The Telegraph can hardly contain its excitement about the forthcoming Tory conference as this week progresses, and as a result, it is doing all it can to belittle Labour. This is one offering the second sort in this morning's rag paper:
Rachel Reeves has been told to “stop whacking” food companies with taxes as the Chancellor faces growing demands not to target businesses at her upcoming Budget.
Andrew Selley, the chief executive of Bidcorp, which is one of the UK's largest food distributors, said the Government's decision to hammer the industry with tax rises and new duties risked pushing up prices for consumers.
The trouble for me is that I entirely agree with this comment. Rachel Reeves should stop piling more taxes on households on average and lower incomes: they really do not have the capacity to pay more.
Of course, what The Telegraph, and no doubt Bidcorp, fail to mention is that there are those with ample capacity to pay more tax in the UK.
Let's call them those with the highest earnings. And those with the highest wealth. And, large corporations, of course, whose tax rate has more than halved during working life.
Reeves has a whole smorgasbord of options available to her to choose from: she just needs to pick up a copy of my Taxing Wealth Report. In one quick scan of that, she could find all the money she needs, and more besides.
Taking further action
If you want to write a letter to your MP on the issues raised in this blog post, there is a ChatGPT prompt to assist you in doing so, with full instructions, here.
One word of warning, though: please ensure you have the correct MP. ChatGPT can get it wrong.
Comments
When commenting, please take note of this blog's comment policy, which is available here. Contravening this policy will result in comments being deleted before or after initial publication at the editor's sole discretion and without explanation being required or offered.s
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Reeves is a disaster. After George Osbourne we deserved better than this.
No such luck.
Of course Rachel Reaves should not be hammering average and lower income families with more tax.
Of course she could, and should, be taxing the wealthy more (to reduce inequality).
But she doesn’t need to do so in order to spend more. She can just create more money, and she should. She needs to create about £100 billion annually to offset inflation and, hopefully, growth of the economy.
Accepted
My implicit assumption is that she thinks she needs to, right or wrong (and wrong, as a matter of fact)
I can’t remember who said this – may have been Zack Polanski – but it was something along the lines of why is it when ‘tough choices’ have to be made it is by those who are on average or less incomes and/or have little or no wealth and not by those on higher incomes and/or with higher wealth.
Whoever did say it, it is a valid point and something I agree with.
Craig
So do I
No need to cross out “rag” when commentating on the Daily Telegraph. They have descended to the level of the gutter tabloid press and cannot be seen as an objective news source. No
Apparently, Starmer called those calling for a wealth tax “snake oil peddlers”. I know you don’t advocate for a wealth tax exactly, but do you like your newly assigned job role of perveyor of snake oils?
I heard him say it.
Let’s be clear, he revealed himself as a far-right friend of wealth by doing so, or as a charlatan in other words
Some might call him a snake oil salesman.