Thursday, 8 March 2012

Entry for most inapropriate paraphrasing of "First they came..."

Fuel Duty, stamp duty, council tax, parking charges. People HATE these taxes and campaign on the basis that these taxes are "unaffordable". Well, they're not, because people keep paying 'em. QED. It might hurt, but that's a feature, not a bug. I'm not arguing they're fair or reasonable. But this really is a case of liking taxes levied on other people. People whinge when they're taxed on what they like to do.

The underlying problem is that the British state spends 50% of GDP and is raising 40% of GDP in tax. We're taxed too much because the Government is spending too much. It's spending too much because for 10 years from 2000, when the one-eyed Scots maniac abandoned Tory spending plans, the Government spend with the care and attention to effects, of a man urinating after 10 pints. When the Government is spending 40% of GDP or less THEN people can whinge about wanting a tax cut. Until then...

First they came for the smokers, and I didn't speak out because I am not a smoker.
Then they came for the petrol, and I did not speak out because I drive a prius.
Then they came for my drink and I didn't speak out because I drink less than my doctor.
Then they came for my house, and because I'd supported every other tax rise, while voting for Labour to piss other people's money at my problems, everyone else told me to "suck it up, you selfish twat."
(With apologies to Martin Niemoller) More tax needs to be levied, and if you've ever voted labour, it's your fault. With consumption and property taxation, at least you have a chance to avoid it, if you wish. Give up smoking, buy a bicycle and drive less, get your booze from Calais cut down the drinking, or buy a smaller house when you no longer need four bedrooms. This is much fairer than income taxes, which everyone seems to think are paid by the rich alone. Look at your pay statement. How much extra consumption tax could you pay, if that big chunk of your income didn't dissapear into the Government's maw each month? Consumption taxes are taxes on idiots buying a new BMW because his penis is small, rather than making do with a cheap 2nd hand runabout.

If people decided to take a bike or walk to the shops, they'd be healthier, and free the roads for those who need to drive. Fewer smokers, better health; (I don't like saying this) more expensive booze, possibly less blood and vomit on the street on a friday night. A tax on of big properties will increase the supply of family homes for families, as it creates an incentive for Grandma to downsize BEFORE she's incontinent. These taxes have positive, as well as negative effects. Income tax is just a punch in the face with no redeeming qualities. National insurance is a punch in the face which comes with a P45, without any redeeming features. Corporation tax is an just income tax (upon whom does the incidence of corporation tax fall?) which comes with a rejection letter from applying for a job after you've been fired because of NI increases, with no redeeming features.

To be honest, I think tobacco and alcohol are probably already taxed enough, but the principle of taxing activities with negative externalites is a sound one. Cut taxes on payroll, income and profits. Raise them on use of resources with short supply, specifically roads and big houses, to ensure more efficient use by those who value them most.

Why is it worse to pay council tax than income tax?



9 comments:

Anonymous said...

While most of what you say is fine, I could not help but take offence at the insinuation that 'Consumption taxes are taxes on idiots'. Consumption taxes are voluntary, if you have the excess wealth to buy a BMW (to compensate as you so delicately put it) or an iPhone, or a new coat, or in fact, whatever you feel you can afford, then the tax you pay on that is just the fee for being succesful at earning and saving and being able to afford your life. To say that it is a tax on idiots because they wish to spend their hard earned wealth is needlessly offensive.

Which would you rather, a voluntary tax paid only by those who feel able to pay, or mandatory taxes which are 'just a punch in the face with no redeeming qualities'. Raise consumption taxes as high as you like, and lower the rest.

Otherwise great stuff, and keep up the good work.

Oh, and I don't drive a beamer, or in fact own a car at all

Luke said...

I came across a blog called "fat man on a keyboard." I doubt you'd like the blog, but the strapline is good: "first they came for the smokers, and I did nothing as I did not smoke. Then they came for the binge drinkers and I did nothing as I did not binge. Now they have an obesity strategy..."

I suspect tax popularity is in inverse proportion to visibility. Not many grumbles about employers' NI, which I suspect costs most people more than the taxes you mention. Only v wealthy and self - employed complain about income tax.

Single acts of tyranny said...

Okay, I am now officially a bit worried about you, and here's why. A few years previous I has a nice BMW coupe. Not because of any anotomical challenges but because it was a great car to drive and I wanted one. Also, attractive women tended to conflate prestige car ownership with desirability for some reason and I like sex with attractive women, (We've been doing this in one form or another since the caves).

Cheap second hand runabouts by contrast, might even be more CO2 producing (if anyone still cares) and more importantly, they are crappier, unreliable drives which really don't ease super hotties out of their clothes, so er, for those of us who have never voted Labour....

Please stop advocating taxes to fund (often pointless or counter-productive) spending

Luke said...

Single Acts, not sure I follow your objection. Your BMW coupe gets you sex with hot babes, you pay a little tax on said BMW. Everyone's a winner. You, the hot babes (since you are not anatomically challenged) and the rest of us from the tax you pay. Surely an all round studmuffin such as you obviously are would not begrudge such an all round win?

Single acts of tyranny said...

@ Luke, I kinda knew when I posted like that someone would would start the ad hominem, so please mate, less of the 'studmuffin' jibes?

It's just how it was. Get one and see for yourself. As to the objection, it's obvious, the excess taxes!

Jackart said...

SAoT: I have one prejudice: BMWs and the people who drive them. (and Audis when they're right up your trumpet).

My last car was an Alfa Romeo. I had no problem pulling in that, but did not have to endure the hostility of other road users that BMW drivers no doubt endure.

Finally, if you want to pull the ladies, can I recommend 30in thighs? Bikes give you that.

mattc said...

yep on the bikes, lycra claddings work great if you have the figure. Also if you need a beemer (or similar) to get laid, try a personality it works wonders other people will also think your less of a twat.

Woodsy42 said...

"A tax on of big properties will increase the supply of family homes for families, "
No it won't, it will fill the ordinary homes with people downsizing.

Weekend Yachtsman said...

Fair enough, except that owning a house is not consumption.

Share it