These are entirely useless idiots – unless you are a politician

Economics, Ethics, Guardianistas, Labour: The War on Truth, Leftist lunacy

These are entirely useless idiots – unless you are a politician

Published by Tom

December 11, 2012

Britain could end these tax scams by hitting the big four | Polly Toynbee | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Ignore Polly. She's just writing her usual hypocritical twaddle. Read the comments. They would be hilarious if they did not so clearly reveal the depths of ignorance, prejudice and hate-addled envy that now characterise most of the British people.

Any reference to tax structuring by Socialists (Margaret Hodge or the Guardian Media Group, say) is dismissed as Tory Propaganda while they rant on about taxing turnover, FFS.

Do they even know what turnover is? Do they understand it's perfectly possible (and indeed quite common at present) to suffer losses on substantial turnover? They either don't or more likely they don't care.

The sad fact is that they just hate (a) the productive and (b) the rule of law. They want their leaders to be able to grab any damn thing they want from anyone they dislike regardless of whether their victims obey they law or not. Due process of law is not the keystone of civilisation to them; it's a loathed obstacle to visiting their mindless hatred on their enemies. It's all (as they keep saying amusingly in demonstrating their entire ignorance of life's complexities) "very simple"

The companies they are attacking and others like them do all the innovating that makes our lives better (who really wants to live now without Amazon or Kindle?) and pay the wages taxed (directly and indirectly) to pay for all the "social goods" these retards lust over. I read recently that entrepreneurs take only about 3% of the value they deliver as their own reward. Their customers get 97%. Compare and contrast with the massive losses on "fiscal churn" involved in delivery of social goods by the retards' beloved state.

Corporate taxes are a joke anyway. The true economic cost falls on individuals (customers, employees and shareholders in varied combinations). There is no point at all in corporate taxation except to disguise the true level of personal taxation. These idiots are being taken for a ride by politicians, as usual. I predict, not a riot, but further punishment and demonisation of the productive in order to win votes from the envious, hate-ridden, feckless readers of that Cayman Island-based model of fiscal rectitude; The Guardian.

12 responses to “These are entirely useless idiots – unless you are a politician”

Tom Knott

December 11, 2012

When you have people who use the word “investment” to describe huge expenditures that will never earn any identifiable return and incur costs that will always way exceed revenues then this is what you get. Including the Labour front bench.

LikeLike

Reply
Blue Eyes

December 11, 2012

Spot on. Plus we already have a turnover tax, which Starbucks and every other effing business has to pay. It’s spun as a consumption tax but of course it’s a tax on turnover.
It’s the hiding of the real tax rates by splitting taxes up into “income”, “corporation”, “VAT” and “capital gains” which is the real scandal.

LikeLike

Reply
Henry Crun

December 11, 2012

The only explanation I have is that there must be something in the water. It’s the only way to explain the collective stupidity.

LikeLike

Reply
cascadian

December 11, 2012

The last time this idiocy was popular you ended up with a Prices and Income Board, attempting to control prices of goods and peoples income because we all know government is really competent in these fields. Some people never learn, let them have it good and hard. After driving industry from your shores the move is afoot to remove all services, banking is doing this in stealth mode, insurance is dieing, Polly wants to destroy accountancy and coffee shops, pubs are already dead zones.
Those who do learn would be well advised to remove as many assets from Britain’s taxmans reach as possible-just like the Guardian in fact.

LikeLike

Reply
Diogenes

December 11, 2012

The sad irony for Polly and her ilk is that the corporation taxes they advocate are a major cause in the never ending expansion of the corporations they so loath. Rather than giving profits to the treasury they shift them to the capex line and open another branch, and another, and another…
I would however disagree that there is no point in turnover taxation in as much as it can be used to counter economies of scale and prevent barriers to entry thus levelling the market and encouraging competition which is a genuine benefit.

LikeLike

Reply
SadButMadLad

December 12, 2012

Diogenes, a turnover tax is never a good thing. It does create a barrier to entry as companies on small margins will have to pay a tax on that tiny margin and have even less to re-invest in growing the company. Companies on large margins won’t have as much a problem. That difference is unfair.
Any tax on a company is a not a good thing as it is never the company that pays. The company is the entity whose cheque is used to pay the tax, but the money doesn’t come from the company but from its stakeholders.

LikeLike

Reply
Suboptimal Planet

December 12, 2012

Well said, SadButMadLad.
Even if turnover taxes did “counter economies of scale”, the government has no business doing this. They likewise have no business “encouraging competition”.
The government just needs to stop discouraging competition, and leave economies and diseconomies of scale to balance each other out.

LikeLike

Reply
Suboptimal Planet

December 12, 2012

Another good article, Tom, though I wonder if this bit is overly pessimistic:
“They would be hilarious if they did not so clearly reveal the depths of ignorance, prejudice and hate-addled envy that now characterise most of the British people.”
The majority of the British public are clearly ignorant and prejudiced, but I suspect hate-addled envy is the preserve of the Guardianistas.

LikeLike

Reply
Tim Worstall

December 12, 2012

The 3%/97% thing is this paper:
http://www.nber.org/papers/w10433
It really is true.

LikeLike

Reply
james higham

December 12, 2012

I do ignore Polly, Tom. I’ve tried reading the Guardian but gave it away after the first few lines.

LikeLike

Reply
MickC

December 12, 2012

Why do you believe that the comments any article attracts actually reflects the opinion of the “British people”?
As you have previously commented in respect of your own site, the commenters are frequently those who support the views expressed in any event.
My view is that the vast majority of “the British people” are perfectly capable of understanding which side a slice of bread is buttered-because most people aren’t stupid. Provided both sides are explained to them, thay quickly see where the sense lies.
The problem we have is that our political class (of all parties) have gone along with the “ruling elite” view on most things-immigration being an obvious example, but also economics (“share the proceeds of growth”-ffs!), defence (how could anyone in their right mind support the Iraq/Afghanistan adventure?)that only one side is really advanced.
Also there is certainly a case for saying that some sectors such as finance have been taking the mick regally-with no consequences to the perpetrators (“Lord” Stevenson step forward)but rather a lot for the people.
But to paraphrase the Bible, the people are not deceived-at least not forever.

LikeLike

Reply
Diogenes

December 12, 2012

Sorry, in my quest for brevity I lacked clarity. I was not suggesting a flat turnover tax which, as you say, would be entirely counter productive.
I think a case could be made to tax turnover where a multinational is gaining an advantage over domestic competition with offshore tax arrangements, not to raise revenue but to encourage companies to bring their financial arrangements onshore. The current system discourages competition.
If the current furore proves anything it is that taxing profits is nonsensical.

LikeLike

Reply