Sunday, 15 August 2010

Idiocy. Of the left in general and Professor Greg Philo of the University of Glasgow in Particular.


An embarrassment to his University

Sometimes you come up against the block-headed idiocy of the left. They just believe that if the dastardly "rich" would just pay more, and ever more, then all would be good. Despite all the evidence to the contrary, there is no persuading these people. But when the argument comes from a Professor of Sociology, Anthropology and applied Social Science at the once respected University of Glasgow in the form of a Guardian 'Comment is Free' article which he apparently considered sufficiently good for him to consent to have it published, and not only published but published under his own name where it might even be seen, it not only demonstrates the complete descent of Scotland into an irredeemable socialist hell-hole from which it will never recover, but also the sharp decline of academic standards. So here's professor Greg Philo's "logic"
The total personal wealth in the UK is £9,000bn, a sum that dwarfs the national debt. It is mostly concentrated at the top, so the richest 10% own £4,000bn, with an average per household of £4m. The bottom half of our society own just 9%. The wealthiest hold the bulk of their money in property or pensions, and some in financial assets and objects such antiques and paintings.A one-off tax of just 20% on the wealth of this group would pay the national debt and dramatically reduce the deficit, since interest payments on the debt are a large part of government spending. So that is what should be done. This tax of 20%, graduated so the very richest paid the most, would raise £800bn.
I've already dealt with why this might be popular: Because the electorate are a selfish bunch of spiteful bastards who would quite like someone else to pay taxes on their behalf. But it's "just" 20% of THEIR net wealth, so that's OK then. I mean a one off (yeah, right!) arbitrary confiscation of the assets of the richest, most mobile people in the country, who own and run businesses and pay disproportionate amounts of tax compared to the services they use. What possible damage could this do to the economy? What could possibly go wrong?



12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Considerably less than one fifth of that money would hire, train and equip the most mighty army the world has ever seen to once and for all rid mankind of socialism. Also if there is any small change left over every copper in Britain should get a well deserved beating.

The Young Oligarch said...

Don't blame Glasgow Uni or Scotland - blame sociology and socialism .

Robert Edwards said...

The words 'professor' and 'sociology' are utterly incompatible. I cannot quite decide whether this man is either a disgrace or simply an idiot.

Longrider said...

Have you read the comments to this piece? It's enough to turn me into a misanthrope. If I wasn't that way inclined already...

The Fatch said...

Can we not just pay the government £10 a time to punch a socialist? This would probably raise enough to pay for the Trident system.

Anonymous said...

The Young Oligarch said...
Don't blame Glasgow Uni or Scotland - blame sociology and socialism.

Sadly the fear is that Scotland and envious greedy socialism are inextricably and irredeemably entwined in the current form of the union. It is always the way when you burn other people's money. Scotland is of course a net consumer of the tax pound. Stay a suckling on the tit too long and you wind up being infantile and unaware of your own dependence on the hard work of others...i.e. you become a socialist.

The Fatch said...

It is normally quite difficult to be branded an embarrassment to your University without removing your trousers but he appears to have managed it quite successfully.

Scott Wright said...

"A one-off tax of just 20% on the wealth of this group would pay the national debt and dramatically reduce the deficit, since interest payments on the debt are a large part of government spending."

What I don't get about this is that government debt isn't like other debt. In order to get back their bonds which have a finite duration and destroy them effectively clearing the debt, they would have to pay a premium relating to the lost interest. So my question is this: Is this professor a fucking moron or what?

Anonymous said...

mr philo has got it right,
it was the rich who got us into this mess, not the people at
the bottom who are expected
to pay for the errors of the
rich establishment.

Notexactlyshakespea said...

Let's privatise the national debt. After all, the wealth accumulated by the post-Thatcher, deregulated generation coupled with the landed wealth of the robber barons should be perfectly adequate to cope with the amounts needed. It's simply a matter of transferring their loot back where it belongs, in the hands of the public services that enable them to live in a reasonably ordered, reasonably fair society. Or do they want to provoke the kind of disorder which would find them driven further into their gated compounds? Very libertarian.

Anonymous said...

To be honest, the only rampant idiocy I can see here is an obviously self-stated right wing blogger (and not even a popular or well known one, for that) trying to propose that their opinions on Sociological matters carry as much weight than those of an internationally acclaimed Professor of the discipline.

Anonymous said...

Clearly you are working to an agenda that you are not sharing or simply so right wing that you have no right to call yourself moderate.
This kind of witless character assasination helps no one.

There was an error in this gadget