Make Ken Livingston carbon neutral… stop him breathing
– Overheard at a Samizdata party the other day
|
|||||
|
AA Gill, the Scottish columnist and restaurant reviewer, has always come across in my eyes as a man who wears chips on his shoulders like military epaulettes, which for an upper middle class lad seems a bit odd. He does not like the English much, does he? Even so, read the article, as it contains some painful truths as well as some unfair bile. He makes the point that the English/British are not always great adopters of life in New York. I have been to the city many times and saw this clubby sort of behaviour a few times. We Brits do not seem to realise how rude we can strike Americans. When I read of Americans being cut short at dinner parties or insulted by Brit tourists, I cringe, even though I tell myself that I am not responsible for the behaviour of my fellow countrymen and women. I feel much the same way when I overhear some idiot in Paris or Milan refusing to speak the local language and assuming that everyone speaks English rather than French or Italian. I would be interested to know what Jim Bennett, the Anglosphere man, makes of this sort of behavioural friction. It may be just a matter of Gill being an arsehole. But he may also have a point. March 21st, 2007 | 33 comments - (Comments are closed)
 Today is ‘Budget Day’, when the UK government lays before Parliament the amount of money it needs to raise to pay for its spending. Since the days of William Pitt, Robert Peel and William Gladstone in the late 18th and 19th centuries, the length of the tax code has grown at a terrifying pace. I came across this from a firm of accountants commenting on today’s performance by Gordon Brown:
(Wall Street Journal, print edition) No wonder accountants love Gordon. There is a sort of unhealthy symbiotic relationship between the whole financial services sector and Brown’s tax morass: the finance minister increases the complexity of the tax code; the accountants make money explaining this to their clients and helping some people to avoid it where possible. This in turn creates a whole industry of people with a vested interest in complexity. A flat-tax, for example, would put a lot of these financial whizzkids out of business and force them to do something more useful instead. At a recent discussion with City types about this, this point was made very clear to me. Assuming we have taxes at all, they should be summarised on two sides of A4 paper, tops. The cost savings to business and individuals would be enormous. Today, Brown grabbed superficial headlines by cutting the standard tax rate to 20p from 22p and cut the rate of corporation tax to 28p from 30p. It sounds like a good step and there will be some net winners from this. Good. However, as is always the case with this sly and driven character, the details are less flattering. The removal of the 10p rate for low earners, adjustments to National Insurance and corporate capital allowances means the overall balance is neutral rather than towards a smaller state. The state will take about 45-46% of UK GDP, compared with 37% in 1997 when Ken Clarke was in Brown’s job (it is worth remembering that Clarke is regarded as a leftwing Tory, but in certain respects his record is pretty good, or at least not as bad as it might be). Watching the House of Commons debate on Brown’s speech, several things struck me. Tory leader David Cameron was plainly rattled by Brown playing the tax-cut card – however bogus a ploy Brown’s is. It might – just might – be enough of a shock to the Tories to realise that competing over which party can push up taxes the most and not get caught might not be a smart strategy with the voters. Brown is trying to pose as a tax-cutter. How odd it is that the Labour Party is now trying to make the running in this direction. Even though it is all hooey, it is interesting to see how Brown’s gambit may pay off. The whole point of this budget, as far as I can see, is in Brown trying to squash Cameron: stealing some of his ‘Green clothes’ while also trying to persuade middle-income voters that Labour is actually more of a tax-cutting party than the Tories. Even if this is utter rubbish – it is – the very fact that Brown wants to create such an impression is interesting. I am increasingly coming round to the view that libertarians and free-marketeer Tories should let Cameron realise that they prefer to keep in Labour than let the Tories win on a Big Government agenda. March 21st, 2007 | 15 comments - (Comments are closed)
This is what I, via the wonders of television, watched being said to David Cameron. A young doctor made this comment to Mr Cameron when this leader of a British political party turned up at a demonstration of doctors and, whilst denouncing the Labour party government for not providing jobs for all qualified young doctors, promised “every single one of you” a job (or words to that effect). To some people the above proves that Mr Cameron is a good leader of the Conservative party, to other people, such as myself, the above shows that David Cameron is not the leader of a ‘Conservative’ party at all. We see the same facts but interpret them differently. March 21st, 2007 | 23 comments - (Comments are closed)
No no, not money. I need ideas. I recently agreed to do another chat spot on 18 Doughty Street TV, and like a fool I picked Tuesday March 20th, i.e. this evening, all unaware that tomorrow is Budget Day, and we would all have to talk about the damn Budget. I hate, hate, hate Budget Days and Budgets, and conversations about Budget Day and conversations about Budgets, from the depths of my soul. I find the details of tax law deeply depressing and complicated, not least deeply depressing because so damn complicated. Plus everyone on regular TV drones on about it all for hour after hour, while saying (because knowing) extremely little, like cricket commentators when it is raining only not funny or interesting. Anyway, I got an email this morning from His IainDaleness which included the following instruction:
Any suggestions? I particularly need help with the “he actually will do” bit. Generally, presumably, he will (a) kiss babies and (b) steal their lollypops. (A lollypop for whoever can pin down the movie reference there.) But more precisely, what specific horrors are in the pipeline? I assume a lot of anti-4×4 crap. But what else? And, of course, suggestions about what he should do will also be trawled through with a view to me using the best of them tonight, probably without credit to the originator. I think that the entire government down be shut down for ever and taxes lowered to zero. But I think they want something more precise than that. So far, I can only think of saying, again, that The Top Rate of Income Tax Should Be Cut to Zero, which I think is a brilliant idea, if only because it makes the current lot of leftier-than-thou Conservatives squirm. I am now off to read what UKIP has to say, budget-wise. (So far I have not got beyond the heading. Which should surely say “fiddles” rather than “tinkers”. The Emperor Nero was a violinist, was he not?) March 20th, 2007 | 23 comments - (Comments are closed)
…so did the Catholic Church speak up for him? The BBC reports:
Where has His Eminence been for the last decade? The Blair administration has been applying the “programme motion” (pdf explanation) to curtail parliamentary debate and adopting wholesale the device of “framework legislation” to legislate by the nominally endorsed decree dressed up as statutory instrument. Wave after wave of revolutionary legislation, stamping out liberty in every quarter and establishing imperial inspectorates in place, has gone through on the back of tendentious PLP briefings calling votes from MPs who have not participated in a debate and have no real idea what they are voting on. How come it is only abuse of parliament when it infringes the Catholic Church’s right to tell people what to think about gay sex, by telling them to think something different about it? March 20th, 2007 | 15 comments - (Comments are closed)
As odd as it may seem today, there was a time when the Conservative opposition was expected to call for cuts in the levels of taxation if only to pressurise the Labour government into not raising taxes too much or too quickly. Occasionally (very occasionally) they even lived up to this expectation. But that ‘golden era’ is a long way behind us now:
Mr. Brown is not to be blamed. After all, it is sheer foolishness to expect a pig to issue anything but a grunt. No, the man to blame is David Cameron. His pernicious eco-tax manifesto has not only incited a pissing contest with the current Chancellor to see who inflict more punishment on those wicked Gaiacidal motorists, it has also (in electoral terms) legitimised this latest round of pure plunder. The Tories are the enemies of the people so please remember your ABC (Anyone But Cameron). March 19th, 2007 | 25 comments - (Comments are closed)
Tomorrow is national No Smoking Day. Whoopeeeeeeee!!!! I shall mark the occasion by puffing my way through at least one pack of my favourite Belgian cigarettes (not contributing to the cavernous coffers of HM Treasury makes the experience so much more enjoyable) while blowing great, billowing clouds of grey, acrid, carcinogenic fumes into the air. I shall consider quitting if and when we ever have a national No Nagging, Preaching, Hectoring, Finger-Wagging, Pecksniffing, Condescending, Nannying Or Sanctimonious Sermonising Just Bugger Off And Mind Your Own Fucking Business Day. March 13th, 2007 | 39 comments - (Comments are closed)
Thanks to my investigative reporting skills, I came across the following draft of the Conservative Party manifesto for the next General Election. It makes for fascinating reading:
Sounds like a real winner to me. March 13th, 2007 | 20 comments - (Comments are closed)
Gordon Brown or David Cameron was alarmed at the possibility of their rival stealing a march in the first media fistfight between both camps. The two politicians needed to punch their green credentials at the public. Cameron’s nonsense on aircraft taxes was launched on Sunday to derision and environmentalist applause. An early headline that can be reversed if the public’s tolerance for more tax withers: a likely outcome under Brown. How did the Chancellor respond, now that he has appropriated Bambi’s teeth prior to his seat? He promised to phase out old-style lightbulbs and subsidise home insulation:
The prudent Chancellor, ever unwasteful of political manure, was recycling spin from Europe and Australia.
The old story of European projects repackaged for domestic consumption, as ignored by your mainstream media. The Chancellor was quite clear that his green policies were designed to set new regulations and taxes within a European framework, extending and affirming our regulatory state in verdant wrapping. March 12th, 2007 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
… in the Charity Commission report into how UK charities can be better harnessed to do the state’s work (dressed up as a survey of what they are already doing). It is called Stand and Deliver [pdf]. [Hat tip: Minette Marin in the Sunday Times] March 11th, 2007 | 6 comments - (Comments are closed)
The Conservative Party has long been regarded as having a certain nostalgic, and some would say romantic, yearning for the past. I had no idea that this included a desire to drag us all back to the 19th Century:
Even if this is just policy-mongering, the fact that such proposals could even be considered is per se a megaphone-warning about the true nature of the Tories and their future likely conduct. The mobility that has been afforded to people on relatively low incomes by cheap international air travel is one of the most productive and liberating benefits of this age. By declaring war on this, Cameron and his lickspittles show themselves to be not just opportunist but also disreputable and loathsome (as is anyone who either supports them or votes for them). As for me, I will be unaffacted. I do not intend to hang around long enough to witness the huddled masses setting sail from Southampton to seek a better life in the free world. If (God forbid) Cameron does win power in the next election, I shall utilise my air travel ‘ration’ to purchase a one-way ticket out. March 11th, 2007 | 30 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Recent Comments