Saturday, September 22, 2012

I don't think that word means what you think it does

The word is of course 'fair' and in part it means...
a. Having or exhibiting a disposition that is free of favouritism or bias; impartial: a fair mediator.
b. Just to all parties; equitable:
But not to politicians, to them it means favouring one group over another.
Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg is to repeat his call for a tax on the wealthy when he rallies activists on their party conference's opening day.
He will urge lower taxes for workers doing a "proper shift" but higher rates for those "sitting on a fortune".
Lib Dem calls for a one-off tax on "unearned wealth" have been rejected by their Conservative coalition partners.
Lib Dem deputy leader Simon Hughes did not rule out a future coalition with the Labour party.
Yes a mansion tax would to an extent 'force' some people to sell their residences and downsize, some would also choose to sell up and move out taking their cash elsewhere. But that isn't fair by any definition of the word. Fair would mean a tax system where everyone paid pretty much the same percentage into the system and not a set of one off 'punitary' raids on those who have. It's how politicians ended up wrecking the pensions system we had in the UK and also started the banks off into paying bonuses.
If Clegg was calling for flat rate tax on everyone, cutting out the offshore tax avoidance route that the wealthy are using that would be fair, but he isn't, he's going down the politics of envy route that those on the left love  because they think (and in a lot of cases are right) that the people of the UK believe that the rich should be taken for all they've got simply because they are rich. They ignore the fact that a lot of the cash the rich has goes towards investment, development and simply paying for others to do they stuff they don't have too. They also ignore the fact that if they squeeze to hard the rich will up and leave, something the rest of us can't or won't do.
If we had a flat rate tax it would eliminate a lot of anger at bonuses, avoidance and various loopholes in a complex system, unfortunately simplifying the system is not in the politicians mantra, they'd rather target groups they see as easy and unloved.
Typical politicians of the left in other words...

3 annotations:

Anonymous said...

To be fair, it has to be simple. Such a concept is beyond the thinking of politicians, nowadays.

Mark Wadsworth has a good idea with his Land Value Tax (for which he is constantly harping on). However, one of the main problems with his scheme is that it is alarmingly democratic, difficult to dodge avoid, and TOO SIMPLE! What would the 1.5 million (number picked totally at random) presently employed in the extortion tax system do with their time?

Another danger is that if it does get implemented it will be IN ADDITION to those taxes that are already being wrung from us.

Radical Rodent

Anonymous said...

...'Ere! A couple of those words should have been crossed out!

Oh, well... use you own imaginations...

Radical Rodent

Weekend Yachtsman said...

If this ever happens, it will be the thin end of yet another wedge.

"Temporary" - oh yes, just like income tax.

"£1m" - ie around the price of a smallish family home in the nicer parts of London - for now. But do you think that number will be updated to take account of the (government-induced) erosion of the value of paper money?

You do? Then I have a bridge you may be interested in buying.