LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
As a bit of ideology how about aligning the tax threshold with the max amount of benefits? logic being that if that is counted as the bare minimum safety net why tax anybody until they earn the same amount?0
-
How does this work when a single young male can live like a king on relatively modest means in Northern towns, when a single mother in London would face a serious uphill struggle on the same amount?surrey_commuter said:As a bit of ideology how about aligning the tax threshold with the max amount of benefits? logic being that if that is counted as the bare minimum safety net why tax anybody until they earn the same amount?
Moving the young mother to the middle of nowhere is also likely to be moving her from any support network that might offer discount child care and the opportunity to work.0 -
Tricky to do as benefits I think are mostly calculated by household whereas tax is mostly individual, but I think it's a valid principle. If you look at UC, you can see how big the gap can be between a good idea and its implementation.surrey_commuter said:As a bit of ideology how about aligning the tax threshold with the max amount of benefits? logic being that if that is counted as the bare minimum safety net why tax anybody until they earn the same amount?
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Raising income tax thresholds is just tax breaks for the middle classes with a worthy hat on. It doesn't make people on low wages any better off as they are already well below the threshold.surrey_commuter said:
taxing the poor and giving it back to them in benefits is the opposite of small state which is all for letting people keep as much of their hard earned as possible and letting them chose to spend it on rather than the state taking it off them and spending it for them.morstar said:It’s nonsense.
Small state is an ideology. It’s preferred by the better off for obvious reasons. Whilst it’s a perfectly legitimate position, trying to get the poor to buy into it is a failure of comprehension.
I used to be all for a high tax threshold but for all the reasons put forwards by RJST I have my doubts1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
there should be far more regional rates for benefits and public sector pay.Jezyboy said:
How does this work when a single young male can live like a king on relatively modest means in Northern towns, when a single mother in London would face a serious uphill struggle on the same amount?surrey_commuter said:As a bit of ideology how about aligning the tax threshold with the max amount of benefits? logic being that if that is counted as the bare minimum safety net why tax anybody until they earn the same amount?
Moving the young mother to the middle of nowhere is also likely to be moving her from any support network that might offer discount child care and the opportunity to work.
There will be a lot of arguments about cost but in this day and age it should be solvable.0 -
You have to have ‘a’ state.surrey_commuter said:
taxing the poor and giving it back to them in benefits is the opposite of small state which is all for letting people keep as much of their hard earned as possible and letting them chose to spend it on rather than the state taking it off them and spending it for them.morstar said:It’s nonsense.
Small state is an ideology. It’s preferred by the better off for obvious reasons. Whilst it’s a perfectly legitimate position, trying to get the poor to buy into it is a failure of comprehension.
I used to be all for a high tax threshold but for all the reasons put forwards by RJST I have my doubts
The market does not provide well in all areas.
If you accept to have a state, the focus should be on optimising effectiveness. Just wanting it to be small is purely an indulgence of the affluent as small is never small enough.
Do I think it works well at present. No?
Why doesn’t it work well, some state interventions are missing, some are not required. We often end up with worst of both worlds.
Why tax somebody who is being given their entire income by the state?
My ideal is that every entitlement and liability is netted against each other and you keep what you are left with. I got ridiculed for that a few years ago but it is actually the direction of travel.
Benefits in kind now taxed in payroll along with stuff like high earners child benefit etc.
Much better than giving in one hand and taking away in another.0 -
Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.1 -
That's similar to UBI isn't it?surrey_commuter said:As a bit of ideology how about aligning the tax threshold with the max amount of benefits? logic being that if that is counted as the bare minimum safety net why tax anybody until they earn the same amount?
0 -
-
I grew up in his constituency. My mother is still there.rick_chasey said:
Absolute baller question there from the FT.
It must be one of the least densely populated outside of somewhere like Cornwall or the highlands. It polls 60% tory (it was formally William Hague's seat). There's next to no unemployment AFAIK.
The biggest crime story from there in my lifetime was the 2 slightly warped kids who plotted to blow up my old school and got done under anti-terror laws.
I can assure Rishi that the needs of the area are nothing compared to parts of Teeside 25 minutes up the road, or the more deprived parts of West & South Yorkshire.0 -
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK productivity levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
1 -
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.0 -
Try doing some research Rick. There's lots of academic papers covering it, and i've heard plenty of fund management groups discus it.rick_chasey said:
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
https://google.com/search?q=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB915GB915&oq=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&aqs=chrome..69i57.24101j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
But then you are very illiberal in respect of people who may have a different outlook to yours.0 -
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/articles/whatistheproductivitypuzzle/2015-07-07Dorset_Boy said:
Try doing some research Rick. There's lots of academic papers covering it, and i've heard plenty of fund management groups discus it.rick_chasey said:
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
https://google.com/search?q=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB915GB915&oq=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&aqs=chrome..69i57.24101j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
But then you are very illiberal in respect of people who may have a different outlook to yours.
I don't think there was a sudden change in the way it was counted in 20090 -
It is the law of unintended consequences. There are many careers that owe their entire income to the state. From police, NHS and all the way up to supreme court judges. Sure the idea works on day one as you do a calculation against the tax code to see what the equivalent is after tax and just pay them that. Next year they tinker with the tax codes and now you have to trawl through those employees and either give them more money or try to reduce against a militant union to make it fair to those not on the payroll of the state.morstar said:
You have to have ‘a’ state.surrey_commuter said:
taxing the poor and giving it back to them in benefits is the opposite of small state which is all for letting people keep as much of their hard earned as possible and letting them chose to spend it on rather than the state taking it off them and spending it for them.morstar said:It’s nonsense.
Small state is an ideology. It’s preferred by the better off for obvious reasons. Whilst it’s a perfectly legitimate position, trying to get the poor to buy into it is a failure of comprehension.
I used to be all for a high tax threshold but for all the reasons put forwards by RJST I have my doubts
The market does not provide well in all areas.
If you accept to have a state, the focus should be on optimising effectiveness. Just wanting it to be small is purely an indulgence of the affluent as small is never small enough.
Do I think it works well at present. No?
Why doesn’t it work well, some state interventions are missing, some are not required. We often end up with worst of both worlds.
Why tax somebody who is being given their entire income by the state?
My ideal is that every entitlement and liability is netted against each other and you keep what you are left with. I got ridiculed for that a few years ago but it is actually the direction of travel.
Benefits in kind now taxed in payroll along with stuff like high earners child benefit etc.
Much better than giving in one hand and taking away in another.
As ever the easiest thing to do is have everyone and all employers comply with a single tax law. Albeit we could argue that simplifying this tax law would be welcomed by most. We have a political system where historically a party say introduces say winter fuel payment and then all future governments find it hard to take away. Paying my mum and dad a winter fuel payment to live in a modern well insulated house is clearly a waste of state funds but it gave a minister a warm feeling for the 10 minutes they announced in in a budget.
0 -
Dorset, do you think the BoE, who published papers every year on how to solve the "Productivity puzzle" since the crash are not aware of how it is counted?0
-
I not sure you have got the point.rick_chasey said:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/articles/whatistheproductivitypuzzle/2015-07-07Dorset_Boy said:
Try doing some research Rick. There's lots of academic papers covering it, and i've heard plenty of fund management groups discus it.rick_chasey said:
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
https://google.com/search?q=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB915GB915&oq=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&aqs=chrome..69i57.24101j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
But then you are very illiberal in respect of people who may have a different outlook to yours.
I don't think there was a sudden change in the way it was counted in 2009
Productivity may have 'tailed off' since 2009 as measured, but that isn't the point i was making.
I am saying that the way productivity is measured favours manufacturing based economies over service based economies.
Therefore, if there is a gap between the UK and others, it isn't anything like the level the official figures suggest because the way the official figures are measured under report service sector productivity.0 -
I get the point. I am explaining why it is irrelevant.Dorset_Boy said:
I not sure you have got the point.rick_chasey said:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/articles/whatistheproductivitypuzzle/2015-07-07Dorset_Boy said:
Try doing some research Rick. There's lots of academic papers covering it, and i've heard plenty of fund management groups discus it.rick_chasey said:
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
https://google.com/search?q=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB915GB915&oq=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&aqs=chrome..69i57.24101j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
But then you are very illiberal in respect of people who may have a different outlook to yours.
I don't think there was a sudden change in the way it was counted in 2009
Productivity may have 'tailed off' since 2009 as measured, but that isn't the point i was making.
I am saying that the way productivity is measured favours manufacturing based economies over service based economies.
Therefore, if there is a gap between the UK and others, it isn't anything like the level the official figures suggest because the way the official figures are measured under report service sector productivity.
People who find excuses in the way things are counted miss the broader point.
No serious economist believes the UK is as productive as the US. That is because it is not. Regardless of counting style.
0 -
You did see my use of the word ‘partly’?rick_chasey said:
Not quite so simple as the US is also more productive.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
It’s a complex system. This is part of the problem. I can assure you it is.0 -
Surprised to see you hold up the USA as a shining light.rick_chasey said:
I get the point. I am explaining why it is irrelevant.Dorset_Boy said:
I not sure you have got the point.rick_chasey said:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/articles/whatistheproductivitypuzzle/2015-07-07Dorset_Boy said:
Try doing some research Rick. There's lots of academic papers covering it, and i've heard plenty of fund management groups discus it.rick_chasey said:
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
https://google.com/search?q=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB915GB915&oq=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&aqs=chrome..69i57.24101j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
But then you are very illiberal in respect of people who may have a different outlook to yours.
I don't think there was a sudden change in the way it was counted in 2009
Productivity may have 'tailed off' since 2009 as measured, but that isn't the point i was making.
I am saying that the way productivity is measured favours manufacturing based economies over service based economies.
Therefore, if there is a gap between the UK and others, it isn't anything like the level the official figures suggest because the way the official figures are measured under report service sector productivity.
People who find excuses in the way things are counted miss the broader point.
No serious economist believes the UK is as productive as the US. That is because it is not. Regardless of counting style.
Presumably the minimal holidays and lack of workers rights, coupled with minimal public healthcare have an impact. none of which i can see you being a fan of.1 -
Sure, that was the point I was making. UK seems to be stuck between models.Dorset_Boy said:
Surprised to see you hold up the USA as a shining light.rick_chasey said:
I get the point. I am explaining why it is irrelevant.Dorset_Boy said:
I not sure you have got the point.rick_chasey said:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/articles/whatistheproductivitypuzzle/2015-07-07Dorset_Boy said:
Try doing some research Rick. There's lots of academic papers covering it, and i've heard plenty of fund management groups discus it.rick_chasey said:
loolDorset_Boy said:
It's down to they way productivity is measured. A service industry heavy economy (the UK) fares far worse in comparison to a production heavy economy. UK production levels are actually significantly under-measured as a result.morstar said:Why do we think productivity is so poor in this country? I guarantee it’s partly due to low pay jobs with no security.
And yet these ideals heavily overlap with the small state brigade in a venn diagram.
It’s all interdependent.
https://google.com/search?q=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&rlz=1C1CHBF_en-GBGB915GB915&oq=productivity+measure+issues+in+service+based+economy&aqs=chrome..69i57.24101j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
But then you are very illiberal in respect of people who may have a different outlook to yours.
I don't think there was a sudden change in the way it was counted in 2009
Productivity may have 'tailed off' since 2009 as measured, but that isn't the point i was making.
I am saying that the way productivity is measured favours manufacturing based economies over service based economies.
Therefore, if there is a gap between the UK and others, it isn't anything like the level the official figures suggest because the way the official figures are measured under report service sector productivity.
People who find excuses in the way things are counted miss the broader point.
No serious economist believes the UK is as productive as the US. That is because it is not. Regardless of counting style.
Presumably the minimal holidays and lack of workers rights, coupled with minimal public healthcare have an impact. none of which i can see you being a fan of.0 -
So we need more fear to increase productivity and a small state to keep the fear alive.0
-
Privatise the NHS to reduce state size.morstar said:So we need more fear to increase productivity and a small state to keep the fear alive.
No expensive or job related insurance? Increase fear. Sorted.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
not what I mean by the size of the statepblakeney said:
Privatise the NHS to reduce state size.morstar said:So we need more fear to increase productivity and a small state to keep the fear alive.
No expensive or job related insurance? Increase fear. Sorted.
Boris believes he can spot industry sectors and companies that will be future world beaters, he will tax you more and borrow more money to back his hunches to give them a helping hand and mean that the next generation of global giants are not all USA and include some UK companies.
I believe in minimising state interference, ie barriers to recruitment, trade, regulations, taxes to provide the best environment for the private sector to flourish.0 -
What does a couple decades of Tories get you?0 -
TBF, Labour has been fecking pretty much on radio silence for months and the Libs are pretty much non-existent.
We don't have an opposition right now and haven't had for bloody years.0 -
Now you’re beginning to understand when I say democracy may not survive another poor /elbowloh said:TBF, Labour has been fecking pretty much on radio silence for months and the Libs are pretty much non-existent.
We don't have an opposition right now and haven't had for bloody years.
non-recovery from an economic downturn0 -
Sorry, but that's nonsense.rick_chasey said:
Now you’re beginning to understand when I say democracy may not survive another poor /elbowloh said:TBF, Labour has been fecking pretty much on radio silence for months and the Libs are pretty much non-existent.
We don't have an opposition right now and haven't had for bloody years.
non-recovery from an economic downturn1 -
+1elbowloh said:
Sorry, but that's nonsense.rick_chasey said:
Now you’re beginning to understand when I say democracy may not survive another poor /elbowloh said:TBF, Labour has been fecking pretty much on radio silence for months and the Libs are pretty much non-existent.
We don't have an opposition right now and haven't had for bloody years.
non-recovery from an economic downturn
Currently Boris has found that the hard core Tory vote would vote for Ed Miliband’s manifesto if he wore a blue rosette.
At some point they will come to hate him more than JC in the way that Labour members hate Blair
0
