George Osborne’s budget has gone down like a speech concerning the stupidity of the Maginot Line delivered in the heart of Paris. I want to make it clear that I don’t agree with everything in the Budget. In fact, I think some aspects of it make for a depressing read; however, I am adamant that a significant majority of the bad press it has received is due to nothing more than the Labour Party’s pathetic scaremongering and opportunistic outbursts. Nothing has been ravished more than the cutting of the 50p rate of income tax for those that earn more than £150,000. For many people this tax cut is about nothing more than principles. In light of this, I’m not going to concentrate on the numbers surrounding the issue, but rather give an electronic oration based on principles.
I don’t agree with David Starkey on many issues, but I think he was wonderfully eloquent when he blamed two female MPs of thinking with their hearts rather than their heads (I want to stress that I don’t agree that such a mentality is limited purely to the female sex, but rather I concur that many people tend to think with their hearts instead of their heads in many political situations). The debate around scrapping the 50 rate of tax is perhaps a perfect example of how people simply allow reason to give way to pure, unmitigated emotion.
I really can understand why an apparently unnecessary tax break for the wealthiest in society is unpalatable at a time when many families and individuals on low incomes are struggling financially (and I don’t just mean because of Labour’s attempted indoctrination). But I implore people to use reason, and to try to rationalise such a move. Let’s be honest. The coalition government inherited an astronomical fiscal deficit due to New Labour’s toxic obsession of spending more money than we actually had. In light of this, some incredibly tough decisions are required to be made (the majority of which I am sure are yet still to come). As a direct result of attempting to diffuse this fiscal ticking time bomb, public spending has to be reduced to a minimum. One of the most important results of this slashing of public spending is that we cannot rely on the public sector to generate the colossal number of jobs required to extract large segments of our society from their current state of unemployment. Only the private sector can be relied upon. If we have to place our hope in the private sector, then it seems logical that we should also ensure that incentivising the private sector is one of our highest priorities. Does a cut in the 50p rate of tax appeal to the capitalist ‘demons’ that we have to rely upon? Apparently (if you ask them) it does. Therefore cut the 50p tax rate we must. How on earth can we refuse to listen to those people that will alleviate our current miseries? Elementary. We can’t.
If we refuse to attempt to stimulate the economy, and remain wedded to the nauseating idea of taxing the wealthiest in society to prop up an increasing number of welfare dependents, then we will have failed as a responsible society. In a different economic situation I would have agreed (probably not entirely) with Labour that removing financial burdens from millionaires isn’t a top priority. But in the current dire situation that one finds oneself in, I’m all for cutting the 50p rate of tax. Why you ask? Because it will indirectly avail the most vulnerable within our society. Interestingly enough, there is evidence to suggest an inverse correlation between revenue generated and tax rate i.e. higher tax rates actually bring in less than lower rates.
As I set out in the beginning though, I’m not coming at this argument from a numbers point of view (and I can guarantee that neither will the Labour party), but from a point of principle: I believe in helping the most vulnerable (which by the way doesn’t include those people that can work but simply don’t) by whatever means necessary. Your heart may tell you that means taxing the rich to oblivion. My head tells me the inverse. Which is right? I’ll let you decide.
No comments:
Post a Comment