Mr. Divvie, that's a foolish comparison. What matters is not the tax an individual pays but the tax that goes to the state. You could increase maximum income tax to 95% but that would see the overall tax take decline dramatically.
This idea that harming the rich is inherently good is just madness.
It's not inherently bad either. The watchword is pragmatism.
"Will the damage to the rich be outweighed by the benefits to the rest?"
This is the question that must be posed for each and every policy proposal.
If "No" - drop that plan.
If "Yes" - find a way to make it "No" and drop that plan.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Not saying he will necessarily win but he has been written off too easily on here previously and still has a pretty decent chance.
Sanders has no chance. Warren is a younger, female, wider supported and better funded version of him
Perhaps. But Jezziah and I are probably a closer match to an activist 25% of the democratic primary electorate. She doesn't strike me at all as a version of Sanders, any more than David Miliband strikes me as a version of Corbyn. She goes on about wicked bankers a lot, but is not consistently left-wing. Nor is she consistently better in polls vs Trump, and her lead in Democratic polls is not consistent either.
I don't think Sanders will win either - the health scare will worry some, and anyway there aren't quite enough leftists even among Democratic activists. But it's a mistake to say he's got no chance, because he has a solid base, whereas Warren's appeal is relatively recent and IMO less deep. I do agree that if Sanders drops out his support will mostly go to Warren, for want of better, but it won't happen soon.
From what you say, Warren seems to be the ideal candidate straddling the divide between left-wing activists and middle America. She needs both. A Lisa Nandy?
Although, pre-2009, the highest court of the land wouldn't have been able to rule of the legality of prorogation as by definition it would have been prorogued itself.
What I'm objecting to is your suggestion that the court had no option but to rule against the government on the grounds of "well, what if the government prorogued for eight months?" Well, presumably there could have been another court case. Personally, I don't think the court should be the arbiter of what is and what isn't acceptable in this regard. Let the democratically elected MPs make that decision.
Not again... this is another example of some of the bullshit that passes as “fact” on this site. A tiny bit of Google will tell you Section 8 of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act 1876 specifically stated -
“For preventing delay in the administration of justice, the House of Lords may sit and act for the purpose of hearing and determining of appeals...during any prorogation of Parliament...”.
Can we put this one to bed once and for all please?
Fair enough, I had wondered about that.
Sorry I expressed myself quite so vociferously! I was quite rude. I shouldn’t expect anyone save nerds like myself to be acquainted with late nineteenth century court reform...
Mr. kinabalu, that's still a crazy way to view the world.
What matters is increasing revenue for the state, and the best way to do that isn't to harm the rich, demotivating those who might become rich and driving away those who can move. It's to welcome the rich, to encourage them, so they make more money, pay more in tax, and spend more, helping those who benefit from state expenditure on vital services and those who provide the rich with goods and services through private enterprise.
Prioritising harming individuals or seeing the wealthy as fair game because they somehow deserve to be harmed is alarming, as well as foolish.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Suggests that Trump is taking the impeachment more seriously than most of us thought..
What's interesting about the Arcuri intervention ( apart from the fact that she's made it ) is it seems quite carefully calibrated. It's designed to keep the story going and be as unhelpful as possible while still remaining superficially neutral. Unless that's a remarkable coincidence she wants something, has a strategy and is getting good advice.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Better the devil you know........
I don't think Trump has thought this through. The consequences of his phone conversation with Erdogan could be game changing.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Me either. Turkey does not have a happy history with ethnic minorities.
What's interesting about the Arcuri intervention ( apart from the fact that she's made it ) is it seems quite carefully calibrated. It's designed to keep the story going and be as unhelpful as possible while still remaining superficially neutral. Unless that's a remarkable coincidence she wants something, has a strategy and is getting good advice.
Yes - whatever else she's doing, she's not helping Boris Johnson. He'll be fuming about that interview this morning. It's actually worse for him than saying "yeah, we shagged". She might at least have denied he pole-danced.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Me either. Turkey does not have a happy history with ethnic minorities.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Better the devil you know........
I don't think Trump has thought this through. The consequences of his phone conversation with Erdogan could be game changing.
Trump is utterly out of control.
When will the GOP realise they have a massive nation-threatening crisis on their hands and do something?
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Suggests that Trump is taking the impeachment more seriously than most of us thought..
I'm sure Trump will have cleared all this with his Russian handlers before picking up the phone.
Mr. kinabalu, that's still a crazy way to view the world.
What matters is increasing revenue for the state, and the best way to do that isn't to harm the rich, demotivating those who might become rich and driving away those who can move. It's to welcome the rich, to encourage them, so they make more money, pay more in tax, and spend more, helping those who benefit from state expenditure on vital services and those who provide the rich with goods and services through private enterprise.
Prioritising harming individuals or seeing the wealthy as fair game because they somehow deserve to be harmed is alarming, as well as foolish.
Hmmm, 2 points:
- I'm not convinced that any society has to "encourage" the rich (ie don't dare to ever try and tax them more) in order to be successful. It seems to be mostly the rich themselves making that argument, funnily enough.
Talking of stupid odds, as I write you can get 870 or 900 on Betfair for Julian Castro as Dem Nominee (though admittedly for only a few quid). Now, he's certainly a long shot, but as long as that? He's actually a candidate, for a starter, and he's not outlandishly inexperienced or unsuitable. Plus he has made the criteria for the October 15th debate, and has already met one of the criteria (donations) for the November debate. It's not unknown for long-shot candidates suddenly to emerge as serious candidates.
More generally, I thought this article was good. Note especially the bits about Biden.
Building an empire as an end in itself may be frowned upon today but it was eminently common as a desire in the ancient world.
I think you misunderstood the point I was trying to make it, and it's probably my fault for not being clear. I'm not judging the morality of what he did in terms of what I think ethical foreign policy looks like today. I'm saying that if he were trying to build an empire to outlast him he didn't do a very good job at all. And if he didn't care about what happened afterwards, then we can make a conclusion about his motivations that would allow to more easily sympathise with the views of the soldiery who (eventually) said Όχι rather than venerating, as we do, the achievements of a man who was thinking much more about himself than is healthy. That is, either Alexander's tactical success is undone by his strategic failure, or Alexander's tactical success must be placed alongside the fact that it delivered only something for him at the expense of the great majority. Or both.
Mr. kinabalu, that's still a crazy way to view the world.
What matters is increasing revenue for the state, and the best way to do that isn't to harm the rich, demotivating those who might become rich and driving away those who can move. It's to welcome the rich, to encourage them, so they make more money, pay more in tax, and spend more, helping those who benefit from state expenditure on vital services and those who provide the rich with goods and services through private enterprise.
Prioritising harming individuals or seeing the wealthy as fair game because they somehow deserve to be harmed is alarming, as well as foolish.
Hmmm, 2 points:
- I'm not convinced that any society has to "encourage" the rich (ie don't dare to ever try and tax them more) in order to be successful. It seems to be mostly the rich themselves making that argument, funnily enough.
- Fairer societies are happier.
+1 on both counts
Lower taxes make the rich work harder? Don't make me laugh.
Rich people I know are either lazy (and lucky) or driven by success rather than accruing money.
What's interesting about the Arcuri intervention ( apart from the fact that she's made it ) is it seems quite carefully calibrated. It's designed to keep the story going and be as unhelpful as possible while still remaining superficially neutral. Unless that's a remarkable coincidence she wants something, has a strategy and is getting good advice.
Yes - whatever else she's doing, she's not helping Boris Johnson. He'll be fuming about that interview this morning. It's actually worse for him than saying "yeah, we shagged". She might at least have denied he pole-danced.
Talking of stupid odds, as I write you can get 870 or 900 on Betfair for Julian Castro as Dem Nominee (though admittedly for only a few quid). Now, he's certainly a long shot, but as long as that? He's actually a candidate, for a starter, and he's not outlandishly inexperienced or unsuitable. Plus he has made the criteria for the October 15th debate, and has already met one of the criteria (donations) for the November debate. It's not unknown for long-shot candidates suddenly to emerge as serious candidates.
More generally, I thought this article was good. Note especially the bits about Biden.
Not saying he will necessarily win but he has been written off too easily on here previously and still has a pretty decent chance.
Sanders has no chance. Warren is a younger, female, wider supported and better funded version of him
Perhaps. But Jezziah and I are probably a closer match to an activist 25% of the democratic primary electorate. She doesn't strike me at all as a version of Sanders, any more than David Miliband strikes me as a version of Corbyn. She goes on about wicked bankers a lot, but is not consistently left-wing. Nor is she consistently better in polls vs Trump, and her lead in Democratic polls is not consistent either.
I don't think Sanders will win either - the health scare will worry some, and anyway there aren't quite enough leftists even among Democratic activists. But it's a mistake to say he's got no chance, because he has a solid base, whereas Warren's appeal is relatively recent and IMO less deep. I do agree that if Sanders drops out his support will mostly go to Warren, for want of better, but it won't happen soon.
It's not a health "scare", it's a full blown heart attack. When John Smith was 50 he was forced to take 3 months off politics to recover from his first heart attack. Sanders is 78. Even if he returns prematurely to campaigning against all doctors advice, his health will be an utter liability should he get the nomination, and will risk letting Trump back in.
Mr. kinabalu, that's still a crazy way to view the world.
What matters is increasing revenue for the state, and the best way to do that isn't to harm the rich, demotivating those who might become rich and driving away those who can move. It's to welcome the rich, to encourage them, so they make more money, pay more in tax, and spend more, helping those who benefit from state expenditure on vital services and those who provide the rich with goods and services through private enterprise.
Prioritising harming individuals or seeing the wealthy as fair game because they somehow deserve to be harmed is alarming, as well as foolish.
Hmmm, 2 points:
- I'm not convinced that any society has to "encourage" the rich (ie don't dare to ever try and tax them more) in order to be successful. It seems to be mostly the rich themselves making that argument, funnily enough.
- Fairer societies are happier.
I want to draw out something that's implicit here, but it needs stating openly. Maximising government revenue is not the (sole) goal of a tax system. There are multiple reasons for taxation, and the use of the incoming cash is just one of those goals. It is a conceit of the neoliberal mindset to assume that marketisation of taxation, and the attempt to make it as efficient as possible, is the prime or only consideration. That is not a view held by all people, even including those like me to rigorously defend the concept of capitalism.
From what you say, Warren seems to be the ideal candidate straddling the divide between left-wing activists and middle America. She needs both. A Lisa Nandy?
Mmm. Do you often hear of Lisa as a future candidate for the leadership? Having "well, she'd be OK, I guess" support isn't enough to win primaries.
Mr. kinabalu, that's still a crazy way to view the world.
What matters is increasing revenue for the state, and the best way to do that isn't to harm the rich, demotivating those who might become rich and driving away those who can move. It's to welcome the rich, to encourage them, so they make more money, pay more in tax, and spend more, helping those who benefit from state expenditure on vital services and those who provide the rich with goods and services through private enterprise.
Prioritising harming individuals or seeing the wealthy as fair game because they somehow deserve to be harmed is alarming, as well as foolish.
You're buying the propaganda of "If the deck does not remain stacked in their favour they will kick the table over".
For me, it's a head v heart issue, as so many things are.
Emotionally, I love the idea of enormous differences in wealth & income between people. That a person through talent and hard work can start at the bottom of the pile and accumulate riches beyond their widest dreams - I like that notion - and I also like the idea of 'great families' evolving over generations, building dynasties, using their wealth to create legacies, myths, households and buildings that inspire, that whole Brideshead and Getty thing. All of this seems so much more attractive than a world of bland sepia sameness.
But then my head, like a tiresome Mr Spock, makes its presence felt.
"Oh do stop it," it says. "That is a load of utter bollox. It is clearly illogical and inefficient that a person's life chances should be influenced above all else by birth circumstances. There is a better way and you know it."
At which point the rest of me puts up a fight, but not for too long.
Frazer Nelson is really not very good. His manner and light Scottish accent deceives. As a spokesman for Johnson often put up against EU journalists he too often sounds vaccuous and leaden footed.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
From what you say, Warren seems to be the ideal candidate straddling the divide between left-wing activists and middle America. She needs both. A Lisa Nandy?
Mmm. Do you often hear of Lisa as a future candidate for the leadership? Having "well, she'd be OK, I guess" support isn't enough to win primaries.
We might be at cross purposes.
I'm looking at Warren as the best democrat candidate to beat Trump by appealing to middle America while also keeping Democrat activists on board.
I think you're looking at Warren from the point of view of the primaries and therefore only considering her appeal to activists.
Both points of view are obviously valid and important from a betting point of view.
Mr. Noo, arguing for inefficient taxation seems rather... unorthodox, to be polite.
Again there is a misunderstanding, but this time it's you. Inefficiency isn't a good thing per se, but it might be a price worth paying if there are other things you value that can be achieved by not regarding efficiency as the sole goal.
A metaphor might help here. Road safety is a good thing but it's not the only goal. Reducing the speed limit on motorways to 30mph might lead to a decrease in accidents (or not, I don't know, this is just an example), but it would be overprioritising one aspect at the expense of other goals.
Mr Dancer, a necessary corollary of the Laffer Curve, as often espoused, is that there is a point below which reducing taxes on the rich is less efficient in terms of revenue raising.
Always reducing taxes in the aim of maximising tax take is exactly as inaccurate as always increasing taxes in the same aim.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
From what you say, Warren seems to be the ideal candidate straddling the divide between left-wing activists and middle America. She needs both. A Lisa Nandy?
Mmm. Do you often hear of Lisa as a future candidate for the leadership? Having "well, she'd be OK, I guess" support isn't enough to win primaries.
The parallels that you are drawing between the Labour leadership and Democratic presidential nominee processes are false one.
Imagine a process here where voters registered their political allegiance as part of registering to vote, it was now necessary to select a candidate to take on the sitting President Johnson at the forthcoming election, there were primary votes at every polling station, and candidates financed their own campaigns.
It was not a land grab. It was the highest Court in the land doing what it has always done: clarifying an aspect of our unwritten constitution. And, as has always been the case, if Parliament does not like it, it can change the law. That, as things currently stand, is that the government cannot close down Parliament for an extended period without its permission or without due cause.
Not to mention cleaning up behind Britain's useless waste of space of a monarch who totally failed to do her one job.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
Pathetic cretins, how can you trust such people, they really are rats and to think we lick their butts at every opportunity.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Hope they do and give Turkey a bloody nose.
That's pretty dark.
You can be sure Turkey will not hesitate to blow them to kingdom come. They have no business invading Syria and if they do they deserve all they get, and hopefully it backfires on Trump and the Americans get embroiled, that will serve them right as well.
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Hope they do and give Turkey a bloody nose.
That's pretty dark.
You can be sure Turkey will not hesitate to blow them to kingdom come. They have no business invading Syria and if they do they deserve all they get, and hopefully it backfires on Trump and the Americans get embroiled, that will serve them right as well.
Yeah, I get where you're coming from and this move looks pretty bad to me. But there are better outcomes we can hope for.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
Would you buy insurance from Gordon Brown?
Mark, there are always exceptions to the rule. The great clunking Dumpling would have bored you to death before you got to the policy
President Donald Trump talked to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey about the military incursion, the White House said in its statement. The administration, without elaborating on the scope of the attack, referred to the invasion as a “long-planned operation.”
The Kurds are going to do a deal with Assad (and indirectly with Iran and Russia). I don't blame them.
Hope they do and give Turkey a bloody nose.
That's pretty dark.
You can be sure Turkey will not hesitate to blow them to kingdom come. They have no business invading Syria and if they do they deserve all they get, and hopefully it backfires on Trump and the Americans get embroiled, that will serve them right as well.
Yeah, I get where you're coming from and this move looks pretty bad to me. But there are better outcomes we can hope for.
We can but I doubt it , Turkey have form with the Kurds, they will not be happy as long as there are any left. Pretty nasty.
Mr. Cooke, I agree. Taxes shouldn't be cut endlessly.
Mr. kinabalu, humans react to reality. Tax someone punitively, and if they can avoid it, they will. A tax rate of 95% yields nothing if all those liable to pay it have gone to live in Switzerland.
Mr. Noo, what are the benefits of deliberately designing a tax policy that leads to the state getting less money due to a desire to get more from individuals?
I want to draw out something that's implicit here, but it needs stating openly. Maximising government revenue is not the (sole) goal of a tax system. There are multiple reasons for taxation, and the use of the incoming cash is just one of those goals. It is a conceit of the neoliberal mindset to assume that marketisation of taxation, and the attempt to make it as efficient as possible, is the prime or only consideration. That is not a view held by all people, even including those like me to rigorously defend the concept of capitalism.
Now this is the sort of 'late night student dorm' conversation I like.
Because, yes, you're right. We do NOT want to maximize the tax take. That is not at all a good thing.
Scenario A - Total tax take £800 billion. Richest 1% contribute 25% of it.
Scenario B - Total tax take £600 billion. Richest 1% contribute 50% of it.
I'm liking B. More info needed, obviously, but I'm liking B.
Mr. Noo, what are the benefits of deliberately designing a tax policy that leads to the state getting less money due to a desire to get more from individuals?
Less income disparity, concentration of wealth and concomitantly political influence in the hands of a tiny elite.
Knives in West 11 Ain't so lucky to be rich Sten guns in Knightsbridge Danger stranger
If Trump has sold Rojava out no one can blame them if they do a deal with Assad. They've never explicitly sought independence from Syria so the issue is how autonomous Assad will let the autonomous Cantons be. Another catastrophic error of judgement if it's true.
Mr. kinabalu, humans react to reality. Tax someone punitively, and if they can avoid it, they will. A tax rate of 95% yields nothing if all those liable to pay it have gone to live in Switzerland.
There is quite a gap between where we are and the absurdity of 95% through which to safely steer the good ship HMS Redistribution.
Mr. Cooke, I agree. Taxes shouldn't be cut endlessly.
Mr. kinabalu, humans react to reality. Tax someone punitively, and if they can avoid it, they will. A tax rate of 95% yields nothing if all those liable to pay it have gone to live in Switzerland.
Mr. Noo, what are the benefits of deliberately designing a tax policy that leads to the state getting less money due to a desire to get more from individuals?
Well, I don't want to get into a bunfight about which outcomes are desirable or not, but some goals might include the reduction of certain economic activity (e.g. the sale of alcohol and tobacco are controlled through high taxation), the discouragement of growths in inequality (incentivising investment in creating jobs is the carrot that comes along with the stick of discouraging excessive capital accumulation), as a way to protect finite resources and the environment against unsustainable exploitation, and so on.
The trick is to think about how you would complete this sentence: "I would like to use the tax system in order to..." if your only answer to that question is "...maximise tax receipts", then you are quite right to argue for for efficiency uber alles. But many people will not share that view, and to argue against those people using the presupposition that efficiency is the only goal is begging the question. A more valid approach would be to first convince them that their goals shouldn't be goals at all, or that there are better methods than using the tax system, and then the efficiency-maximising argument starts to kick in quite effectively.
Mr. Ace, ah, yes, income disparity. Like 'relative poverty', a strange notion that holds a five house street with one income of £1m a year and four of £40k to be inferior to a five house street with four houses of £40k income and one of £10k.
Because everyone being equally poor is better than the dreadful unfairness of some being richer than others...
Mr. Submarine, Turkey versus Syria, Russia, and Iran would be a dramatic development. What's the Turkish pretext?
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
I want to draw out something that's implicit here, but it needs stating openly. Maximising government revenue is not the (sole) goal of a tax system. There are multiple reasons for taxation, and the use of the incoming cash is just one of those goals. It is a conceit of the neoliberal mindset to assume that marketisation of taxation, and the attempt to make it as efficient as possible, is the prime or only consideration. That is not a view held by all people, even including those like me to rigorously defend the concept of capitalism.
Now this is the sort of 'late night student dorm' conversation I like.
Because, yes, you're right. We do NOT want to maximize the tax take. That is not at all a good thing.
Scenario A - Total tax take £800 billion. Richest 1% contribute 25% of it.
Scenario B - Total tax take £600 billion. Richest 1% contribute 50% of it.
I'm liking B. More info needed, obviously, but I'm liking B.
Just don't get sick, as your hospital has just closed.....
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
Would you buy insurance from Gordon Brown?
Mark, there are always exceptions to the rule. The great clunking Dumpling would have bored you to death before you got to the policy
The USA has in effect implemented flat taxes, yet the USA GDP growth rate was considerably higher when rates were higher. I am sure those individuals enjoy their tax cuts, but there is little evidence that there has been a long term boost to the economy. The only thing that has been growing so swiftly is the US national debt. Could they be related?
Completely off all topics, but this is a curious example of discrimination against girls - by their own parents and grandparents. Hargreaves Lansdown have got hold of the figures for subscriptions to Junior Pensions (which allow money to be put aside for a child's eventual pension pot).
.. the data also revealed that while approximately 20,000 boys aged 15 or under received contributions into a pension in 2016/17, only 13,000 girls aged 15 or under had the same. This is a difference of 54%, showing that the gender inequality in pensions starts even before men and women begin working.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
Would you buy insurance from Gordon Brown?
Mark, there are always exceptions to the rule. The great clunking Dumpling would have bored you to death before you got to the policy
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
Completely off all topics, but this is a curious example of discrimination against girls - by their own parents and grandparents. Hargreaves Lansdown have got hold of the figures for subscriptions to Junior Pensions (which allow money to be put aside for a child's eventual pension pot).
.. the data also revealed that while approximately 20,000 boys aged 15 or under received contributions into a pension in 2016/17, only 13,000 girls aged 15 or under had the same. This is a difference of 54%, showing that the gender inequality in pensions starts even before men and women begin working.
Talking of stupid odds, as I write you can get 870 or 900 on Betfair for Julian Castro as Dem Nominee (though admittedly for only a few quid). Now, he's certainly a long shot, but as long as that? He's actually a candidate, for a starter, and he's not outlandishly inexperienced or unsuitable. Plus he has made the criteria for the October 15th debate, and has already met one of the criteria (donations) for the November debate. It's not unknown for long-shot candidates suddenly to emerge as serious candidates.
More generally, I thought this article was good. Note especially the bits about Biden.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
Would you buy insurance from Gordon Brown?
Mark, there are always exceptions to the rule. The great clunking Dumpling would have bored you to death before you got to the policy
Completely off all topics, but this is a curious example of discrimination against girls - by their own parents and grandparents. Hargreaves Lansdown have got hold of the figures for subscriptions to Junior Pensions (which allow money to be put aside for a child's eventual pension pot).
.. the data also revealed that while approximately 20,000 boys aged 15 or under received contributions into a pension in 2016/17, only 13,000 girls aged 15 or under had the same. This is a difference of 54%, showing that the gender inequality in pensions starts even before men and women begin working.
Not news to half of humanity sadly - and this is a place where women have it far, far better than other areas of the world. An Indian programmer I used to work with said she hated going back to India because she was basically treated as a domestic appliance in spite of her education and earning potential.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
This was my suggestion. If they build Manchester-Leeds there really isn't any need for Birmingham-Leeds. What they ought to do instead is reinstate connections between the WCML and MML and electrify the MML.
Mr. Ace, ah, yes, income disparity. Like 'relative poverty', a strange notion that holds a five house street with one income of £1m a year and four of £40k to be inferior to a five house street with four houses of £40k income and one of £10k.
Because everyone being equally poor is better than the dreadful unfairness of some being richer than others...
Relative poverty is an important and meaningful concept.
Question to illustrate this -
If pensions and other benefits were to rise ONLY in line with inflation - with no reference to average earnings - and the economy delivered consistent year on year standard of living increases for those in work, would pensioners and other benefit claimants over time fall into real and actual poverty?
Anyone who answers "No", please apply the relevant calculation to the last (say) 75 years and see if it changes your mind.
Just changing the subject for a moment, Ian Blackford once again offering to put Corbyn in Number 10 in exchange for IndyRef2.
Manna from heaven for LibDems seeking revenge for ousting of Charlie Kennedy in 2015. Corbyn enjoys about the same levels of popularity in the Highlands as the Duke of Cumberland.
This is why Jo Swinson (a Scottish MP, remember) will never agree to putting Corbyn into Number 10. Would stymie their ambition to do to Blackford what the SCons did to Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
Indeed! Neither are at all good advertisements for project management.
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
Indeed! Neither are at all good advertisements for project management.
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Edit: Main point is it is *now* possible to get some budgets out quite well in contrast, for example, to the Great Western railway line electrification ...
Mr. kinabalu, I'm not surprised the numbers you've made up appeal to you.
The left seems quite content to sacrifice public expenditure for those who need it on the altar of being seen to hit the rich.
The wealthy are punished and the poor do without. Socialism in action.
But consider the numbers more closely.
200 billion less tax. Rich paying 100 billion more. Poor paying 300 billion less.
Therefore 200 billlion less to spend on public services but the poor have 300 billion more in their pockets, the rich 100 billion less.
So the poor are net 100 billion better off even if we assume ALL public services go on them.
That is a 100 billion redistribution from rich to poor even though the tax take has fallen by 200 billion.
To illustrate that redistribution is not synonymous with tax & spend.
What happens to everything that was previously paid for by the missing £200 Billion, the government were not running a surplus?
LOL careful Malc it's a lefty you're talking to. Hampstead lefty at that. Don't expect them to get things like this. It's all grand gesture and declaiming at The Flask.
Talking of stupid odds, as I write you can get 870 or 900 on Betfair for Julian Castro as Dem Nominee (though admittedly for only a few quid). Now, he's certainly a long shot, but as long as that? He's actually a candidate, for a starter, and he's not outlandishly inexperienced or unsuitable. Plus he has made the criteria for the October 15th debate, and has already met one of the criteria (donations) for the November debate. It's not unknown for long-shot candidates suddenly to emerge as serious candidates.
More generally, I thought this article was good. Note especially the bits about Biden.
weird accent Roger, like no other Scottish accent ever heard.
Apparently the Scottish accent - if of the mild and educated variety - is an enormous asset in selling insurance. Outside Scotland, I assume that means.
I read this somewhere several years ago. In a tabloid newspaper, I think, but I can't remember which one.
It is indeed, it is connected to being honest and trustworthy.
LOL careful Malc it's a lefty you're talking to. Hampstead lefty at that. Don't expect them to get things like this. It's all grand gesture and declaiming at The Flask.
Not what it was, The Flask. They prioritize food now.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
Indeed! Neither are at all good advertisements for project management.
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Fair comment, but doesn't stop the impression that all the investment is going into Central Belt while the rest of Scotland picks up the crumbs and has to make do with crumbling infrastructure, failing hospitals and unseaworthy ferries. SNP will pick up the tab for that, maybe unfairly, because they are in office and have been for the last 12 years.
Folk are making a mistake if they think SNP are going to sweep all before them.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
Indeed! Neither are at all good advertisements for project management.
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Fair comment, but doesn't stop the impression that all the investment is going into Central Belt while the rest of Scotland picks up the crumbs and has to make do with crumbling infrastructure, failing hospitals and unseaworthy ferries. SNP will pick up the tab for that, maybe unfairly, because they are in office and have been for the last 12 years.
Folk are making a mistake if they think SNP are going to sweep all before them.
The effect of the Edinburgh trams - and later injections to rescue the project - was indeed to delay projects elsewhere. The Borders Railway is however a counterexample (though in my opinion done on the cheap - should have been double tracked throughout - but that kind of thinking was a chronic disease of UK railway projects at the time: for some reason there was huge institutional pessimism about the cost-benefit ratios to be gained by new investment, as the Bathgate Line electrification showed very clearly was mistaken).
Talking of stupid odds, as I write you can get 870 or 900 on Betfair for Julian Castro as Dem Nominee (though admittedly for only a few quid). Now, he's certainly a long shot, but as long as that? He's actually a candidate, for a starter, and he's not outlandishly inexperienced or unsuitable. Plus he has made the criteria for the October 15th debate, and has already met one of the criteria (donations) for the November debate. It's not unknown for long-shot candidates suddenly to emerge as serious candidates.
More generally, I thought this article was good. Note especially the bits about Biden.
LOL careful Malc it's a lefty you're talking to. Hampstead lefty at that. Don't expect them to get things like this. It's all grand gesture and declaiming at The Flask.
Not what it was, The Flask. They prioritize food now.
Hey, I get in there from time to time. How about a mini PB Meet? I think Cyclefree lives within a bus ride too.
You can drink and watch the rugby in the little bar at the front, so if we get fed up talking about Brexit we could always watch the telly.
Just changing the subject for a moment, Ian Blackford once again offering to put Corbyn in Number 10 in exchange for IndyRef2.
Manna from heaven for LibDems seeking revenge for ousting of Charlie Kennedy in 2015. Corbyn enjoys about the same levels of popularity in the Highlands as the Duke of Cumberland.
This is why Jo Swinson (a Scottish MP, remember) will never agree to putting Corbyn into Number 10. Would stymie their ambition to do to Blackford what the SCons did to Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
Indeed! Neither are at all good advertisements for project management.
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Fair comment, but doesn't stop the impression that all the investment is going into Central Belt while the rest of Scotland picks up the crumbs and has to make do with crumbling infrastructure, failing hospitals and unseaworthy ferries. SNP will pick up the tab for that, maybe unfairly, because they are in office and have been for the last 12 years.
Folk are making a mistake if they think SNP are going to sweep all before them.
PS Actually I'd be just as interested in the effect of the rising LD and BXP votes on the Tories and Labour, as well as SNP too. I haven't seen any analysis of the possible development (or elimination) of likely 3/4 way contests under FPTP in Scotland though?
LOL careful Malc it's a lefty you're talking to. Hampstead lefty at that. Don't expect them to get things like this. It's all grand gesture and declaiming at The Flask.
Not what it was, The Flask. They prioritize food now.
Are you after that authentic northern working man's boozer? Homesick?
What happens to everything that was previously paid for by the missing £200 Billion, the government were not running a surplus?
It's ultra theoretical but for example it could mean -
NHS & Education spending cut by 200 billion.
But the poor have 300 billion extra to go private.
You would have to ensure the poor spend it wisely on such things - and not just p*ss the extra cash up the wall.
PAYE doesn't necessarily encourage money management. For example in Switzerland you must put away the right amount of tax yourself to pay the revenue when they come calling two years after the tax year. Encourages saving and fiscal responsibility.
If there's anything more calculated to get the UK's clogged & calcifed constitutional (that's enuff alliteration - ed) arteries pumping, it's a letter signed by 3 of yesterday's men (2 of them hardly even today's men in their pomp). It just needs Gordy to sign up for the full quadruple bypass.
What happens to everything that was previously paid for by the missing £200 Billion, the government were not running a surplus?
It's ultra theoretical but for example it could mean -
NHS & Education spending cut by 200 billion.
But the poor have 300 billion extra to go private.
You would have to ensure the poor spend it wisely on such things - and not just p*ss the extra cash up the wall.
PAYE doesn't necessarily encourage money management. For example in Switzerland you must put away the right amount of tax yourself to pay the revenue when they come calling two years after the tax year. Encourages saving and fiscal responsibility.
Just changing the subject for a moment, Ian Blackford once again offering to put Corbyn in Number 10 in exchange for IndyRef2.
Manna from heaven for LibDems seeking revenge for ousting of Charlie Kennedy in 2015. Corbyn enjoys about the same levels of popularity in the Highlands as the Duke of Cumberland.
This is why Jo Swinson (a Scottish MP, remember) will never agree to putting Corbyn into Number 10. Would stymie their ambition to do to Blackford what the SCons did to Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson.
The chances of the SLDs retaking Ross, Skye and Lochaber are only slightly better than those of Swinson becoming FM (™HYUFD).
The other thing that strikes me about Ms Swinson is her reported support for fracking firms and apparently by fracking money, or at least people with fracking links.
As much of the Midland Valley is (as if by definition) Carboniferous and much of it is (in theory though less convincingly in practice) frackable, as is the Merse in Berwickshire, it is a potential issue that could hit the LDs.
You would have to ensure the poor spend it wisely on such things - and not just p*ss the extra cash up the wall.
PAYE doesn't necessarily encourage money management. For example in Switzerland you must put away the right amount of tax yourself to pay the revenue when they come calling two years after the tax year. Encourages saving and fiscal responsibility.
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Depends which country you mean. The Scots, for some reason which escapes me, seem to be able to do at least some things to budget - or under budget: the new Forth bridge had an "overrun" of ca. minus 55% compared to initial estimates if my mental arithmetic is correct.
Indeed! Neither are at all good advertisements for project management.
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Fair comment, but doesn't stop the impression that all the investment is going into Central Belt while the rest of Scotland picks up the crumbs and has to make do with crumbling infrastructure, failing hospitals and unseaworthy ferries. SNP will pick up the tab for that, maybe unfairly, because they are in office and have been for the last 12 years.
Folk are making a mistake if they think SNP are going to sweep all before them.
PS Actually I'd be just as interested in the effect of the rising LD and BXP votes on the Tories and Labour, as well as SNP too. I haven't seen any analysis of the possible development (or elimination) of likely 3/4 way contests under FPTP in Scotland though?
I think you'll see unofficial non-aggression pacts where the unionist parties have MPs and where its obvious who is the challenger. Scots are pretty savvy at this. Inevitably there are a few places where it is not so obvious, such as Highlands, where SCon has made considerable strides and overtook LibDems, such as Blackford's seat. But I have a suspicion that LibDems will throw kitchen sink here and it will be a toss-up. Robertson's reputation as a parliamentary performer didn't help him in Moray - just gave reputation that he was taking his base for granted. Could do for Blackford too who is, in any case, less impressive anyway.
"The police watchdog has been strongly criticised by a retired High Court judge for its review of how detectives handled false claims of a Westminster paedophile ring.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) cleared five detectives of wrongdoing, but Sir Richard Henriques said its review was "flawed".
Sir Richard said it "fell well short of an effective investigation"."
Sir Richard is undoubtedly correct, and nobody should be surprised. The cynic in me suspects the investigation was deliberately botched, but it is unlikely we will ever know.
The police’s first instinct when criticised in this case has been to protect their own.
Based on what we have learnt in this case, neither the Met nor Wiltshire Police nor IPOC are fit for purpose.
Umm, Cyclefree, I hate to take issue but did anyone think they were fit for purpose before?
Because if not, we haven't even learned that.
Well no.
But for God’s sake, is it too much to expect people to be competent in their job? Or even have some sense of shame and responsibility. Clearly it is.
I’ve not been to the blasted police training college and I seem to know more about how investigations should be done than these bozos or even the Victim’s Commissioner, one Vera Baird QC.
You are expecting people in the police and ancillary organisations to be appointed on the basis of talent and experience rather than cronyism and doing favours for the right people?
You, whose job description is 'trying to stop bankers from being fuckwits?'
Yes, Cyclefree, it is too much to expect. That would be an intelligent request and when has the Home Office ever behaved intelligently?
A proper investigation would have consumed huge amounts of police time for years. How much easier to just hand the job to a couple of hopeless plods and tell them not to try too hard. Naturally they are defended when they fail, because they were never intended to succeed.
A proper investigation would not have taken years. Not if run by competent investigators. This is one of those myths that is spread by those who either have no idea how investigations are done or who have every incentive to use an investigation to kick the whole affair into the long grass never to to be heard or seen again.
We need to discuss this over a glass in The Flask. Just you and me. Don't let anybody else know.
Comments
"Will the damage to the rich be outweighed by the benefits to the rest?"
This is the question that must be posed for each and every policy proposal.
If "No" - drop that plan.
If "Yes" - find a way to make it "No" and drop that plan.
Such is the Thatcher/Blair consensus.
What matters is increasing revenue for the state, and the best way to do that isn't to harm the rich, demotivating those who might become rich and driving away those who can move. It's to welcome the rich, to encourage them, so they make more money, pay more in tax, and spend more, helping those who benefit from state expenditure on vital services and those who provide the rich with goods and services through private enterprise.
Prioritising harming individuals or seeing the wealthy as fair game because they somehow deserve to be harmed is alarming, as well as foolish.
Turkey does not have a happy history with ethnic minorities.
Resignations later today?
When will the GOP realise they have a massive nation-threatening crisis on their hands and do something?
- I'm not convinced that any society has to "encourage" the rich (ie don't dare to ever try and tax them more) in order to be successful. It seems to be mostly the rich themselves making that argument, funnily enough.
- Fairer societies are happier.
More generally, I thought this article was good. Note especially the bits about Biden.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/oct/07/will-swing-voters-who-went-from-obama-to-trump-stay-loyal-in-2020
That is, either Alexander's tactical success is undone by his strategic failure, or Alexander's tactical success must be placed alongside the fact that it delivered only something for him at the expense of the great majority. Or both.
Lower taxes make the rich work harder? Don't make me laugh.
Rich people I know are either lazy (and lucky) or driven by success rather than accruing money.
Hillary won the popular vote in 2016. More Americans voted for her than for the Racist-in-Chief.
It is a conceit of the neoliberal mindset to assume that marketisation of taxation, and the attempt to make it as efficient as possible, is the prime or only consideration. That is not a view held by all people, even including those like me to rigorously defend the concept of capitalism.
For me, it's a head v heart issue, as so many things are.
Emotionally, I love the idea of enormous differences in wealth & income between people. That a person through talent and hard work can start at the bottom of the pile and accumulate riches beyond their widest dreams - I like that notion - and I also like the idea of 'great families' evolving over generations, building dynasties, using their wealth to create legacies, myths, households and buildings that inspire, that whole Brideshead and Getty thing. All of this seems so much more attractive than a world of bland sepia sameness.
But then my head, like a tiresome Mr Spock, makes its presence felt.
"Oh do stop it," it says. "That is a load of utter bollox. It is clearly illogical and inefficient that a person's life chances should be influenced above all else by birth circumstances. There is a better way and you know it."
At which point the rest of me puts up a fight, but not for too long.
Mr. Noo, arguing for inefficient taxation seems rather... unorthodox, to be polite.
I'm looking at Warren as the best democrat candidate to beat Trump by appealing to middle America while also keeping Democrat activists on board.
I think you're looking at Warren from the point of view of the primaries and therefore only considering her appeal to activists.
Both points of view are obviously valid and important from a betting point of view.
Inefficiency isn't a good thing per se, but it might be a price worth paying if there are other things you value that can be achieved by not regarding efficiency as the sole goal.
A metaphor might help here. Road safety is a good thing but it's not the only goal. Reducing the speed limit on motorways to 30mph might lead to a decrease in accidents (or not, I don't know, this is just an example), but it would be overprioritising one aspect at the expense of other goals.
Always reducing taxes in the aim of maximising tax take is exactly as inaccurate as always increasing taxes in the same aim.
Imagine a process here where voters registered their political allegiance as part of registering to vote, it was now necessary to select a candidate to take on the sitting President Johnson at the forthcoming election, there were primary votes at every polling station, and candidates financed their own campaigns.
Mr. kinabalu, humans react to reality. Tax someone punitively, and if they can avoid it, they will. A tax rate of 95% yields nothing if all those liable to pay it have gone to live in Switzerland.
Mr. Noo, what are the benefits of deliberately designing a tax policy that leads to the state getting less money due to a desire to get more from individuals?
Because, yes, you're right. We do NOT want to maximize the tax take. That is not at all a good thing.
Scenario A - Total tax take £800 billion. Richest 1% contribute 25% of it.
Scenario B - Total tax take £600 billion. Richest 1% contribute 50% of it.
I'm liking B. More info needed, obviously, but I'm liking B.
Knives in West 11
Ain't so lucky to be rich
Sten guns in Knightsbridge
Danger stranger
The Clash, 1977
The left seems quite content to sacrifice public expenditure for those who need it on the altar of being seen to hit the rich.
The wealthy are punished and the poor do without. Socialism in action.
The trick is to think about how you would complete this sentence:
"I would like to use the tax system in order to..."
if your only answer to that question is "...maximise tax receipts", then you are quite right to argue for for efficiency uber alles. But many people will not share that view, and to argue against those people using the presupposition that efficiency is the only goal is begging the question. A more valid approach would be to first convince them that their goals shouldn't be goals at all, or that there are better methods than using the tax system, and then the efficiency-maximising argument starts to kick in quite effectively.
Because everyone being equally poor is better than the dreadful unfairness of some being richer than others...
Mr. Submarine, Turkey versus Syria, Russia, and Iran would be a dramatic development. What's the Turkish pretext?
https://www.ft.com/content/16593c8a-e693-11e9-b112-9624ec9edc59
Ahhhhh! Why can we not build anything in this country except ever higher private office developments in London?
Anyway politically speaking, Corbyn is miles to the left of him. Sanders program here wouldn't scare the horses I think.
Afternoon Malc!
https://twitter.com/DLeonhardt/status/1181004566088814594?s=19
The USA has in effect implemented flat taxes, yet the USA GDP growth rate was considerably higher when rates were higher. I am sure those individuals enjoy their tax cuts, but there is little evidence that there has been a long term boost to the economy. The only thing that has been growing so swiftly is the US national debt. Could they be related?
I'm not planning on opening a new account, but they have 1/7 on Hamilton beating Bottas next year.
The 4/9 on Leclerc beating Vettel's worth considering too.
.. the data also revealed that while approximately 20,000 boys aged 15 or under received contributions into a pension in 2016/17, only 13,000 girls aged 15 or under had the same. This is a difference of 54%, showing that the gender inequality in pensions starts even before men and women begin working.
https://www.hl.co.uk/news/articles/women-losing-out-on-pensions-even-before-they-start-working
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-49945051
200 billion less tax. Rich paying 100 billion more. Poor paying 300 billion less.
Therefore 200 billlion less to spend on public services but the poor have 300 billion more in their pockets, the rich 100 billion less.
So the poor are net 100 billion better off even if we assume ALL public services go on them.
That is a 100 billion redistribution from rich to poor even though the tax take has fallen by 200 billion.
To illustrate that redistribution is not synonymous with tax & spend.
Question to illustrate this -
If pensions and other benefits were to rise ONLY in line with inflation - with no reference to average earnings - and the economy delivered consistent year on year standard of living increases for those in work, would pensioners and other benefit claimants over time fall into real and actual poverty?
Anyone who answers "No", please apply the relevant calculation to the last (say) 75 years and see if it changes your mind.
Manna from heaven for LibDems seeking revenge for ousting of Charlie Kennedy in 2015. Corbyn enjoys about the same levels of popularity in the Highlands as the Duke of Cumberland.
This is why Jo Swinson (a Scottish MP, remember) will never agree to putting Corbyn into Number 10. Would stymie their ambition to do to Blackford what the SCons did to Alex Salmond and Angus Robertson.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-49951259
Though those were some time ago.
So we need to look closer. The former was at the behest of the Labour Party, then very much managed from London, and the projecyt efectively managed IIRC by the Labour-LD alliance which then dominated Holyrood. It was very much against the recommendations of the SNP, which wanted to reuse the Royal High School.
The trams were imposed by SLAB and other oppsition parties on a minority SNP government very much against its wishes and managed by a Labour-LD alliance.
Also are there any bookies out there offering as to if or when any of the wronged 21 will be allowed back in to the Tory fold?
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/court-of-session
and with the chipolatas and other trimmings too
https://twitter.com/JolyonMaugham/status/1181168120037281793
So may take some time to digest. Off now ....
Folk are making a mistake if they think SNP are going to sweep all before them.
The horror, the horror.
Looks like little change from last time to me
You can drink and watch the rugby in the little bar at the front, so if we get fed up talking about Brexit we could always watch the telly.
NHS & Education spending cut by 200 billion.
But the poor have 300 billion extra to go private.
PAYE doesn't necessarily encourage money management. For example in Switzerland you must put away the right amount of tax yourself to pay the revenue when they come calling two years after the tax year. Encourages saving and fiscal responsibility.
https://twitter.com/DarranMarshall/status/1180954833542668288?s=20
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/liberal-democrat-leadership-hopeful-dubbed-16483979
I'm not sure how vulnerable her own seat is but licensing has occurred in the general area
https://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/13304191.warning-as-firm-takes-up-sites-for-fracking-in-east-dunbartonshire/
As much of the Midland Valley is (as if by definition) Carboniferous and much of it is (in theory though less convincingly in practice) frackable, as is the Merse in Berwickshire, it is a potential issue that could hit the LDs.