I guess I should blog about the Tory's tax plans.
But I can't raise enough enthusiasm to comment on such obviously mad strategies as those they are proposing without any comment offered by them as to who will bear the cost in society of the boost this whole strategy is designed to give to the best off .
And please don't doubt me: this strategy is blatantly designed to increase the wealth gap in the UK. Why else cut inheritance tax, corporation tax, capital gains tax, stamp duty on shares but not housing and never once mention taxes paid by the 90% of the UK's population?
This is the politics of greed. Thankfully this will be electoral suicide for the Tories. Yet again. Which is, however, bad news for democracy in the country.
But what did Cameron expect if he asked John Redwood to talk about tax? The man is semi-detached from reality, at best. And the thinking on offer is evidence of that if ever it were needed.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I don’t think anyone should be too surprised by the ravings of John Redwood.
What to me is surprising is that David Cameron should ask such a maverick to conduct such a review. That to my mind is poor political management and does not bode well for any future Tory adminstration. Mind you, for personal reasons I would never vote Tory while William Hague is in the party.
Meanwhile, if the FT is right, perhaps some sense on tax from another party may appear soon:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/83a6edbe-4c13-11dc-b67f-0000779fd2ac.html
[…] The Tory’s tax madness […]
“And please don’t doubt me: this strategy is blatantly designed to increase the wealth gap in the UK. Why else cut inheritance tax, corporation tax, capital gains tax, stamp duty on shares but not housing and never once mention taxes paid by the 90% of the UK’s population?”
Richard, you might like to consider the possibility that those you disagree with are well-meaning and have good intentions. Assigning base motives to them is rarely a route to understanding their arguments.
You accuse Mr Redwood of “blatantly wanting to increase the wealth gap”, which is a conclusion you can only reach if you believe him to be a liar.
You would do better to explain why you believe that their policies will not have their claimed effects.
Richard
I do not impute honourable motives to John Redwood
But at least I didn’t call him a bastard, as John Major did
Richard
“I do not impute honourable motives to John Redwood”
I think that’s unfortunate. Whether you think he is genuine in his motives or not, he does make some reasoned arguments for his proposals. If you think his *argument* is wrong, why not say so? I’d stop short of saying you’re just relying on a lazy ad hominem, but you are getting close… 🙂
Richard
Candidly, I think I did present a short, clear and comprehensive argument. All the tax cuts benefit the top 10%:
They own more than 50% of all assets in the UK. Cuts in stamp duty and corproation tax disproprtionately benefit them.
Only 7% pay IHT. So the cuts beenfit the top again.
To pay CGT you must have assets. And that means wealth – we’re back to the top 10% again.
So the welathiest will get wealthier. That widens the wealth gap, by definition.
And since we all know (and all evidence shows) trickle down does not happen my argument is complete and evidemnce based. We also know that there is no evidence of a Laffer effect anywhere in a large economy. Iceland and Ireland are small economies – and Ireland’s tax revenues rose when it raised its taxes in any case.
So what’s you argument to say that I’m wrong?
Richard
[…] The Tories have got this wrong. And people realise this is only a tax on a small minority in society. The only one’s that John Redwood thinks matter. […]