Why Tory voter demands for low taxes are delusional

[bartelbe]

Read the Tory press and you see increasing demands for cuts to taxes on individuals and businesses. They cite low tax jurisdictions and claim this is the economic model the UK should follow. So what is the matter with that? We would all like lower taxes.

The tiny issues is the UK government spends 192bn on welfare and another 170bn on the NHS. Brexit voters response to that is to say if we just got rid of immigrants and the unemployed, we could cut the welfare bill. Slight problem with the brexiteer argument, only 2.2bn is actually spent on the unemployed, compared to £111bn on pensioners.

In fact the most effective way of creating a low tax economy would be to deport all the pensioners. Not only could you save 111bn they cost in welfare, they are the main users of the NHS. My point is this, the reason we have an increasingly high tax economy that elderly brexiteer voters complain about, is because we have so many elderly brexiteers.

So unless they are willing to surrender their pensions and forgo all medical treatment, there is not much we can do about the situation, so they should really stop complaining.

Edited June 13, 2022 by bartelbe

[byron78]

Stop messing around on that laptop on a school night or I'm putting your rent up!

[bartelbe]

4 hours ago, byron78 said:

Stop messing around on that laptop on a school night or I'm putting your rent up!

So what exactly is wrong with my point? The reason we have an increasing tax burden is we have a large retired population. The Tories win because the retired vote for them.

So there is a problem with Tory voters getting outraged by welfare spending, higher taxes, yet at the same time demanding things like the triple lock for state pensions. Most public spending is on Tory voters, they are why we have high taxes.

 

[btd1981]

I suspect many people have a notion that the more you pay into the welfare system, the more deserving you are when it's time to claim. I get that, even if the rewards can in fact seem a bit disproportionate.

Edited June 14, 2022 by btd1981

[Mikhail Liebenstein]

7 hours ago, bartelbe said:

In fact the most effective way of creating a low tax economy would be to deport all the pensioners. Not only could you save 111bn they cost in welfare, they are the main users of the NHS. My point is this, the reason we have an increasingly high tax economy that elderly brexiteer voters complain about, is because we have so many elderly brexiteers.

So unless they are willing to surrender their pensions and forgo all medical treatment, there is not much we can do about the situation, so they should really stop complaining.

 

I'm with you analysis brother.

That is why we should not have taken any Covid measures and just got on with things.

The problem would now be reduced a bit.

[HousePriceTooHigh]

Perhaps everyone should get a yearly statement of their lifetime contribution/withdrawals from the state.

Vast majority of people deep in the red, but probably currently mouthing off about how their taxes as a milkman are actually supporting 50 migrants on benefits.

[Gurgle]

Just now, HousePriceTooHigh said:

Perhaps everyone should get a yearly statement of their lifetime contribution/withdrawals from the state.

Vast majority of people deep in the red, but probably currently mouthing off about how their taxes as a milkman are actually supporting 50 migrants on benefits.

This is a good idea.  I also remember that at some point the government was going to send out a breakdown of your tax and social security contributions showing how much went into each part of the budget.  Personally never seen one of those either.  They're probably too scared to tell us.

[dugsbody]

8 hours ago, bartelbe said:

Read the Tory press and you see increasing demands for cuts to taxes on individuals and businesses. They cite low tax jurisdictions and claim this is the economic model the UK should follow. So what is the matter with that? We would all like lower taxes.

The tiny issues is the UK government spends 192bn on welfare and another 170bn on the NHS. Brexit voters response to that is to say if we just got rid of immigrants and the unemployed, we could cut the welfare bill. Slight problem with the brexiteer argument, only 2.2bn is actually spent on the unemployed, compared to £111bn on pensioners.

In fact the most effective way of creating a low tax economy would be to deport all the pensioners. Not only could you save 111bn they cost in welfare, they are the main users of the NHS. My point is this, the reason we have an increasingly high tax economy that elderly brexiteer voters complain about, is because we have so many elderly brexiteers.

So unless they are willing to surrender their pensions and forgo all medical treatment, there is not much we can do about the situation, so they should really stop complaining.

Good post.

It isn't demonisation to quote stats but somehow every time this topic comes up people take a lot of offence.

The Conservative Party is aware of the issue though which is why they'll lie to the public about immigration, blame the EU, pull the puppet strings, but then allow 1 million people into the country in 2021.

[byron78]

3 hours ago, bartelbe said:

So what exactly is wrong with my point? The reason we have an increasing tax burden is we have a large retired population. The Tories win because the retired vote for them.

So there is a problem with Tory voters getting outraged by welfare spending, higher taxes, yet at the same time demanding things like the triple lock for state pensions. Most public spending is on Tory voters, they are why we have high taxes.

 

I can't actually argue against that.

You are right. The Con Club is full of people on state pensions with big NHS burdens etc.

They don't see themselves as a drain as "we've always paid in". I'm not sure this is completely true, actually. There's certainly a generation of little old ladies who were, mostly, stay at home mums. Husband paid in is usually the argument, but it's not always the case.

Fairest way (which the billionaire press HATE because it's obviously a lot more expensive the more assets you have) is probably an estate tax.

If you set it north of 2M in assets until it kicks in (tied to inflation to try and negate the inevitable "garden tax" fearmongering) then a lot of the people - and I am probably included here - who benefited most from HPI and from asset inflation will ultimately have to kick in a bit more to cover their costs etc.

This country isn't as poor as it is making out is all I would say.

Yes, wages are in the toilet for many. Yes, living costs look increasingly bleak for many.

But if workers are going to keep voting for a political party who put asset holders and the elite above them, then they probably shouldn't be surprised they now have the largest tax burden since WW2.

 

Edited June 14, 2022 by byron78

[jevans]

Why Tory voters demands for low taxes are delusional

fixed

[Si1]

3 hours ago, bartelbe said:

So what exactly is wrong with my point? The reason we have an increasing tax burden is we have a large lightly taxed retired population.

 

ftfy

they have plenty of wealth we could/should tax

[Si1]

12 minutes ago, jevans said:

Why Tory voters demands for low taxes are delusional

fixed

that too

and greedy

[Si1]

It reminds me of the 70s - a depressed economy serving the needs of a large untouchable subsidised vested interest group

 

- in the 70s this was the nationalised industry and the trade unions that served it; now it is the pensioners/boomers block vote

[jevans]

Tax burden is just about number its about balance, you can put more on to indirect tax such as VAT and duty or more on to direct tax such as income tax. you also can choose to put more or less proportion on to individuals/businesses, recently the government chose to cut corporation tax over income tax. 

But the absolute key problem here is growth, the idea is that you can cut tax and increase growth the have more tax revenue on the lower rate than the previous higher one, the UK the amount of tax cut to create a 1% gdp growth would never be recovered and would require huge cuts in services. Now if you fully expect the tax cut to work over say a 24 month period you are making greater revenue then you would just plan the gap to filled be short term borrowing and not cut services because cutting services is counterproductively withdrawing cash for the economy, especially if people aren't going to switch to a private supply, ie your bins are only collected once a fortnight rather weekly, lower cost so probably reduced staff/hours but no opportunity really for a private replacement so the money saved is no longer flowing in the system.

[“Nasty Piece of work”]

The Tory Party wants, and needs for re-election, Nordic style Services whilst fluffing Boomerville with a Right wing Tax take.  The back benches are kicking back to reality, and the tax rises necessary to keep the liar in place.  The cost of this race to the bottom is slaughtering in the Bye-Byes, and loosing the GE.

[Locke]

58 minutes ago, HousePriceTooHigh said:

Perhaps everyone should get a yearly statement of their lifetime contribution/withdrawals from the state.

Vast majority of people deep in the red, but probably currently mouthing off about how their taxes as a milkman are actually supporting 50 migrants on benefits.

[Locke]

31 minutes ago, byron78 said:

Fairest way (which the billionaire press HATE because it's obviously a lot more expensive the more assets you have) is probably an estate tax.

Fairest way is no tax, no state pension, no public healthcare, no public education.

Obviously you will pop a gasket and say "You just want poor people to starve/have no education/die of a tooth infection", which is such a boring and trite argument- as if I haven't thought of these things and genuinely prefer people to suffer. Grotesque.

In actual fact, the state provided services are grossly inefficient and ineffective. People considered poor today would be far better off in a free market economy.

In any case, government services are about to shit the bed; there is nothing left for the government to steal via taxation.

[jevans]

It seems odd that no country has ever tried a true free market economy given how incredibly great vs socialism/communism which has been tried

[Si1]

3 minutes ago, jevans said:

It seems odd that no country has ever tried a true free market economy given how incredibly great vs socialism/communism which has been tried

lefties would argue that a true socialist economy has never been tried either....

(the USSR was Bolshevik fascism, China is Sino-fascism.......)

[jonb2]

3 minutes ago, Locke said:

Fairest way is no tax, no state pension, no public healthcare, no public education.

Obviously you will pop a gasket and say "You just want poor people to starve/have no education/die of a tooth infection", which is such a boring and trite argument- as if I haven't thought of these things and genuinely prefer people to suffer. Grotesque.

In actual fact, the state provided services are grossly inefficient and ineffective. People considered poor today would be far better off in a free market economy.

In any case, government services are about to shit the bed; there is nothing left for the government to steal via taxation.

IMO, the only way to ensure a 'true' free market economy is to make sure the whole world population are stripped of the uneven wealth they own. Then give everybody a cheque for $1000, and say you are on your own. Make of it what you will. Meaning the market is truly free. So, levelling down to generate a true meritocracy.

Then we can ensure the anomalies which defy your theory are ironed out. Like this latest headline:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/06/ftc-acts-protect-pet-owners-private-equity-firms-anticompetitive-acquisition-veterinary-services

Unless you start from a level playing field for wealth, there is/will be no free market.

[Locke]

7 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Unless you start from a level playing field for wealth, there is/will be no free market.

There will never be a level playing field. 

 

8 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

IMO, the only way to ensure a 'true' free market economy is to make sure the whole world population are stripped of the uneven wealth they own.

First thing is that enough of the people who matter; those who makes things and people (i.e. mothers), understand that initiating violence against peaceful people is always evil.

After that it kind of falls into place by itself. There won't be a centralised solution.

10 minutes ago, jonb2 said:

Then we can ensure the anomalies which defy your theory are ironed out. Like this latest headline:

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/06/ftc-acts-protect-pet-owners-private-equity-firms-anticompetitive-acquisition-veterinary-services

Private equity firms are unnaturally enriched by government forces. No government = no adverse monopolies.

[Locke]

17 minutes ago, jevans said:

It seems odd that no country has ever tried a true free market economy given how incredibly great vs socialism/communism which has been tried

Isn't it weird how mafias never try doing actual work.

Freer economices are more productive.

[jonb2]

6 minutes ago, Locke said:

There will never be a level playing field. 

 

How can a market be 'free' then?

It will always be dominated by those with the most money. Whose only presumed purpose on earth is to enrich themselves.

What is your solution for greed?

[jevans]

3 minutes ago, Si1 said:

lefties would argue that a true socialist economy has never been tried either....

(the USSR was Bolshevik fascism, China is Sino-fascism.......)

Very true

[dugsbody]

34 minutes ago, Locke said:

Fairest way is no tax, no state pension, no public healthcare, no public education.

Obviously you will pop a gasket and say "You just want poor people to starve/have no education/die of a tooth infection", which is such a boring and trite argument- as if I haven't thought of these things and genuinely prefer people to suffer. Grotesque.

You seem to think private services will fill this gap? They won't. As is evidenced by any number of countries around the world. Just like communism but on the opposite end, this better life created by a perfect free market society is a nice idea, but pure fantasy in reality.