long. Which is a recipe for disaster if there's ever a disruption. (In this case, three disruptions: US gas drilling dried up in the pandemic, Russia has caused trouble by restricting supply to Europe, and the wind didn't blow.)
Presumably the removal of the UKs gas storage capacity hasn’t helped us either.
Good point: at the same time we've become more dependent on gas, we've got rid of storage faciltiies.
The numbers I saw were that the UK has 9TwH equivalent against 150TWH in Germany or Italy.
The justification for us having less storage than our European neighbours used to be that we were self sufficient in gas whereas they relied on imports from dodgy sources.
Well that argument doesn't hold water anymore, so we've got ourselves into a bit of a pickle.
This article has some interesting points about it. It was to save money as we’d have cheap gas a plenty. They were warned.
Unless we are going to use gas as a means of storing excess wind energy now would be a really silly time to build extra gas storage. National Grid are planning for the electricity grid to be fully decarbonised by 2035, HMG are planning to ban the sale of gas boilers - what are we going to be using gas for that we would need to store it?
Reality is probably going to intervene with whatever the current plans are to replace gas boilers (boilers powered by unicorn farts?) long before we get anywhere near 2050. There simply aren't affordable alternatives that can be retro-fitted to most of the UK's housing stock.
It's going to be interesting watching this particular immovable object collide with an irresistible force over the next 5 years or so as people's expectations of good living standards based on affordable energy crash into a group of political parties utterly committed to decarbonisation (aka making energy really expensive). Farage would be well advised to start jumping up and down about this, rather than the plight of un-vaxed tennis stars - it's about to be an issue with a very strong public resonance, where (rather like with the EU) the politicians are going to be well out of tune with the bulk of the public.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
Wont't briefing the Times your plans to get rid of free LFT tests lead to even more pressure on LFT supply chains as every man and his dog try to get their hands on as many as possible for nought in next couple of weeks?
Ending free LFTs is a stupid idea unless HMG is sure that the next variant will be mild, and because LFTs are a way of reducing self-isolation and quarantine, which are causing staff shortages in the NHS and across the economy.
What the government should do is reduce the self-isolation period from seven to five days, which will also reduce demand for LFTs.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
Yeah. And the actual theory isn't exactly Einstein. If you tax at 0% your revenue will be zero. If you tax at 100 % your revenue will also be zero (debateable). So the sweet spot must be between the two. An insight Keynes frequently had whilst wiping his arse but didn't pass on for fear he'd be thought a total imbecile.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
Again there's a big difference between 0% or 6% in Kansas and 70% in the UK.
You've clearly never bothered to learn how the Laffer Curve works or what it means, especially if you think that all that's relevant is people hiding their wealth. Especially since we're not talking in the UK about 70% wealth taxes and if we were then damn right they'd be hidden!
The problem with having a real income tax of 70% is that people stop bothering to work more, as well as issues like ensuring the work they do is cash in hand etc which results in low productivity and therefore more in benefits paid out by the state and less economic growth.
There is a multiplier effect to money spent in the economy so every time you convince people not to bother to work more because the state would just take most of their money anyway, that then get multiplied throughout the economy.
But sure keep tilting at windmills in America where we're talking about 0% or single digit tax rates instead of 70% tax rates. That's meaningful and will trick somebody into taking you seriously I'm sure (!)
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
Still with a tax rate well below 100% and the wealthiest 5 nations by gdp per capita, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Bermuda and Switzerland are all low tax
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
Still with a tax rate well below 100% and the wealthiest 5 nations by gdp per capita, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Bermuda and Switzerland are all low tax
What ok Earth does “still with a tax rate well below 100%” mean? Which country has that?
Your examples, save perhaps Switzerland, are not very useful or explanatory to anyone interested in improving the performance of a large post industrial economy.
We already pretty much know he lied about the whole affair anyway, his smirking interview told us that even if we didn’t read the Geidt report.
Indeed but the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, Kathryn Stone, could have suspended Boris as an MP, which might have been terminal to his premiership. That is why Boris set out to nobble Ms Stone while pretending to save Owen Paterson. Turns out he need not have bothered.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Finland? The Baltic States outstrip NE England.
Yeh, almost. If not, already.
It’s one of my hobbyhorses. Outside London and the SE, living standards in the U.K. are very low. Even places like Portugal and Poland are catching up and maybe surpassing.
Levelling up is essential. And yet, even now, in 2021, it’s largely considered a slightly swotty topic by London-based commentators.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
Morning Bart 🙂
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
Morning. I'm staying up watching the Ashes so have more time to write on here this evening.
If we invoke Article 16 we get to rewrite the rules (temporarily, officially) unilaterally in a way that suits us best. Of course the EU can retaliate, but there's very little they can do to retaliate in reality (others mileage may vary on that). A trade dispute could follow, that could potentially last just weeks, or could be years or decades even. But in the mean time the UK's solution to the NI situation would be the one that is happening since we have that power under Article 16 - and since NI is part of the UK and its on us to enforce it, they have no ability to overrule us.
What makes matters worse for the EU is their bluff has been that the border needs enforcing in the Irish Sea because otherwise it'd need to be done at the EU/Eire border - but we all know full well they're never going to do that, so its a bluff. If we call the bluff, then there'll be no Irish Sea border, no Ireland border, and the bogeyman of Irish violence goes away and the EU lose that card forever.
As a result we may not need to actually invoke it. If we can threaten to invoke and be taken seriously in that threat, then the EU might give us whatever we want in order to avoid it being triggered.
And in the time I've written that, we've lost another wicket. Malan out.
That's not quite true. Invoking Article 16 initially leads to talks, at which point the UK is supposed to lay out the evidence of how the EU is not meeting its treaty obligations, and then the EU is supposed to respond. Only if the parties cannot reach agreement in those talks, can the UK take those measures.
Of course, the EU is welcome to take countermeasures at that point.
I think there's an Opinium poll tonight, here's some of the supplementaries.
an Opinium poll for the Observer suggests households are already noticing price inflation. About 70% of voters said they had seen their cost of living increase more than their income over the last 12 months, despite reports of pay rises. A majority who voted Tory at the last election (57%) said they backed removing VAT from energy bills.
One in eight voters (12%) would now describe their financial situation as “struggling”, up slightly from 9% from the end of lockdown in April. A huge majority of the public say they have noticed price rises. About 86% have noticed a rise in the overall cost of living, 83% a rise in grocery bills, 80% a rise in energy bills and 59% a rise in council tax.
The issue with removing VAT is it’s gesture politics.
I remember reading that the average bill is going to double from £600 to £1,200. No idea if that is true but let’s use fir illustrative purposes.
Cutting 5% off the £1,200 saves £60 - which won’t be noticed by the average person in the context of a £600 rise and will benefit the rich more (on the assumption they have higher energy bills).
Far better to use the money - I think someone said £1.4bn - for targeted help at those who need it rather than middle class journalists
I disagree. The doubling of rates is I believe based on some extreme examples, eg being on a very heavily discounted rate from one of the aggressive retailers and then ending up on the price cap instead.
But "targeted help" is in general the worst possible thing that creates the poverty trap.
The rich will benefit the least because the amount of tax removed will be a tiny proportion of their income, a bigger proportion of middle incomes and a much bigger proportion of poor ones.
VAT on energy is a regressive tax not a progressive one.
A one time targeted payment is fine re poverty trap and it eliminates the deadweight cost. I would get something like £180 from eliminating VAT on fuel which I would save.
It just kicks the can down the road though. This is unlikely to go away in the next few years. We will still need gas, and plenty of it, to generate electricity and for domestic heating and cooking as well as industry. A one off payment really is just short termism. There needs to be something to manage the transition, affordable, to self sufficient renewables.
There's metric shit tonnes of gas in the world - the problem is that electricity generators have been able to make more money by buying spot than entering into long term supply contracts.
If you were at Centrica in 2007 and bought a 10 year gas supply contract, you lost your job in 2009 because spot gas prices were a quarter of where you'd committed to buy gas.
The UK retail electricity market has encouraged people to buy short and sell long. Which is a recipe for disaster if there's ever a disruption. (In this case, three disruptions: US gas drilling dried up in the pandemic, Russia has caused trouble by restricting supply to Europe, and the wind didn't blow.)
Presumably the removal of the UKs gas storage capacity hasn’t helped us either.
Good point: at the same time we've become more dependent on gas, we've got rid of storage faciltiies.
The numbers I saw were that the UK has 9TwH equivalent against 150TWH in Germany or Italy.
The justification for us having less storage than our European neighbours used to be that we were self sufficient in gas whereas they relied on imports from dodgy sources.
Well that argument doesn't hold water anymore, so we've got ourselves into a bit of a pickle.
This article has some interesting points about it. It was to save money as we’d have cheap gas a plenty. They were warned.
Unless we are going to use gas as a means of storing excess wind energy now would be a really silly time to build extra gas storage. National Grid are planning for the electricity grid to be fully decarbonised by 2035, HMG are planning to ban the sale of gas boilers - what are we going to be using gas for that we would need to store it?
Reality is probably going to intervene with whatever the current plans are to replace gas boilers (boilers powered by unicorn farts?) long before we get anywhere near 2050. There simply aren't affordable alternatives that can be retro-fitted to most of the UK's housing stock.
It's going to be interesting watching this particular immovable object collide with an irresistible force over the next 5 years or so as people's expectations of good living standards based on affordable energy crash into a group of political parties utterly committed to decarbonisation (aka making energy really expensive). Farage would be well advised to start jumping up and down about this, rather than the plight of un-vaxed tennis stars - it's about to be an issue with a very strong public resonance, where (rather like with the EU) the politicians are going to be well out of tune with the bulk of the public.
The reality is that you can do the first 80% of decarbonisation for very little. The remaining 20%, though, gets incrementally more and more expensive.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
Still with a tax rate well below 100% and the wealthiest 5 nations by gdp per capita, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Bermuda and Switzerland are all low tax
What ok Earth does “still with a tax rate well below 100%” mean? Which country has that?
Your examples, save perhaps Switzerland, are not very useful or explanatory to anyone interested in improving the performance of a large post industrial economy.
Of course they are given they all have lower tax rates than the UK, as does Ireland which is 6th
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Finland? The Baltic States outstrip NE England.
Yeh, almost. If not, already.
It’s one of my hobbyhorses. Outside London and the SE, living standards in the U.K. are very low. Even places like Portugal and Poland are catching up and maybe surpassing.
Levelling up is essential. And yet, even now, in 2021, it’s largely considered a slightly swotty topic by London-based commentators.
London is the biggest and most prosperous global city in Europe. It is the first destination of choice of most Europeans post graduation, let alone most graduates in Britain. That is the main reason
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
Still with a tax rate well below 100% and the wealthiest 5 nations by gdp per capita, Monaco, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Bermuda and Switzerland are all low tax
Excluding Switzerland, those aren't real countries. I mean, Monaco, come on...
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Having looked at this too, I came to the startling conclusion that all the Nordic model countries have different characteristics. For example, Finland has a big gender pay gap, while being unemployed in Sweden is really tough compared with the UK.
You can set up your own comparisons on the OECD website. Even levels of Unionisation vary more than you might think. I'm not sure you can draw general conclusions tbh.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Finland? The Baltic States outstrip NE England.
Yeh, almost. If not, already.
It’s one of my hobbyhorses. Outside London and the SE, living standards in the U.K. are very low. Even places like Portugal and Poland are catching up and maybe surpassing.
Levelling up is essential. And yet, even now, in 2021, it’s largely considered a slightly swotty topic by London-based commentators.
London is the biggest and most prosperous global city in Europe. It is the first destination of choice of most Europeans post graduation, let alone most graduates in Britain. That is the main reason
I’m not talking about London or it’s greater hinterland though.
I’m talking about the rest of the country, which is where (by my count), 2/3 of the population actually live.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
Morning Bart 🙂
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
Morning. I'm staying up watching the Ashes so have more time to write on here this evening.
If we invoke Article 16 we get to rewrite the rules (temporarily, officially) unilaterally in a way that suits us best. Of course the EU can retaliate, but there's very little they can do to retaliate in reality (others mileage may vary on that). A trade dispute could follow, that could potentially last just weeks, or could be years or decades even. But in the mean time the UK's solution to the NI situation would be the one that is happening since we have that power under Article 16 - and since NI is part of the UK and its on us to enforce it, they have no ability to overrule us.
What makes matters worse for the EU is their bluff has been that the border needs enforcing in the Irish Sea because otherwise it'd need to be done at the EU/Eire border - but we all know full well they're never going to do that, so its a bluff. If we call the bluff, then there'll be no Irish Sea border, no Ireland border, and the bogeyman of Irish violence goes away and the EU lose that card forever.
As a result we may not need to actually invoke it. If we can threaten to invoke and be taken seriously in that threat, then the EU might give us whatever we want in order to avoid it being triggered.
And in the time I've written that, we've lost another wicket. Malan out.
That's not quite true. Invoking Article 16 initially leads to talks, at which point the UK is supposed to lay out the evidence of how the EU is not meeting its treaty obligations, and then the EU is supposed to respond. Only if the parties cannot reach agreement in those talks, can the UK take those measures.
Of course, the EU is welcome to take countermeasures at that point.
Don't those talks last a month not an indefinite time? Its essentially part and parcel of the invocation process.
Considering those talks have already begun, unofficially, and the EU and UK have been in close talks on this subject for a year to avoid invocation, I'm not sure how much would change in one month. Yes an agreement may be reached to avoid the dispute getting past the one month mark, but if they don't then what I wrote follows - and I mentioned the possibility for countermeasures in my explanation.
The one month period for talks is essentially a part of the invocation procedure rather than an alternative to it. If the talks have broken down enough to have invocation followed through on, then I'm not sure how much would change in the following month to get it back on track. Only thing I can see is if the EU hadn't taken the threat of invocation seriously enough so get jolted by the invocation actually happening - but again since talks have already been happening you'd hope that level of diplomacy isn't necessary.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Having looked at this too, I came to the startling conclusion that all the Nordic model countries have different characteristics. For example, Finland has a big gender pay gap, while being unemployed in Sweden is really tough compared with the UK.
You can set up your own comparisons on the OECD website. Even levels of Unionisation vary more than you might think. I'm not sure you can draw general conclusions tbh.
That’s why it’s such an interesting question.
There’s a diversity of models in North America, and Western/Northern Europe, but whatever they are doing seems to work better than what the U.K. has achieved outside the South East in the last twenty odd years.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Finland? The Baltic States outstrip NE England.
Yeh, almost. If not, already.
It’s one of my hobbyhorses. Outside London and the SE, living standards in the U.K. are very low. Even places like Portugal and Poland are catching up and maybe surpassing.
Levelling up is essential. And yet, even now, in 2021, it’s largely considered a slightly swotty topic by London-based commentators.
London is the biggest and most prosperous global city in Europe. It is the first destination of choice of most Europeans post graduation, let alone most graduates in Britain. That is the main reason
I’m not talking about London or it’s greater hinterland though.
I’m talking about the rest of the country, which is where (by my count), 2/3 of the population actually live.
And if you increased taxes on London and the SE heavily to spend on the North then London would cease to be the dominant global city in Europe and would likely in time be overtaken by Paris, as well as falling well behind New York.
You can target investment and training in the North and cut corporate taxes there, not by whacking up taxes on London and the City which would just move businesses abroad
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
You can allow me a little disingenuousness?
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
As a general rule, Laffer is absolute shite.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
I think I remember you being in the economics world. What do you think the Danes are getting right?
I’m not in economics, although I’m fascinated by what makes some countries wealthy and others not.
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting. Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Finland? The Baltic States outstrip NE England.
Yeh, almost. If not, already.
It’s one of my hobbyhorses. Outside London and the SE, living standards in the U.K. are very low. Even places like Portugal and Poland are catching up and maybe surpassing.
Levelling up is essential. And yet, even now, in 2021, it’s largely considered a slightly swotty topic by London-based commentators.
London is the biggest and most prosperous global city in Europe. It is the first destination of choice of most Europeans post graduation, let alone most graduates in Britain. That is the main reason
I’m not talking about London or it’s greater hinterland though.
I’m talking about the rest of the country, which is where (by my count), 2/3 of the population actually live.
And if you increased taxes on London and the SE heavily to spend on the North then London would cease to be the dominant global city in Europe and would likely in time be overtaken by Paris, as well as falling well behind New York.
You can target investment and training in the North and cut corporate taxes there, not by whacking up taxes on London and the City which would just move businesses abroad
I don’t necessarily disagree. I don’t generally think higher taxes aid economic growth, at least in isolation.
But the main point is that the Laffer Curve really doesn’t tell us anything and the idea that businesses “just move abroad” doesn’t really get anyone anywhere either.
On Laffer, it's a bit simplistic just to look at maximising tax revenue rather than maximising general welfare, output etc. Other ideas, like the effective marginal tax on UC recipients and tax allowances for children are fun.
More interesting is the differing tax regimes across the UK, which allows for tax avoidance of a sort (especially with so much WFH). I might even consider moving to Northumberland with GF if the higher tax rates keep increasing (even if the job remains in Scotland?!?).
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
Economic growth has been not been politically feasible since 2016. Look at U.K. productivity stagnation and the drop in FDI. It’s amazing how quickly you can screw a country.
LOL at the idea that productivity stagnation was caused by 2016, the opposite is true.
I met Liz Truss in 2015 as part of an interesting discussion on the UK's productivity challenges. I came away from that very impressed with Liz Truss incidentally.
The UK's productivity was flatlined from about 2007 to 2015/16, its actually been rising again since. I expect much more productivity growth in the years to come, especially now that importing more people from Eastern Europe to work for minimum wage as opposed to investing in productivity growth is no longer an option.
Here's England's problem as illustrated with averages, the top batting ex Root and Stokes, particularly near the top of the order is really weak.
David Warner 48.00 Marcus Harris 25.29 Marnus Labuschagne 58.67 Steven Smith 60.60 Usman Khawaja 43.40 Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder) Carey 15.71 ---------- Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38 Zak Crawley 28.30 Dawid Malan 28.08 Joe Root (c) 49.66 Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder) Bairstow 34.09 Buttler 32.17 ---------- Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
Economic growth has been not been politically feasible since 2016. Look at U.K. productivity stagnation and the drop in FDI. It’s amazing how quickly you can screw a country.
LOL at the idea that productivity stagnation was caused by 2016, the opposite is true.
I met Liz Truss in 2015 as part of an interesting discussion on the UK's productivity challenges. I came away from that very impressed with Liz Truss incidentally.
The UK's productivity was flatlined from about 2007 to 2015/16, its actually been rising again since. I expect much more productivity growth in the years to come, especially now that importing more people from Eastern Europe to work for minimum wage as opposed to investing in productivity growth is no longer an option.
Nope. It’s flatlined since the GFC-inspired collapse.
It does not surprise me that you were impressed by Truss (who incidentally was a remainer in 2015).
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
Economic growth has been not been politically feasible since 2016. Look at U.K. productivity stagnation and the drop in FDI. It’s amazing how quickly you can screw a country.
LOL at the idea that productivity stagnation was caused by 2016, the opposite is true.
I met Liz Truss in 2015 as part of an interesting discussion on the UK's productivity challenges. I came away from that very impressed with Liz Truss incidentally.
The UK's productivity was flatlined from about 2007 to 2015/16, its actually been rising again since. I expect much more productivity growth in the years to come, especially now that importing more people from Eastern Europe to work for minimum wage as opposed to investing in productivity growth is no longer an option.
Nope. It’s flatlined since the GFC-inspired collapse.
If you believe that, then why would you blame 2016?
Other than your own pre-existing beliefs, what evidence says to you that productivity has gotten worse instead of better post-2016?
EDIT: Just saw your edit in about Truss. She's a very intelligent person to have a discussion with, and I was a Remainer in 2015 too.
Here's England's problem as illustrated with averages, the top batting ex Root and Stokes, particularly near the top of the order is really weak.
David Warner 48.00 Marcus Harris 25.29 Marnus Labuschagne 58.67 Steven Smith 60.60 Usman Khawaja 43.40 Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder) Carey 15.71 ---------- Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38 Zak Crawley 28.30 Dawid Malan 28.08 Joe Root (c) 49.66 Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder) Bairstow 34.09 Buttler 32.17 ---------- Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
Root is the only proper batsman on the list. 45-50 is the minimum a batsman as opposed to an all rounder should be averaging.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
Economic growth has been not been politically feasible since 2016. Look at U.K. productivity stagnation and the drop in FDI. It’s amazing how quickly you can screw a country.
LOL at the idea that productivity stagnation was caused by 2016, the opposite is true.
I met Liz Truss in 2015 as part of an interesting discussion on the UK's productivity challenges. I came away from that very impressed with Liz Truss incidentally.
The UK's productivity was flatlined from about 2007 to 2015/16, its actually been rising again since. I expect much more productivity growth in the years to come, especially now that importing more people from Eastern Europe to work for minimum wage as opposed to investing in productivity growth is no longer an option.
Nope. It’s flatlined since the GFC-inspired collapse.
If you believe that, then why would you blame 2016?
Other than your own pre-existing beliefs, what evidence says to you that productivity has gotten worse instead of better post-2016?
EDIT: Just saw your edit in about Truss. She's a very intelligent person to have a discussion with, and I was a Remainer in 2015 too.
I’m referring to wages, export performance, FDI and market performance.
Notice how nobody mentions wage growth since that time Boris pretended it was the main reason for Brexit? It’s because it hasn’t happened.
Brexit is a massive tax on the economy, and it makes delivering growth much harder.
Sorry about that. I’m afraid you’re very much the Comical Ali on this.
On the cricket, why didn't we just keep the same team that was winning most of their matches about 5 years ago? Most of that team aren't too old to play today unless I'm mistaken.
Here's England's problem as illustrated with averages, the top batting ex Root and Stokes, particularly near the top of the order is really weak.
David Warner 48.00 Marcus Harris 25.29 Marnus Labuschagne 58.67 Steven Smith 60.60 Usman Khawaja 43.40 Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder) Carey 15.71 ---------- Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38 Zak Crawley 28.30 Dawid Malan 28.08 Joe Root (c) 49.66 Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder) Bairstow 34.09 Buttler 32.17 ---------- Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
Root is the only proper batsman on the list. 45-50 is the minimum a batsman as opposed to an all rounder should be averaging.
That's a little harsh: plenty of great test players had averages in the low 40s, and some were in the high 30s.
Nasser Hussein - 37.2 Michael Atherton - 37.7 Alec Stewart - 39.5 Ian Bell - 42.7 Graeme Gooch - 42.6 David Gower - 44.3
Basically, only Pieterson and Cook had test averages over 45 in the recent era.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
Yes, I've posted before that Mrs Thatcher was disappointed that the rich did not, as she had expected, follow the example of the good Samaritan, which parable she was fond of quoting, or their American peers.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
Economic growth has been not been politically feasible since 2016. Look at U.K. productivity stagnation and the drop in FDI. It’s amazing how quickly you can screw a country.
LOL at the idea that productivity stagnation was caused by 2016, the opposite is true.
I met Liz Truss in 2015 as part of an interesting discussion on the UK's productivity challenges. I came away from that very impressed with Liz Truss incidentally.
The UK's productivity was flatlined from about 2007 to 2015/16, its actually been rising again since. I expect much more productivity growth in the years to come, especially now that importing more people from Eastern Europe to work for minimum wage as opposed to investing in productivity growth is no longer an option.
Nope. It’s flatlined since the GFC-inspired collapse.
If you believe that, then why would you blame 2016?
Other than your own pre-existing beliefs, what evidence says to you that productivity has gotten worse instead of better post-2016?
EDIT: Just saw your edit in about Truss. She's a very intelligent person to have a discussion with, and I was a Remainer in 2015 too.
I’m referring to wages, export performance, FDI and market performance.
Notice how nobody mentions wage growth since that time Boris pretended it was the main reason for Brexit? It’s because it hasn’t happened.
Brexit is a massive tax on the economy, and it makes delivering growth much harder.
Sorry about that. I’m afraid you’re very much the Comical Ali on this.
Nobodies mentioned wage growth? That's funny, many people here have been repeatedly bemoaning wage growth and "inflation".
FDI figures have been pretty good and import/export figures look quite promising too though its far, far too premature to make any judgements yet because of the pandemic and the disruption to the global economy.
On the cricket, why didn't we just keep the same team that was winning most of their matches about 5 years ago? Most of that team aren't too old to play today unless I'm mistaken.
To be fair, the English team usually gets destroyed in Australia. I remember us winning the 2005 Ashes series in England, and then being walloped 5-0 in Oz. A feat that was repeated in 2013-14. In 2017-18, it wasn't much better: we went down 4-0.
Here's England's problem as illustrated with averages, the top batting ex Root and Stokes, particularly near the top of the order is really weak.
David Warner 48.00 Marcus Harris 25.29 Marnus Labuschagne 58.67 Steven Smith 60.60 Usman Khawaja 43.40 Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder) Carey 15.71 ---------- Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38 Zak Crawley 28.30 Dawid Malan 28.08 Joe Root (c) 49.66 Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder) Bairstow 34.09 Buttler 32.17 ---------- Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
Root is the only proper batsman on the list. 45-50 is the minimum a batsman as opposed to an all rounder should be averaging.
That's a little harsh: plenty of great test players had averages in the low 40s, and some were in the high 30s.
Nasser Hussein - 37.2 Michael Atherton - 37.7 Alec Stewart - 39.5 Ian Bell - 42.7 Graeme Gooch - 42.6 David Gower - 44.3
Basically, only Pieterson and Cook had test averages over 45 in the recent era.
That Hussein and Atherton were in the 30s and you consider them "great" is part of why we never won an Ashes in my memory until after both had retired! Those "greats" were not good enough.
Compare to Aussies in a similar time period, not even duplicating those named above:
Surprised Atherton's average was only 37.7. I would have guessed around 42/43.
Atherton was one of those rare batsmen who would score 12 and 7 against Zimbabwe, before scoring 120 out of his team's 180 in Australia. He was best with his back against the wall as his team collapsed around him.
Here's England's problem as illustrated with averages, the top batting ex Root and Stokes, particularly near the top of the order is really weak.
David Warner 48.00 Marcus Harris 25.29 Marnus Labuschagne 58.67 Steven Smith 60.60 Usman Khawaja 43.40 Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder) Carey 15.71 ---------- Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38 Zak Crawley 28.30 Dawid Malan 28.08 Joe Root (c) 49.66 Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder) Bairstow 34.09 Buttler 32.17 ---------- Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
Root is the only proper batsman on the list. 45-50 is the minimum a batsman as opposed to an all rounder should be averaging.
That's a little harsh: plenty of great test players had averages in the low 40s, and some were in the high 30s.
Nasser Hussein - 37.2 Michael Atherton - 37.7 Alec Stewart - 39.5 Ian Bell - 42.7 Graeme Gooch - 42.6 David Gower - 44.3
Basically, only Pieterson and Cook had test averages over 45 in the recent era.
That Hussein and Atherton were in the 30s and you consider them "great" is part of why we never won an Ashes in my memory until after both had retired! Those "greats" were not good enough.
Compare to Aussies in a similar time period, not even duplicating those named above:
Your greats being in the thirties just isn't good enough.
That's fair.
And no doubt that's why England has struggled. But there's still only *two* England players in the last thirty years who've managed a 45 average over more than a few games.
On the cricket, why didn't we just keep the same team that was winning most of their matches about 5 years ago? Most of that team aren't too old to play today unless I'm mistaken.
Gary Ballance is the only other current top order potentially viable batsman about now I think. He was excellent in 2014 (Avg 61), OK in 2015 (Avg 35.8)
But his 2016/17 scores were 6, 43, 23, 70, 28, 8, 17 vs Pakistan 1, 9, 9, 5 vs Bangladesh 20, 34, 27, 4 vs S Africa
Here's England's problem as illustrated with averages, the top batting ex Root and Stokes, particularly near the top of the order is really weak.
David Warner 48.00 Marcus Harris 25.29 Marnus Labuschagne 58.67 Steven Smith 60.60 Usman Khawaja 43.40 Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder) Carey 15.71 ---------- Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38 Zak Crawley 28.30 Dawid Malan 28.08 Joe Root (c) 49.66 Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder) Bairstow 34.09 Buttler 32.17 ---------- Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
Root is the only proper batsman on the list. 45-50 is the minimum a batsman as opposed to an all rounder should be averaging.
That's a little harsh: plenty of great test players had averages in the low 40s, and some were in the high 30s.
Nasser Hussein - 37.2 Michael Atherton - 37.7 Alec Stewart - 39.5 Ian Bell - 42.7 Graeme Gooch - 42.6 David Gower - 44.3
Basically, only Pieterson and Cook had test averages over 45 in the recent era.
That Hussein and Atherton were in the 30s and you consider them "great" is part of why we never won an Ashes in my memory until after both had retired! Those "greats" were not good enough.
Compare to Aussies in a similar time period, not even duplicating those named above:
Your greats being in the thirties just isn't good enough.
That's fair.
And no doubt that's why England has struggled. But there's still only *two* England players in the last thirty years who've managed a 45 average over more than a few games.
Three: Cook, Pieterson and Root.
Thorpe and Trott were very close, with Trescothick, Strauss, Bell and Prior rounding out the 40s.
The fact that England have so few to have such an average, while Australia have had so many that do, is why we've been outclassed too often. Its not like when they had McGrath and Warne as matchwinners on their own, we've had the bowlers but they've simply outbatted us.
It doesn't matter how good the bowling us, if you're too regularly bowled out for 180.
Surprised Atherton's average was only 37.7. I would have guessed around 42/43.
Atherton was one of those rare batsmen who would score 12 and 7 against Zimbabwe, before scoring 120 out of his team's 180 in Australia. He was best with his back against the wall as his team collapsed around him.
Yes that's true.
Incidentally I remember watching Atherton getting bowled by Anil Kumble at Lords in 1996. That was Dickie Bird's final match as umpire. I wonder how many young cricket fans today haven't heard of Dickie Bird? Would have seemed unimaginable at one time.
"ECB executive warns green energy push will drive inflation higher Isabel Schnabel says low-carbon economy ‘poses measurable upside risks’ to inflation projections over medium term"
I think this is the first time I've seen a 'Fail Safe' meme posted here. One of my favourite films of all time. Top three along with Groundhog Day and The Quiet Earth.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
Morning Bart 🙂
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
Morning. I'm staying up watching the Ashes so have more time to write on here this evening.
If we invoke Article 16 we get to rewrite the rules (temporarily, officially) unilaterally in a way that suits us best. Of course the EU can retaliate, but there's very little they can do to retaliate in reality (others mileage may vary on that). A trade dispute could follow, that could potentially last just weeks, or could be years or decades even. But in the mean time the UK's solution to the NI situation would be the one that is happening since we have that power under Article 16 - and since NI is part of the UK and its on us to enforce it, they have no ability to overrule us.
What makes matters worse for the EU is their bluff has been that the border needs enforcing in the Irish Sea because otherwise it'd need to be done at the EU/Eire border - but we all know full well they're never going to do that, so its a bluff. If we call the bluff, then there'll be no Irish Sea border, no Ireland border, and the bogeyman of Irish violence goes away and the EU lose that card forever.
As a result we may not need to actually invoke it. If we can threaten to invoke and be taken seriously in that threat, then the EU might give us whatever we want in order to avoid it being triggered.
And in the time I've written that, we've lost another wicket. Malan out.
Thank you.
I’m surprised a wicket didn’t fall for each paragraph! We need better batsman from somewhere. As a Yorkshire lass I know we say if Yorkshire got nowt England got nowt but that all seems falling apart at the moment!
If you were to do a combined XI which England players would make it?
The only dedicated English batsman I think even in contention would be Root, none of the others would get close. Stokes as an all rounder.
Broad and Anderson at their prime would have easily but I think they're looking past it now unfortunately. Possibly Broad and Wood?
Current form and fitness....Root.....and....that's it. Stokes can't bowl and isn't top of his form with the bat, and the convicts don't need Anderson or Broad, especially in Australia, where having that bit of extra pace is really important.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
Morning Bart 🙂
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
Morning. I'm staying up watching the Ashes so have more time to write on here this evening.
If we invoke Article 16 we get to rewrite the rules (temporarily, officially) unilaterally in a way that suits us best. Of course the EU can retaliate, but there's very little they can do to retaliate in reality (others mileage may vary on that). A trade dispute could follow, that could potentially last just weeks, or could be years or decades even. But in the mean time the UK's solution to the NI situation would be the one that is happening since we have that power under Article 16 - and since NI is part of the UK and its on us to enforce it, they have no ability to overrule us.
What makes matters worse for the EU is their bluff has been that the border needs enforcing in the Irish Sea because otherwise it'd need to be done at the EU/Eire border - but we all know full well they're never going to do that, so its a bluff. If we call the bluff, then there'll be no Irish Sea border, no Ireland border, and the bogeyman of Irish violence goes away and the EU lose that card forever.
As a result we may not need to actually invoke it. If we can threaten to invoke and be taken seriously in that threat, then the EU might give us whatever we want in order to avoid it being triggered.
And in the time I've written that, we've lost another wicket. Malan out.
That's not quite true. Invoking Article 16 initially leads to talks, at which point the UK is supposed to lay out the evidence of how the EU is not meeting its treaty obligations, and then the EU is supposed to respond. Only if the parties cannot reach agreement in those talks, can the UK take those measures.
Of course, the EU is welcome to take countermeasures at that point.
Don't those talks last a month not an indefinite time? Its essentially part and parcel of the invocation process.
Considering those talks have already begun, unofficially, and the EU and UK have been in close talks on this subject for a year to avoid invocation, I'm not sure how much would change in one month. Yes an agreement may be reached to avoid the dispute getting past the one month mark, but if they don't then what I wrote follows - and I mentioned the possibility for countermeasures in my explanation.
The one month period for talks is essentially a part of the invocation procedure rather than an alternative to it. If the talks have broken down enough to have invocation followed through on, then I'm not sure how much would change in the following month to get it back on track. Only thing I can see is if the EU hadn't taken the threat of invocation seriously enough so get jolted by the invocation actually happening - but again since talks have already been happening you'd hope that level of diplomacy isn't necessary.
I seem to have outlasted you all, by watching horsey videos on YouTube and not putting the cricket on. 😏
So just trying to second guess what happens next then.
We do a deal without invoking it (both sides claim success)
We invoke it to speed things up to the deal (same deal, both sides claim success)
Invoking it does give us extra powers, because it times out and then no deal, we get to write whatever rules we like 😌 The downside of that though, the EU can make up their own rules too? It’s a sort of war? And Anglo Saxon brethren across pond might go ape shit about Northern Ireland Agreement? So it’s a question of, once we invoke it, it’s wether current government wants to go through with possible downsides of no deal, or (now Frost is out way) fudge a deal where everyone claims success?
Correct me where wrong - I’ll ask my brother tomorrow to see if he is as smart as you lot.
The SUN SAYS: Boris seems to think the world is neatly divided between “the poor” and the wine-swigging, cheese-noshing, wallpaper-fretting elite circles that he knocks around in. But ordinary families who work for a living are seeing a tidal wave of debt heading straight for them. They are not “the poor”. They are the struggling workers of this country.
They are not on benefits so do not qualify for the Government’s £140 Warm Home Discount. Their taxes pay for benefits. They voted Leave in their millions. They put Boris in 10 Downing Street. And they are being betrayed by a Government that cares more about its pious, self-harming net-zero emission goals than the Brexit promises of years ago.
But I struggle to comprehend that Boris can so brazenly betray the people who believed he was telling the truth in 2016.
It is not too late. But ditching VAT on gas and electricity prices needs to be done NOW. Brexit cost us all so much. All that poison, all that division, all those long years of national paralysis.
If leaving the EU did not set us free, then what was the point?
VAT will go on energy. As will the NI uplift.
Just a question of when Sunak announces it and how. I guess he is looking for a opportunity for maximum exposure for his leadership bid.
Of cousre, neither will come anywhere close to dealing with the crisis.
I say again, GE 2023/4 is wide open and all to play for for Starmer.
I don't see how Sunak can cancel the NI uplift. The much-heralded plan for social care is based entirely on the funds raised from that. So he'd be saying - "you know that social care plan that we've promised for years, that Boris finally fixed in the autumn - well, we've changed our minds. Got social care undone. Soz". Otherwise, I agree with you.
Cut taxes and get the money for social care from economic growth, as per the Laffer Curve.
The NI tax rise was bad economics as well as bad politics.
I just don't see it getting reversed because ego will prevent him from admitting he made a mistake. Then I expect to add insult to injury there'll be a cut of Income Tax instead so those working for a living are worse off while those on unearned incomes are better off.
Fuck of with your shitting Laffer curve. It does not work. Its bollocks. Dreamed up by ideologues and sold by ideologues.
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
LOL you're not seriously trying to compare Kansas with the UK are you? 😂
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Your man Laffer quoted in the wiki article about the Kansas experiment:
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Mistakes were made in Kansas. Specifically going to a zero percent exploitable tax rate and not getting rid of exemptions, both of which are mentioned in the same article but I note you don't quote that.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
That’s what they said about communism (‘they’ being other communists)
I think there's an Opinium poll tonight, here's some of the supplementaries.
an Opinium poll for the Observer suggests households are already noticing price inflation. About 70% of voters said they had seen their cost of living increase more than their income over the last 12 months, despite reports of pay rises. A majority who voted Tory at the last election (57%) said they backed removing VAT from energy bills.
One in eight voters (12%) would now describe their financial situation as “struggling”, up slightly from 9% from the end of lockdown in April. A huge majority of the public say they have noticed price rises. About 86% have noticed a rise in the overall cost of living, 83% a rise in grocery bills, 80% a rise in energy bills and 59% a rise in council tax.
The issue with removing VAT is it’s gesture politics.
I remember reading that the average bill is going to double from £600 to £1,200. No idea if that is true but let’s use fir illustrative purposes.
Cutting 5% off the £1,200 saves £60 - which won’t be noticed by the average person in the context of a £600 rise and will benefit the rich more (on the assumption they have higher energy bills).
Far better to use the money - I think someone said £1.4bn - for targeted help at those who need it rather than middle class journalists
I disagree. The doubling of rates is I believe based on some extreme examples, eg being on a very heavily discounted rate from one of the aggressive retailers and then ending up on the price cap instead.
But "targeted help" is in general the worst possible thing that creates the poverty trap.
The rich will benefit the least because the amount of tax removed will be a tiny proportion of their income, a bigger proportion of middle incomes and a much bigger proportion of poor ones.
VAT on energy is a regressive tax not a progressive one.
A one time targeted payment is fine re poverty trap and it eliminates the deadweight cost. I would get something like £180 from eliminating VAT on fuel which I would save.
It just kicks the can down the road though. This is unlikely to go away in the next few years. We will still need gas, and plenty of it, to generate electricity and for domestic heating and cooking as well as industry. A one off payment really is just short termism. There needs to be something to manage the transition, affordable, to self sufficient renewables.
There's metric shit tonnes of gas in the world - the problem is that electricity generators have been able to make more money by buying spot than entering into long term supply contracts.
If you were at Centrica in 2007 and bought a 10 year gas supply contract, you lost your job in 2009 because spot gas prices were a quarter of where you'd committed to buy gas.
The UK retail electricity market has encouraged people to buy short and sell long. Which is a recipe for disaster if there's ever a disruption. (In this case, three disruptions: US gas drilling dried up in the pandemic, Russia has caused trouble by restricting supply to Europe, and the wind didn't blow.)
Presumably the removal of the UKs gas storage capacity hasn’t helped us either.
Good point: at the same time we've become more dependent on gas, we've got rid of storage faciltiies.
The numbers I saw were that the UK has 9TwH equivalent against 150TWH in Germany or Italy.
The justification for us having less storage than our European neighbours used to be that we were self sufficient in gas whereas they relied on imports from dodgy sources.
Well that argument doesn't hold water anymore, so we've got ourselves into a bit of a pickle.
This article has some interesting points about it. It was to save money as we’d have cheap gas a plenty. They were warned.
Unless we are going to use gas as a means of storing excess wind energy now would be a really silly time to build extra gas storage. National Grid are planning for the electricity grid to be fully decarbonised by 2035, HMG are planning to ban the sale of gas boilers - what are we going to be using gas for that we would need to store it?
Reality is probably going to intervene with whatever the current plans are to replace gas boilers (boilers powered by unicorn farts?) long before we get anywhere near 2050. There simply aren't affordable alternatives that can be retro-fitted to most of the UK's housing stock.
It's going to be interesting watching this particular immovable object collide with an irresistible force over the next 5 years or so as people's expectations of good living standards based on affordable energy crash into a group of political parties utterly committed to decarbonisation (aka making energy really expensive). Farage would be well advised to start jumping up and down about this, rather than the plight of un-vaxed tennis stars - it's about to be an issue with a very strong public resonance, where (rather like with the EU) the politicians are going to be well out of tune with the bulk of the public.
At the moment it is high prices of fossil fuels that are driving energy bills ever skywards. How do you manage to blame decarbonisation for that?
Ending the burning of fossil fuels is the escape from high energy prices due to high fossil fuel prices.
Comments
Absolutely agreed on giving FFP3 masks to those who are worried about Covid - but the quid pro quo is letting those who are not worried about Covid live entirely normally. No restrictions, nothing.
If you are worried, get your vaccine and wear your own mask. Don't expect others to live their life for you.
This is what happens when the curve intersects with reality.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kansas_experiment
"Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
I was listening to Capitalism on Trial series by Portillo recently. One of his most interesting statements (to me) was that Thatcher believed giving people who earnt large amount even more tax breaks would inculcate a desire to give back to the society they required to earn it in the first place. Turns out its was also bollocks and even Portillo accepts it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0150p5l
If you're interested.
You are quite at liberty not to read my posts. For the most part they are bollocks, but occasionally I try to make some serious points. Sorry to have disappointed you.
As you find me tiresome I'd better **** off.
The point often overlooked with the Laffer Curve is that you can be both past its peak (often discussed) and before its peak (rarely discussed).
Kansas managed to get a law whereby many people could shape their taxes with a 0% tax rate. No shit Sherlock that 0% is before the peak, that doesn't take a genius to realise.
However in the UK we have real tax rates upto 70%.
There is a big gap between 70% tax and 0% tax rates. The Laffer peak can be higher than 0% but lower than 70%.
Brownback's tax consultant, supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, predicted the cuts would support job growth,[40][12] calling Brownback's policies "amazing ... Truly revolutionary.”
What happened to jobs growth in Kansas. What happened to all the economic and social metrics in Kansas? They went to shit. Laffer's revolutionary predictions went to shit. QED Laffer is a shit.
Implementing a good idea badly just shows that bad implementation doesn't work, it doesn't show that the idea is bad.
There's plenty of real world evidence for where Laffer has worked in the real world, including the UK in the eighties. All that Kansas shows is that cutting tax rates to 0% was not a good idea, it doesn't follow that having tax rates at 70% is a good idea.
But @BartholomewRoberts is half right. We should aim for economic growth to pay for increased spending, rather than automatically cut spending and/or impose higher taxes. Investment might be the key rather than Laffer curves, however.
ETA has Vanilla changed its settings again? You never used to get the spurious line break after referring to another PBer.
You won’t find me as cheeky as others in this thread - in fact I suspect you ideal person to clear something up.
We are currently holding cards in our renogotiating game with EU - if we invoke (like something out of Harry Potter!) article 16, what extra cards or advantage does this give us? Hence why (Sundays telegraph latest example) we keep threatening it.
Specifically privatisation receipts and a vast ocean of oil revenue.
It isn't a good control experiment.
However. You are spot on to highlight the outrageous marginal tax rates faced by the low paid, underemployed and unemployed.
Brexit is effectively dead, only the clean up job post 2024 remains.
It will be some wreckage the next government will inherit.
You know the argument I am presenting is that the man who presented his curve is a shyster and surprisingly his predictions were shite. I'm sure in an ideal world there is some truth to the principle that people may hide less of their wealth if the tax rate is lower.
My prediction is that is if people are inclined to hide their wealth they do it anyway as they are still losing a proportion of it. The tax rate is never low enough. I mean it was ~6% in Kansas, is that really a limiting factor on growth?
The economic theory just seems to be produced to support the ideology.
Look at Denmark, one of the mostly highly taxed but also one of the wealthiest countries per person in the world.
If we invoke Article 16 we get to rewrite the rules (temporarily, officially) unilaterally in a way that suits us best. Of course the EU can retaliate, but there's very little they can do to retaliate in reality (others mileage may vary on that). A trade dispute could follow, that could potentially last just weeks, or could be years or decades even. But in the mean time the UK's solution to the NI situation would be the one that is happening since we have that power under Article 16 - and since NI is part of the UK and its on us to enforce it, they have no ability to overrule us.
What makes matters worse for the EU is their bluff has been that the border needs enforcing in the Irish Sea because otherwise it'd need to be done at the EU/Eire border - but we all know full well they're never going to do that, so its a bluff. If we call the bluff, then there'll be no Irish Sea border, no Ireland border, and the bogeyman of Irish violence goes away and the EU lose that card forever.
As a result we may not need to actually invoke it. If we can threaten to invoke and be taken seriously in that threat, then the EU might give us whatever we want in order to avoid it being triggered.
And in the time I've written that, we've lost another wicket. Malan out.
It's going to be interesting watching this particular immovable object collide with an irresistible force over the next 5 years or so as people's expectations of good living standards based on affordable energy crash into a group of political parties utterly committed to decarbonisation (aka making energy really expensive).
Farage would be well advised to start jumping up and down about this, rather than the plight of un-vaxed tennis stars - it's about to be an issue with a very strong public resonance, where (rather like with the EU) the politicians are going to be well out of tune with the bulk of the public.
Boris Johnson to escape standards investigation over Downing Street flat makeover
Relief for Prime Minister as No 10 is told that Kathryn Stone will not open a potentially damaging fresh inquiry into the redecoration
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/01/08/boris-johnson-escape-standards-investigation-downing-street/ (£££)
We already pretty much know he lied about the whole affair anyway, his smirking interview told us that even if we didn’t read the Geidt report.
Gay men like to hang out with other gay men
Men who like to sleep with (very) young women like to hang out with men, who, etc.
I have absolutely no doubt that there's a parallel Jeffrey Epstein that has parties where there are lots of gay men, and some of them are underage.
But I would be surprised if that was Jeffrey's bag. You hung out with Jeffrey because he is a predator of young women, and you are also a predator.
What the government should do is reduce the self-isolation period from seven to five days, which will also reduce demand for LFTs.
An insight Keynes frequently had whilst wiping his arse but didn't pass on for fear he'd be thought a total imbecile.
You've clearly never bothered to learn how the Laffer Curve works or what it means, especially if you think that all that's relevant is people hiding their wealth. Especially since we're not talking in the UK about 70% wealth taxes and if we were then damn right they'd be hidden!
The problem with having a real income tax of 70% is that people stop bothering to work more, as well as issues like ensuring the work they do is cash in hand etc which results in low productivity and therefore more in benefits paid out by the state and less economic growth.
There is a multiplier effect to money spent in the economy so every time you convince people not to bother to work more because the state would just take most of their money anyway, that then get multiplied throughout the economy.
But sure keep tilting at windmills in America where we're talking about 0% or single digit tax rates instead of 70% tax rates. That's meaningful and will trick somebody into taking you seriously I'm sure (!)
I think the Scandinavian model is v interesting.
Even Finland is wealthier than Britain ex- the South East these days.
I suspect the answer is skilled workforce, strong (but not cumbersome) public services, and a tendency in both public and private sectors to (1) invest and (2) invest for the longer term.
Your examples, save perhaps Switzerland, are not very useful or explanatory to anyone interested in improving the performance of a large post industrial economy.
It’s one of my hobbyhorses. Outside London and the SE, living standards in the U.K. are very low. Even places like Portugal and Poland are catching up and maybe surpassing.
Levelling up is essential. And yet, even now, in 2021, it’s largely considered a slightly swotty topic by London-based commentators.
Of course, the EU is welcome to take countermeasures at that point.
You can set up your own comparisons on the OECD website. Even levels of Unionisation vary more than you might think. I'm not sure you can draw general conclusions tbh.
I’m talking about the rest of the country, which is where (by my count), 2/3 of the population actually live.
Considering those talks have already begun, unofficially, and the EU and UK have been in close talks on this subject for a year to avoid invocation, I'm not sure how much would change in one month. Yes an agreement may be reached to avoid the dispute getting past the one month mark, but if they don't then what I wrote follows - and I mentioned the possibility for countermeasures in my explanation.
The one month period for talks is essentially a part of the invocation procedure rather than an alternative to it. If the talks have broken down enough to have invocation followed through on, then I'm not sure how much would change in the following month to get it back on track. Only thing I can see is if the EU hadn't taken the threat of invocation seriously enough so get jolted by the invocation actually happening - but again since talks have already been happening you'd hope that level of diplomacy isn't necessary.
There’s a diversity of models in North America, and Western/Northern Europe, but whatever they are doing seems to work better than what the U.K. has achieved outside the South East in the last twenty odd years.
You can target investment and training in the North and cut corporate taxes there, not by whacking up taxes on London and the City which would just move businesses abroad
But the main point is that the Laffer Curve really doesn’t tell us anything and the idea that businesses “just move abroad” doesn’t really get anyone anywhere either.
More interesting is the differing tax regimes across the UK, which allows for tax avoidance of a sort (especially with so much WFH). I might even consider moving to Northumberland with GF if the higher tax rates keep increasing (even if the job remains in Scotland?!?).
There are other benefits and costs to doing business apart from the tax rate.
There are other reasons to trade or not trade apart from actual tariffs on goods.
As we see from declining trade volumes with Europe, simply zero-rating tariffs on most goods is not actually enough…
I met Liz Truss in 2015 as part of an interesting discussion on the UK's productivity challenges. I came away from that very impressed with Liz Truss incidentally.
The UK's productivity was flatlined from about 2007 to 2015/16, its actually been rising again since. I expect much more productivity growth in the years to come, especially now that importing more people from Eastern Europe to work for minimum wage as opposed to investing in productivity growth is no longer an option.
David Warner 48.00
Marcus Harris 25.29
Marnus Labuschagne 58.67
Steven Smith 60.60
Usman Khawaja 43.40
Cameron Green 30.58 (All rounder)
Carey 15.71
----------
Top 7 282.25
Haseeb Hameed 24.38
Zak Crawley 28.30
Dawid Malan 28.08
Joe Root (c) 49.66
Ben Stokes 36.34 (All rounder)
Bairstow 34.09
Buttler 32.17
----------
Top 7 233.02
We've won tests a few years back due to having excellent bowling, and batting further down the order hauling us out of holes - the Headingley test in 2019 probably the best example.
It does not surprise me that you were impressed by Truss (who incidentally was a remainer in 2015).
Other than your own pre-existing beliefs, what evidence says to you that productivity has gotten worse instead of better post-2016?
EDIT: Just saw your edit in about Truss. She's a very intelligent person to have a discussion with, and I was a Remainer in 2015 too.
Notice how nobody mentions wage growth since that time Boris pretended it was the main reason for Brexit? It’s because it hasn’t happened.
Brexit is a massive tax on the economy, and it makes delivering growth much harder.
Sorry about that. I’m afraid you’re very much the Comical Ali on this.
Nasser Hussein - 37.2
Michael Atherton - 37.7
Alec Stewart - 39.5
Ian Bell - 42.7
Graeme Gooch - 42.6
David Gower - 44.3
Basically, only Pieterson and Cook had test averages over 45 in the recent era.
See - https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/individual/most_matches_career.html?class=1;id=1;type=team
FDI figures have been pretty good and import/export figures look quite promising too though its far, far too premature to make any judgements yet because of the pandemic and the disruption to the global economy.
Compare to Aussies in a similar time period, not even duplicating those named above:
Clarke - 49.10
Hayden - 50.73
Hussey - 51.52
Katich - 45.03
Lehmann - 44.95
Martyn - 46.37
Ponting - 51.85
Taylor - 43.49
M Waugh - 41.86
S Waugh - 51.06
Your greats being in the thirties just isn't good enough.
And no doubt that's why England has struggled. But there's still only *two* England players in the last thirty years who've managed a 45 average over more than a few games.
But his 2016/17 scores were
6, 43, 23, 70, 28, 8, 17 vs Pakistan
1, 9, 9, 5 vs Bangladesh
20, 34, 27, 4 vs S Africa
So that was that.
Thorpe and Trott were very close, with Trescothick, Strauss, Bell and Prior rounding out the 40s.
The fact that England have so few to have such an average, while Australia have had so many that do, is why we've been outclassed too often. Its not like when they had McGrath and Warne as matchwinners on their own, we've had the bowlers but they've simply outbatted us.
It doesn't matter how good the bowling us, if you're too regularly bowled out for 180.
Incidentally I remember watching Atherton getting bowled by Anil Kumble at Lords in 1996. That was Dickie Bird's final match as umpire. I wonder how many young cricket fans today haven't heard of Dickie Bird? Would have seemed unimaginable at one time.
Isabel Schnabel says low-carbon economy ‘poses measurable upside risks’ to inflation projections over medium term"
https://www.ft.com/content/80cbd05f-d722-411f-9bbe-155cd8c06f7e
One of my favourite films of all time. Top three along with Groundhog Day and The Quiet Earth.
I’m surprised a wicket didn’t fall for each paragraph! We need better batsman from somewhere. As a Yorkshire lass I know we say if Yorkshire got nowt England got nowt but that all seems falling apart at the moment!
The only dedicated English batsman I think even in contention would be Root, none of the others would get close. Stokes as an all rounder.
Broad and Anderson at their prime would have easily but I think they're looking past it now unfortunately. Possibly Broad and Wood?
So just trying to second guess what happens next then.
We do a deal without invoking it (both sides claim success)
We invoke it to speed things up to the deal (same deal, both sides claim success)
Invoking it does give us extra powers, because it times out and then no deal, we get to write whatever rules we like 😌
The downside of that though, the EU can make up their own rules too? It’s a sort of war? And Anglo Saxon brethren across pond might go ape shit about Northern Ireland Agreement?
So it’s a question of, once we invoke it, it’s wether current government wants to go through with possible downsides of no deal, or (now Frost is out way) fudge a deal where everyone claims success?
Correct me where wrong - I’ll ask my brother tomorrow to see if he is as smart as you lot.
Ending the burning of fossil fuels is the escape from high energy prices due to high fossil fuel prices.