Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Mish On Cameron, Osborne, Uh Oh...


Recommended Posts

I don't truly understand what you are saying, but feel that I need to. Could you please expand a little?

Thanks.

social conservatism says that things like family, church, nationhood, community serve social security needs better than the state ever can - that they are hewn in our human behaviour patterns

David Cameron put it - "There IS such a thing as society - it's just not the same as the state"

there is overlap between this and the free market, but since, over the last 30 years or so, the free market has been recognised as not-as-perfect-as-we'd-like - then the acceptance has to be made that conservatism's ideals are not always served best by a completely free market. An example is in US healthcare, say, where cartel behaviour in this 'free market' and imperfect market knowledge by the patients, pushes up healthcare costs beyond what even the NHS costs on a per capita basis. So free market ideology would choose the US system, neo-conservative politics would recognise a failure in the market and favour govt intervention to some degree.

It really isn't far from the liberal third way when looked at carefully, a bit more to the right. This is why the centre-right Cameron found it so easy to get into bed with the liberal Clegg. The loony-right of the tory party are playing catch-up.

Edited by Si1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

social conservatism says that things like family, church, nationhood, community serve social security needs better than the state ever can - that they are hewn in our human behaviour patterns

David Cameron put it - "There IS such a thing as society - it's just not the same as the state"

there is overlap between this and the free market, but since, over the last 30 years or so, the free market has been recognised as not-as-perfect-as-we'd-like - then the acceptance has to be made that conservatism's ideals are not always served best by a completely free market. An example is in US healthcare, say, where cartel behaviour in this 'free market' and imperfect market knowledge by the patients, pushes up healthcare costs beyond what even the NHS costs on a per capita basis. So free market ideology would choose the US system, neo-conservative politics would recognise a failure in the market and favour govt intervention to some degree.

It really isn't far from the liberal third way when looked at carefully, a bit more to the right. This is why the centre-right Cameron found it so easy to get into bed with the liberal Clegg. The loony-right of the tory party are playing catch-up.

Thanks for explaining that. Seems I might be a Cameroncleggist!

Does this not open up a can of worms though? ie multiculturism etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you. I tried to express something along these lines on the Mish comments yesterday and basically got lynched. I usually agree with a lot Mish has to say but in this instance I think given the context of the raise he is wrong.

Yeah. Today after I read through the comments on this article I thought to do the same, but decided it would be a waste of time. Lot of nonsense there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Noodle

Why does CGT apply at the same rate for all types of asset or capital gain?

Why not CGT on 2nd homes at 50% and on businesses at 18% (or ideally zero)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

social conservatism says that things like family, church, nationhood, community serve social security needs better than the state ever can - that they are hewn in our human behaviour patterns

David Cameron put it - "There IS such a thing as society - it's just not the same as the state"

there is overlap between this and the free market, but since, over the last 30 years or so, the free market has been recognised as not-as-perfect-as-we'd-like - then the acceptance has to be made that conservatism's ideals are not always served best by a completely free market. An example is in US healthcare, say, where cartel behaviour in this 'free market' and imperfect market knowledge by the patients, pushes up healthcare costs beyond what even the NHS costs on a per capita basis. So free market ideology would choose the US system, neo-conservative politics would recognise a failure in the market and favour govt intervention to some degree.

It really isn't far from the liberal third way when looked at carefully, a bit more to the right. This is why the centre-right Cameron found it so easy to get into bed with the liberal Clegg. The loony-right of the tory party are playing catch-up.

this is a good description of the so called red toryism that cameron i ssupposed to support - developed by phillip Blond and his 'distributionist' school of political thought.

'lark rise to candleford' conservatism, rather than thatcherism, which is dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does CGT apply at the same rate for all types of asset or capital gain?

Why not CGT on 2nd homes at 50% and on businesses at 18% (or ideally zero)?

I think that there will be some exceptions, particularly to start-up investment, and SME's.

But this is aimed squarely at hedge funds and 2nd homes...

Edited by Toto deVeer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is a good description of the so called red toryism that cameron i ssupposed to support - developed by phillip Blond and his 'distributionist' school of political thought.

'lark rise to candleford' conservatism, rather than thatcherism, which is dead.

I actually think that the ConLibs are coming close to the post WW2 West German Social Market Economy that is credited with the German economic miracle...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_market_economy

The social market economy seeks a market economic system rejecting both socialism and laissez-faire capitalism, combining private enterprise with measures of government regulation in an attempt to establish fair competition, low inflation, low levels of unemployment, a standard of working conditions, and social welfare. Nominally respecting the free market, the social market economy is opposed to both a strictly planned economy and laissez-faire capitalism. Erhard once told Friedrich Hayek that the free market economy did not need to be made social but was social in its origin. The term "social" was chosen rather than "socialist" to distinguish the social market economy from a system in which the state directed economic activity and/or owned the means of production, which are privately-owned in the social market model.

Edited by Toto deVeer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is a good description of the so called red toryism that cameron i ssupposed to support - developed by phillip Blond and his 'distributionist' school of political thought.

'lark rise to candleford' conservatism, rather than thatcherism, which is dead.

I gather it is influenced by Irving Kristol, who identified that conservative governments have tended to be good at paying off debts - and then get a bit lost - so they needed a social agenda to adopt instead of simply balancing the books and then being elected out by a bored electorate

scarily, this thinking influenced G.W. Bush

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that there will be some exceptions, particularly to start-up investment, and SME's.

But this is aimed squarely at hedge funds and 2nd homes...

Hats orf to anyone who can show the 'accounting dodges' that the supa-rich already have in place to avoid all their CGTs

Ta very much for exposing it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for explaining that. Seems I might be a Cameroncleggist!

Does this not open up a can of worms though? ie multiculturism etc.

yes, but it's a bit idealistic (we're rejecting absolute ideals remember) to think there wouldn't be

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does CGT apply at the same rate for all types of asset or capital gain?

Why not CGT on 2nd homes at 50% and on businesses at 18% (or ideally zero)?

That I understand is exactly what is proposed. CGT on speculation which does not create jobs and wealth.

They claim real enterprise will have not have CGT raised though I am not sure how this will be determined.

As usual the devil will be in the detail.

I think it will mostly affect some parts of financial services and property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest happy?

That I understand is exactly what is proposed. CGT on speculation which does not create jobs and wealth.

They claim real enterprise will have not have CGT raised though I am not sure how this will be determined.

As usual the devil will be in the detail.

I think it will mostly affect some parts of financial services and property.

Interesting debate on the extent to which political parties and fiscal policy can be used to contribute to a marketplace favourable to business creation.

I'm surprised though that none of the participants here have not dubbed it as yet another example of a stealth tax. Why not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting debate on the extent to which political parties and fiscal policy can be used to contribute to a marketplace favourable to business creation.

I'm surprised though that none of the participants here have not dubbed it as yet another example of a stealth tax. Why not?

Obvious isn't it.

Stealth taxes are Labour, sensible measures are Conservative.

Economies are Labour, savage Tory cuts are Conservative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for a madman,he's had a better last five years than the majority of the pro's on wall st and in the square mile.

no he hasn't, he has pumped deflation which has put him into the very large camp of utterly wrong commentators who assumed governments wouldn't lift a finger to intervene, or at least, drastically underestimated the policy impact of those interventions.

These type of people claim that 'no-one could have forsaw the deluge of money printing and bailouts, while simultaneously castigating all those who 'failed to see the crisis approaching'. He can claim it is simply a matter of timing until he is blue in the face but the reality is he is no more likely to get the timing right next time or correctly assess the impact of continued monetary, fiscal and regulatory policy moves.

And his constant diatribes against worker action in the face of an unprecendented onslaught of crony capitalism might seem to be 'right on' viewed from the perspective of his commentators and the general libertarian tea party agenda (and to be fair some of his criticisms of unions are valid), but he remains utterly out of tune with middle america.

I predict that this massive blindspot of his will ensure he continues to miss the big picture, for which you are much better off going to ritholtz or calculated risk for.

On top of all that, he has (or at least had) a seriously flawed understanding of the basics of inter-bank and bank-central bank financial accounting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought this was interesting.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2010/05/legalized-theft-uk-proposes-50-tax-on.html

Whilst I find Mish an interesting pundit on likely market direction, sometimes I think his political/economic views are completely destructive.

The comments to this article are worth reading. Funny how the Yanks want to go back to the pre-FED days, yet they don't seem to have a clue what that was like.

Prior to the FED, there was no income tax, but capital gains tax and tariffs on imports were the major sources of government revenue under the US constitution.

Personally, I think that the ConDems are going in the right direction, and the States haven't got a clue. Any thoughts?

I found Mish view on this issue completely logical.

This policy proposal, if enacted, will wreck UK investment opportunities. It puts a firm sell on property and the UK stock index FTSE as well.

Mish did not mention that GBP is a sell too. And this means GBP will sink faster than USD, hurting US competitiveness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting debate on the extent to which political parties and fiscal policy can be used to contribute to a marketplace favourable to business creation.

I'm surprised though that none of the participants here have not dubbed it as yet another example of a stealth tax. Why not?

probably because it is actually called a tax unlike, say, diverted lottery income or speeding fines

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't have a choice in the matter ?

Would be the same for a Government in power that was 'Anti-War'. If the French decided to invade they would suddenly have little option but to become 'Pro-war'.

No offence to the French.

Offence to the French ALWAYS! And to their much more pleasant country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no he hasn't, he has pumped deflation which has put him into the very large camp of utterly wrong commentators who assumed governments wouldn't lift a finger to intervene, or at least, drastically underestimated the policy impact of those interventions.

These type of people claim that 'no-one could have forsaw the deluge of money printing and bailouts, while simultaneously castigating all those who 'failed to see the crisis approaching'. He can claim it is simply a matter of timing until he is blue in the face but the reality is he is no more likely to get the timing right next time or correctly assess the impact of continued monetary, fiscal and regulatory policy moves.

And his constant diatribes against worker action in the face of an unprecendented onslaught of crony capitalism might seem to be 'right on' viewed from the perspective of his commentators and the general libertarian tea party agenda (and to be fair some of his criticisms of unions are valid), but he remains utterly out of tune with middle america.

I predict that this massive blindspot of his will ensure he continues to miss the big picture, for which you are much better off going to ritholtz or calculated risk for.

On top of all that, he has (or at least had) a seriously flawed understanding of the basics of inter-bank and bank-central bank financial accounting.

theyd have been better off at just reading the market technicals when it fell to 7,000

Edited by Tamara De Lempicka
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That I understand is exactly what is proposed. CGT on speculation which does not create jobs and wealth.

They claim real enterprise will have not have CGT raised though I am not sure how this will be determined.

As usual the devil will be in the detail.

I think it will mostly affect some parts of financial services and property.

For a start, isn't CGT a personal tax?

So if a company makes a profit on an asset then it is corporation tax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back on topic.

Most 'capital gains' aren't really capital gains at all, they are just numbers getting bigger as the price of money falls (inflation).

So many sensible people, looking to for protection from inflation through investing in shares/property, now have absolutely nowhere to hide from this mysterious for of state theft. This is good old fashioned inflation theft, coin clipping etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back on topic.

Most 'capital gains' aren't really capital gains at all, they are just numbers getting bigger as the price of money falls (inflation).

So many sensible people, looking to for protection from inflation through investing in shares/property, now have absolutely nowhere to hide from this mysterious for of state theft. This is good old fashioned inflation theft, coin clipping etc...

Agreed.

You have implied the reason why deflation is so good for savers and so bad for governments. Governments will do everything that they can do to prevent savers from benefitting from deflation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest happy?

probably because it is actually called a tax unlike, say, diverted lottery income or speeding fines

The lottery of course is a tax on stupidity.

So which part of the party manifesto stated that Dave would immediately abandon plans to 'reform' IHT, and double CGT.

Stealth taxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back on topic.

Most 'capital gains' aren't really capital gains at all, they are just numbers getting bigger as the price of money falls (inflation).

So many sensible people, looking to for protection from inflation through investing in shares/property, now have absolutely nowhere to hide from this mysterious for of state theft. This is good old fashioned inflation theft, coin clipping etc...

From your logic then surely as long as captial gain of assets match inflation then it's okay.

These sensible people will be okay as CGT will be tapered (i.e. inflation linked).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting debate on the extent to which political parties and fiscal policy can be used to contribute to a marketplace favourable to business creation.

I'm surprised though that none of the participants here have not dubbed it as yet another example of a stealth tax. Why not?

Vested interests my dear boy. We all generally don't mind taxes that we won't have to pay.

This is a tax that will hit BTL landlords and is clearly in the interest of most on here who stand to benefit from the side effects (HPC) on the housing market.

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.