18 2 mins 8 yrs


When it comes to the vexatious issue of tax, there is one simple lesson. if you want to get more TAX TAKE then you must TAX LESS.

Just consider this.

Labour INCREASED the top rate of income tax from 40% to 50% in its dying year. It did this as class war and as a landmine for the incoming Conservative led Government. What happened? The tax take FELL.  In 2011, the Coalition cut the rate from 50% t0 45%. They were instantly berated by the left but what happened? Yes, the TAX TAKE rose by more than 10%.

Then reflect on this.

Capital Gains Tax was increased from 18% to 27%. You only pay CGT if you dispose of an asset. Guess what has happened? Yes, asset sales dropped by 76%.

Try Stamp duty. This has been raised to 7% on all properties sold over £2million. Guess what has happened. Sales have plummeted by 40% in one year.

The lesson is simple. If you impose PUNITIVE taxes, people will behave in a way to reduce their liability. If the State wants to harvest more tax, then it must CUT taxes.

It is so simple, so stunningly obvious, but socialists don’t get this. Their poster boy,  Francois Hollande, has INCREASED the top tax rate to a stunning 75%. France is currently in economic free fall with top earner LEAVING the country and moving their assets off-shore.

My view is that tax IS essentially institutionalised theft, the misappropriation of private citizens wealth to the almighty State, However IF the State has to take out taxes, let it do so in an efficient and modest manner. Tax us less and get more. What’s not to like about that?

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

18 thoughts on “TAXING FOR LEFTARDS..

  1. How about tax more and create and fairer, more equal society? What’s not to like?

  2. yep

    Your incentive to generate income damps down quite a bit if it is getting taxed at 70%. Either cut back on your endeavours, or find a means of tax avoidance like giving to charity. Either way the tax man won’t get it.

  3. Funny how whenever the issue gets to the appalling levels of taxation in this country, all public sector workers instantly transmute into school teachers nurses (and in this case) librarians. Leftards have no concept of waste, which explains a lot.

    Tax in this country is like allowing a nasty spoilt brat to decide how much pocket money he gets, and how he can spend it. Pretty soon, bankrupt parents.

    A fairer society, where hard workers are robbed to pay for other people to lie on their sofas all day long? I don’t think so.

    Capitalism: where winners get to live in nice houses and nice cars, and losers get to live in nasty houses and drive clapped out cars.

    Socialism: where everyone has to live in nasty houses and drive clapped out cars, except for party officials.

  4. And just to emphasise: The underlying, thoroughly nasty axiom of socialism is that anyone who has any excess money must have somehow cheated to get it, it is therefore unfair that they have it, and they must be relieved of it somehow, and the more that they have, the more that they cheated, and so the more they must be relieved of it. That is the ‘fairness’ that they whine about. No possibility that some people worked hard to get their excess, they all get lumped together and are forced to pay up in the same way.

    It is no surprise that with such an appalling, simplistic, childish, over-generalised fundamental belief, socialism in all its manifestations poisons itself and turns into disaster.

    Of course, some people do cheat to get their excess money, but I can live with that.

  5. An accedemic point for me as I am not a top bracket earner but if I managed to get there I would resent paying well over the odds to a public purse that manages its money, and has done so all my life, for the benefit of the neurotypical majority.

    Where its schools don’t cater for intelligent ADD girls. Who cared if we were quietly underachieving in the corner? If we are still managing to appear about average, it didn’t matter if we should have been in the top bracket.

    Where the medical profession also has very little clue of the implications of sensory sensitivity. or the impact of medication on us.

    Where employment, including the public sector is more geared up to employ mediocre Neurotypicals than high potential Neurodivergents.

    So the three main areas that the public purse should be catering for gives us a massively poor return compared with the normal folks.

    Oh and police – very poor understanding of the implications of these conditions. This is despite what little research there is, showing that NDs are vastly overrepresented in the prison population and thus all the stages of the Criminal Justice System.

    I reckon most NDs are owed a massive rebate.

    If I was in the position to be a highest bracket earner, I would want my money going to repair the damage inflicted by the misuse of the public purse.

  6. Aileen

    Is it wise to use the expression ‘normal folks’. Is there really any such thing. Isn’t everyone ‘abnormal’ to some degree or another ?

  7. Colm

    Deliberately used.

    Being normal, in the sense I am using it, applies to a population and an attribute.

    In the context of Neurodiversity, Neurotypical are normal.

    If I was talking about sexual orientation, hetrosexuals (or bisexuals depending on your definition and whatever research you credit) would be normal.

    If I was talking which hand prominent, right handed people would be normal.

  8. “If I was talking about sexual orientation….”

    Oh no, don’t mention that. You’ll get a certain person all Agit8ed 😉

  9. ….. or if I was talking about, ahem, “lifestyles”, taking the whole population being a transgender Dominatrix would not be 😉

  10. libraries etc.?

    Libaries are funded through ‘Council tax’ not the tax man

  11. Good old Tarasov.

    He was against government yesterday. Today he wants even greater government looting for even greater madcap human engineering schemes.

    As for Hollande, he’s just another mediocre politician doing what all politicians do, which is prove von Mises right:

    Despots and democratic majorities are drunk with power. They must reluctantly admit that they are subject to the laws of nature. But they reject the very notion of economic law . . . economic history is a long record of government policies that failed because they were designed with a bold disregard for the laws of economics.

    And like all politicians, Hollande will go on to prove that politics is the very worst way of organising anything. He hasn’t a stake in anything he controls, he won’t suffer slightly for all the terrible decisions he makes, he won’t suffer any consequences for inflicting misery on millions, then he’ll walk away a much wealthier man than before.

  12. One reason the tax take dropped was that the 50% rate was announced a year before it was enacted and its reduction to 45% was also flagged a year in advance. So it was easy to bring forward and then delay large bonuses and dividends in private companies in order to avoid it.

  13. And like all politicians, Hollande will go on to prove that politics is the very worst way of organising anything. He hasn’t a stake in anything he controls, he won’t suffer slightly for all the terrible decisions he makes, he won’t suffer any consequences for inflicting misery on millions, then he’ll walk away a much wealthier man than before.

    How is that any different to elite actors in the private sector? Where have you been for, say, the last 12 odd years?

  14. What do you mean by “elite actors in the private sector”?

    Crony capitalists? Corporate statists? What’s free market about them? Nothing. They’re statist parasites who’d perish in the free market.

  15. As in the private sector equivalent to Hollande.

    Dance around the realities of capitalism all you want. Big money will always protect its position. Hiding behind a theoretical ideal doesnt change it either.

  16. “Big money”? What’s big money? Be precise.

    “Big money” without the protective embrace of government can only protect itself by offering people what they want. Without the violence of law and regulations, it must work for what the people want.

    The only way to strip Big Money of its advantages and privileges is to strip government of the power to bestow advantages and privileges on its crony pals.

  17. You know what i mean, you just used it in context.

    I like your solution. Stop legislators from legislating. You really should move to somalia. Its got everything you seek in governance.

Comments are closed.