I do not see why reducing inequality shouldn't be a conservative goal. Our society seems to be getting ever more unequal, with wealth accruing to a smaller and smaller segment at the top. It seems inherently conservative to desire to maintain the middle class mass property owning democracy we've had for most of the 20th century. Not least because it promotes social stability: we don't want to end up with politics like Latin America due to the gap between rich and poor. Of course, we should seek to do this through thoughtful methods, rather than throwing money at the problem. I would like to see the Conservatives do this through cutting taxes and NI on those earning below £20k rather than inheritance tax, through increasing the pupil premium in education, through reducing unskilled family and EU immigration, and through encouraging better use of housing via a more progressive council tax banding.
Ideally, I'd like to see NI and employment taxes abolished entirely and other measures to bring down the non-wage costs of employment.
I agree.
It seems to me absurd that we tax employment and yet give capital allowances. It skews the choice for companies between using capital or labour to the disadvantage of employment.
I'm guessing the reason is to encourage the higher productivity that mechanisation can provide. But why skew the market? Let the market decide - otherwise you will get a misallocation of resources.
But you are never going to vote Labour as long as you have got a hole in your arse are you? How can you possibly know what impact he will have on voters who MIGHT vote Labour?
The left, including Corbyn, were loyal to Labour under Blair and I hope that loyalty would be reciprocated should the members and supporters decide that a new direction is needed and select Corbyn as leader.
Blair was winning elections, which seems to be the most important factor in maintaining discipline in party politics. If Corbyn as LOTO looked like he was going to take Labour into government, I'd expect the Blairites to be supportive regardless of his platform.
Comments
It seems to me absurd that we tax employment and yet give capital allowances. It skews the choice for companies between using capital or labour to the disadvantage of employment.
I'm guessing the reason is to encourage the higher productivity that mechanisation can provide. But why skew the market? Let the market decide - otherwise you will get a misallocation of resources.