Comments on: Higher tax rates mean lower tax revenues

By: Stuart Fairney

Stuart Fairney — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 06:30:55 +0000

If you really want radical, there is no need for the state to be in the infrastructure or money business either. Defence and law & order for sure, along with perhaps upholding of commercial contracts.

By: Stuart Fairney

Stuart Fairney — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:59:59 +0000

Quite, when things are just accepted as the norm, it doesn't hurt to say "Why?" once in a while. I honestly believe the whole case for income tax is invalid and arguments about rates are peripheral to the fundamentally unsound principle.

Ron Paul gathered great support for saying he would abolish the IRS, I wonder how much support a policy to abolish the Inland Revenue would get in the UK

By: Robert K, Oxford

Robert K, Oxford — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:27:03 +0000

Absolutely. The whole notion of income tax is based on state-sponsored violence. Take a look at the HM Government Revenue & Customs website if you don’t believe me. It was introduced as a temporary tax to fight Napoleon, was reinforced by the need to fund war in the Crimea, was hiked dramatically for WWI and hit its extortionate heights after WWII.

By: Norman

Norman — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:41:10 +0000

I agree with all the points you make – the Party's leadership consistently appear dithering and weak willed but this government has to be one of the most incompetent this country has ever had otherwise it would undoubtedly be election defeat number four.

The reason I believe a Conservative government will cut taxes is simply because that is what conservatism is, if they don't at some point start cutting taxes to enable the private sector to compete against other countries they will fail without the shadow of a doubt.

The alternative is a Labour government whose aims are socialist and make no secret of the fact that their approach is based on universal increase of taxation (heaviest on the 'rich'), redistribution of wealth and big government.

There is zero chance Mr Cameron will do an about face this late in the day (although I wish he would over CO2 being a poison) so we either take it or leave it. I'd rather take lukewarm conservatism over firebrand socialism but I'd still rather have proper conservatism over both.

By: Robert K, Oxford

Robert K, Oxford — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:03:37 +0000

Why do you hope for Conservative government when their tax policies are little different from Labour? (They support the 50% upper tax rate and appear to be backtracking on their inheritance tax promise for example.) They have made no substantive comments on how to rebalance the calamitous imbalance between the state and the private sector and have public spending targets that seem almost identical to the Brown’s. They are simply trying to sniff the public mood, as if a chance scent will put them on the right track. If the media is to believed (which in this case I suspect it can) its spin doctors are terrified that a shift to the “right” would leave them exposed to a Labour charge on the centre ground. But wouldn’t it be great if they adopted the more radical tone of JR’s diary, so that voters had a genuine choice?

By: Robert K, Oxford

Robert K, Oxford — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:56:26 +0000

I like the economy/overhead bit. Neat.

By: Lola

Lola — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:29:21 +0000

Yep, and the 'State' is not the economy. It's an overhead. You can't get richer by growing your overhead. The 'State' only spends money it has coerced from its Citizens. Hence the citizens can't spend it themselves. No State activity creates wealth at all. The job we have given it is very simple. It has about four basic things to do. Defence, sound money, law and order and some infrastructure is best done on our behalf by the state and do that on the least possible money. The rest of it we can do for oursleves. We might also want it to act as insurer of last resort and to use its powers of redistribution to provide everyone with funding for education. That's it really. How hard can it be?

By: JimF

JimF — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 18:04:41 +0000

Go tell it on the mountain. Maybe your leaders will eventually agree.

By: Mike Stallard

Mike Stallard — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:30:24 +0000

OK, we are about to enter a time of austerity. I understand that.
But, once we have paid off our debts enough to deal with the interest thereon, I hope we will cut all sorts of taxes.
The Labour/Socialist/Leftie idea seems to be that everyone ought to be equal (=the same) because Equality is a Good that cannot be questioned.
This is recipe for dictatorship. It is already obvious that the people who control the system have their own schools, their own private health, their own cafe where they can enjoy tobacco, their own class in the air, their own drivers and limos on the ground and they get expenses which they neither deserve nor can account for. Maybe they even above the law too. (Lord Levy?)
If we believe in freedom, then we ought to start by offering the North, which is really suffering, a tax break so that people can start up their businesses there again.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:23:37 +0000

There is one other very big knock on effect: people with capital start and invest in new businesses. But generally, these are local to where they live and work (OK, exclude stock market investments etc.).

So there is a hidden employment multiplier effect of flight from high personal taxation; you lose the high tax payers *and* the new business job creation that the high tax payers in turn create.

As an entrepreneur, job creator and tax payer, I look at the increasing tax burden in the UK and consider whether I should be elsewhere…