Comments on: Ah, Ritchie, the gift that never stops giving

By: Worstall and Guido can’t both be right | called2account

Worstall and Guido can’t both be right | called2account — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:05:16 +0000

[...] his fellow right wing blogger, Tim Worstall argues in a comment also aimed directly at me: businesses don’t pay taxes. People [...]

By: Tax Research UK » Worstall and Guido can’t both be right

Tax Research UK » Worstall and Guido can’t both be right — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 10:00:34 +0000

[...] his fellow right wing blogger, Tim Worstall argues in a comment also aimed directly at me: businesses don’t pay taxes. People [...]

By: Philip Walker

Philip Walker — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:33:25 +0000

Should add that of course, if you stripped out public sector workers and calculated the effect on private sector workers only, the figure would be rather higher.

By: Philip Walker

Philip Walker — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:25:01 +0000

“70% of the burden of corporate taxation is carried by the workforce in the form of lower wages.”

Figures. About 70% of returns in the West are captured by labour, and 30% by capital. (Those are BoE figures; in the developing world, the ratio is reversed.) So if you tax profits, then about 70% of the decrease will return to labour.

I estimate that corporation tax costs the average worker about £845 a year. (70% of £35bn raised shared by 29mn workers.)

By: Georges

Georges — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 00:53:26 +0000

So Richard Murphy is abandoning a key tenet of New Economics? A key tenet originally proposed by …. Richard Murphy:

http://enougheconomics.wordpress.com/2009/07/02/accepting-constraints/

By: Newmania

Newmania — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:59:19 +0000

The IFS have calculated that our tax system is about as progressive as it can be so any further “redistribution ” implies large extension of state control heading towards either world government or closed borders . Education has been hugely well funded and teachers have benefited , the way to pay teachers more is to fire poor ones and until Union grip is ,loosened on the whole corrupt system that is never going to happen.

Recruitment for teaching is currently a question of beating them off with a stick ,…they should be paid less under the present system .

By: AC1

AC1 — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:42:56 +0000

Maybe the State shouldn’t be in Education Provision? Just loan parents the money to educate their own children, and also make sure said children are being educated to a standard.

By: Pat

Pat — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 19:50:33 +0000

As I understand it, Tesco are expected to pay more tax and are berated for paying low wages, so they’re presumably expected to raise these.
Either we give Tesco a monopoly, putting all those market stalls and farmer’s markets out of business- and then everyone, including the lowly paid, pays more for their food- or Tesco goes bust, pays no-one, pays no taxes. I’m not entranced by either option.
Further I question the idea that each and every person can benefit from a better education-everyone’s ability to learn has limits whatever their enthusiasm for learning, and some people simply can’t be bothered. Of course it’s from these two classes that the parents of the children receiving free school meals largely come- they all had a chance at school but failed to take it.
And since we actually need people to staff supermarkets, clean offices, etc. it seems wasteful of their time as well as teachers time and public money to educate them beyond the level that they need or want. And don’t forget that there are many skilled workers who’s skills were acquired after leaving school.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:08:13 +0000

I despair. I’ve said it here before, and I’ll repeat it: if my Grandfather and his brothers and sisters could be taught in State schools about 100 years ago to read, write and do arithmatic to a standard that would shame todays 16 year olds, for the amount we spent on education in those days, then we can do so again today.

It doesn’t take a Philosophers stone, or the discovery of some long lost ancient secret, just the practical application of the educational methods that produced results all those years ago. It doesn’t take the billions we spend now either.

By: JuliaM

JuliaM — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 15:45:09 +0000

But we are categorically not ‘underspending on education’.

It’s simply that the money is being spent on pointless, idealogically-driven projects and meddling in things that have no business in the educational system, like ‘green isues’ and ‘health issues’…

By: Gareth

Gareth — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 14:49:22 +0000

“Some of the goals I share: a better education system being one of them. Some of them I don’t particularly: equitable distribution in the sense of more equal distribution isn’t one of the scabs of our society I particularly care to pick. But my ire comes from those proposing things which will be entirely counter-productive.”

What you see as counter-productive the left do not. You would like equality of opportunity the left would like just equality. Of the Animal Farm variety of course…

It is unnatural and illogical.

Aiming for the lowest common denominator is the easiest means to achieve equality (possibly even the only way). All you need do is keep squashing excellence wherever you find it and you will end up with across the board mediocrity. But at least everyone is equal.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 14:15:28 +0000

Is he actually treating free school meals as a cause, rather than a correlate, of underachievement? FFS!

By: Philip Scott Thomas

Philip Scott Thomas — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 13:30:06 +0000

“Tescos are the UK’s biggest private sector employer”

“Tescos, and employers like it, are paying the wages…”

It’s barking, innit?

Yes. And it’s also flipping illiterate. It’s Tesco. Singular. It takes a singular verb.