Government U-turns, a good thing?

JY – I would argue that it is both, not either/or. I am more frustrated that the headlines are the bits that are largely irrelevant in the grander scheme of things rather than the economic issues that really matter. The UK economy will not magically turnaround depending on whether there is VAT on a pasty or not! Can’t quite imagine Mme Lagarde spending too much of her time on that issue.

JY – there is plenty of research on optimal rates of tax. No need for sarcasm!! Although in recent Gov/HRMC reports that was also confined to the footnotes/appendices!! 😉

Yes of course, Ernie they have followed Blair’s example of policy by focus group!! And on the contrary they are listening too much and to the tittle tattle rather than the important stuff.

there is plenty of research on optimal rates of tax. No need for sarcasm!!

its not conclusive for example the laffer curve shows a rate range of 35-70% its not definitive by any means [ what the optimal tax rate is] and your own [original] quotes shows this.

Fair enough over sarcasm , it was more meant as humour. I shall stop.

As were my comments 😉

There is loads of research but as you say no firm conclusion. But most consensus is somewhere between 43-48p. So guess why Darling made it 50p as he walked out the door. Mischief making – nothing else.

[p.s. I am sure you saw the word “probably’ in my post 😉 ]

Yes of course, Ernie they have followed Blair’s example of policy by focus group!!

😕 eh ?

They seem to be following all previous government’s example of “let’s not piss too many people off and make ourselves really unpopular because we’ll probably need to win some elections in the future”

I don’t think Tony Blair invented that philosophy.

Maybe not, but he certainly did a good job at perfecting it!

he certainly did a good job at perfecting it!

By really pissing people off by insisting taking the country into a war which they really didn’t want to be involved in ? Which incidentally is probably his most famous legacy.

There is loads of research but as you say no firm conclusion. But most consensus is somewhere between 43-48p. So guess why Darling made it 50p as he walked out the door. Mischief making – nothing else.

Will you stop doing this – treating right wing shibboleths as fact. The whole theory of laffer curve is widely disputed and the max rate as given by your own links of the few who believe in this is a range of 30 – 75 %

Even the treasury say that the reduction to 45 % will cost billions!

TJ don’t start your nonsense. This is not about the dispute over the Laffer Curve per se. It’s is about TIE. I’ve given you the link to those right nasties at HRMC before. Go and read it. It’s clear and simple.

As for the OP – it became an article of faith amongst politicians that they must not change their mind – one of Thatchers contributions to the political world. I do not believe this is the right thing to do – if a policy is wrong it should be changed.

However the recent U turns are usually panicked responses to bad publicity and have often made a bad policy worse

THM – stop behaving as if right wing theories are facts when they are not. The laffer curve is a theory only given credence by the right wing. there is no proof of it and many reputable economists deny its existence.

Be a little bit intellectually honest if you can and stop pretending.

You could also stop being so unpleasant, patronising and condescending.

Ever wondered why Darling had chosen a 45p rate of tax and announced it in the pre-Budget report until, yes you’ve guessed it, it was time for political slash and burn? Lets go for 50p instead, that will stuff the Tories. One thing Darling got spot on. Smart political tactic, economic nonsense. Plus ca change…

TJ when you spout BS about tax and the Laffer Curve and misrepresent other people’s position, you will be picked up on it as you were repeatedly before. If your deem that to be unpleasant, patronising and condescending then so be it. You know what to do – its your choice!

Is it intellectually dishonest to quote the main government reference piece on tax policy?

However the recent U turns are usually panicked responses to bad publicity and have often made a bad policy worse

You can’t really say that without evidence as to what was the root cause of teh change of opinion. Was it a bad publicity? I doubt it, they have enough of that already for their entire process – a bit of complaint about pasties isn’t going to matter a jot to them in comparison with the fact that their main plans are counter to everyone elses claims.

The problem with UK politics is it’s often all about vote winning and not doing what’s right. A government who makes ten dozen suggestions and then adjusts them to suit is better than one who makes ten decisions and sticks to them, IF it’s done for the country rather than for votes. Part of the issue we have in the UK is the constant opposition claiming things are not good then when they change they’re still not good because it’s a U turn and that shows no confidence. It’s a farce, it’s a schoolkids argument and the majority of the public and media participate in this playground bickering. There’s no wonder people are driven into a state of saying “you know what, I just don’t care about voting, it doesn’t make any difference anyway”.

In the case of the current government I’m not sure which way these decisions are in reality, panic mistake or taking note and doing the right thing. What I will say is that the constant opposition to everything, the constant leveraging of any position against each other, all that does makes me (And many MANY like me) want to walk away and have no part in it. It doesn’t drive people to have greater input, it makes those who feel strongly feel more strongly and those who are borderline just think “who cares?”.

The whole process is stupidity incarnate.

This is not about the dispute over the Laffer Curve per se.

Just agree to differ a everyone knows both your views on this issue.

TJ why do you always use language like

Will you stop doing this – treating right wing shibboleths as fact.

stop behaving as if right wing theories are facts when they are not.

Be a little bit intellectually honest if you can and stop pretending.

You could also stop being so unpleasant, patronising and condescending.

Have you read your first sentence then you ask him to be nice

FACE PALMS

it is is obvious you dislike him and you just attack him ans his argument every thread
FWIW IMHO he seems to be quite restrained in the face of this [ better than me but that may be setting the bar quite low]

Thank you JY. It is as tiresome as it is predictable. Pity lessons are not learned from bans?

he is right though you are a **** 😉

I thought that was an a***? 😀

Now which insult has five letters beginning with A?

Rape anonymity
Selling off the forests
Camerons vanity photographer on the public payroll
Gove’s plan to withdraw funding for the 450 school sport partnerships (SSPs)
Scrapping school milk for under-5s
Scrapping Bookstart
Scrapping the Financial Inclusion Fund
Cutting Housing Benefit for long-term jobseekers
Immigration target policy reduced to an “ambition”
Coastguard cuts
Circus animals ban
Reduction in BBC World Service cuts
Cutting support for disabled people in care homes
Scrapping the Office of the Chief Coroner
Automatic prison sentences for carrying a knife
50% sentence reductions for an early guilty plea
Scrapping the Youth Justice Board
Scrapping Domestic Violence Protection Orders
Plans to introduce unannounced Ofsted inspections
Watering down of Child Benefit cuts
Video games tax relief kept after all
Scrapping NHS targets
Scrapping NHS Direct
Joint Strike Fighter mess
Watering down plans to recall MPs
Rowing back on Secret Courts
Pasty Tax scrapped
Caravan Tax watered down

I’m sure some will call the Government a bit weak and accuse them of ill thought out policies, others will no doubt say that the Government listens.

All I see is a Government sacrificing some of it’s not very big or important policies as a means of distraction while they continue with no u-turns on the bigger stuff like the NHS changes.

Smoke and mirrors.

Anyone with half a brain could predict that pastygate and the cap on gift aid was going to create a mountain of bad publicity for a molehill of extra tax revenue, so one wonders if they really are that incompetent, or (more likely) are so spectacularly devious that they’re using it to deflect attention from elsewhere, as El-bent suggests.

Its interesting when you look at a great many of the policy climbdowns, because you start to see just how mixed up the message that the public give is.

i) Millionaires are avoiding tax by offsetting against their tax bill- stop them, quick.
ii) oh my god, the government have clamped down on millionaires offsetting charitable donations against their tax bill.

i) There should be something done about all this unhealthy take-away food making kids fat
ii) Oh my god, they’re going to tax our pasties

i) Judges are letting people off with a slap on the wrists, increase thee mandatory sentences
ii) Oh my god, the government are taking away judicial independence

i) The police spend all their time chasing targets, why don’t they go and do something useful like stopping criminals
ii) Waaah! the police did me for speeding

By the way, I thought it was particuarly good that the old LW press tried to make an issue over the boss of Ginsters making a donation to the Tory party just before they changed the policy – corrupption, big business, donations buying influence etc… then someone pointed out that Ginsters made cold pasties, not hot ones, so wouldnt be affected by the tax ;o)

ZE, that’s right, because “the public” is a single entity that speaks with one voice.

Could you tell me if the entity known as “the public” was opposed to charitable donations by the wealthy? Or is it just possible that “the public” wasn’t too keen on offshore trusts and the like?

I dislike tax avoidance, was the charity thing really the best way this talented bunch could come up with to stop it? C’mon I have a low opinion of this shower but not even this lot are that rubbish.
It was a poor policy not a hypocritical public

Junkyard – I dislike THMs intellectual dishonesty where he claims to be liberal but infact supports a right wing economic theory. I far prefer the like of Zulu and CFH who do not try to pretend to be something else.

Usually I simply ignore him these days but his continual espousing of right wing shibboleths as fact needs to be challenged on occasion as does his very unpleasant patronising and condescending attitude.

I attack him far less than I want to and he deserves.

but tmh suppports the city which is really very socialist, let me explain……

ooh- ra lets make lots of money, trickle down effect…..boom!…….

bust

quick get the state to bail us out were fuuuuuuctt — we cant pay our bonuses!!

ahh thats better now get the BoE to print loads of money and keep interest rates low so it will be easier for us to lend money out (excpt we wont lend we’ll just hang on to it-theres a recession on dont you know we cant pay our dividends if weve got no cash)

its like capitalism only with all the risk taken by the taxpayer

he does have views that I disagree with but he has a reason for his views is there really any need for this from the “tolerant liberal lefties”?

TJ you are basically calling him a liar, saying he deserves it and calling your behaviour restrained….words fail me.
FFS people have attacked you in the past at every post you appear to be doing the same now.

Be a little bit intellectually honest if you can and stop pretending.
You could also stop being so unpleasant, patronising and condescending.

is the irony of this post lost on you?

FFS this is the playground attack his argument if you must but attacking him personally is way out of order.
I am actually embarrassed to be associated with this thread

Junkyard – you miss the point.

email me if you really want to debate this -= this is not the place.

I will continue to usually ignore him but I cannot stand the nasty attitude and dishonesty from him.

Junkyard – you miss the point.

The again, perhaps you dont [and thank you BTW]!

Like all bullies, the internet versions, struggle when people stand up to them. They try all kind of tricks – personalising debates, misquoting, pointless repetition – but ultimately end up like sad balloons pricked of their hot air.

Ultimately, bullies’ post become a mixture of self-parody and/or observations in the mirror. Which is what makes the irony* amusing at first but quickly tiresome and embarrassing.

* eg, an atheist who likes to cyber bully religious people using a term derived from the Hebrew Bible. In this case, it is quite amusing in a dry kind of way!!

Stop pretending you are the victim and I am a bully. I stand up to you and I point out your dishonesty and pomposity and this has clearly got to you so you make personal attacks on me.

when you have the honesty to admit that you espouse right wing theories not economic facts, when you have the honesty to say who you are in real life then you can take the moral high ground.

When you keep on with your same bullshit on occasion I will challenge you. But thats bullying isn’t it. 🙄

You need to read that treasury piece again BTW with your eyes open – it actually shows that the laffer curve clearly was not in play in the 50% tax rate as do the figures coming out of the treasury – no surprise seeing as the laffer curve is a discredited piece of wish fulfillment from the right.#

You of course will continue to bluster and bluff – and claim that I am a bully for standing up to you.

Well you ain’t fooling me and you ain’t fooling anyone else.

I repeat – “Ultimately, bullies’ posts become a mixture of self-parody and/or observations in the mirror.” QED.

Enough, you are not bullying me or anyone else into a ban for excessive arguing. Simply tiresome.

I repeat – “Ultimately, bullies’ posts become a mixture of self-parody and/or observations in the mirror.” QED.

Pot kettle black

you ain’t fooling me, you ain’t fooling anyone else.

annoying, argumentative, stubborn even mistaken I may be but I am no bully as you well know

simply repeating your lies does not make them true.

simply repeating your lies does not make them true.

The perfect example of self-parody. Brilliant way to end – marvelous. Time for a drink to celebrate, I think.

Teej, I often support you and feel that you do get picked on, but this discussion was going well until you turned up. Can we keep it adult and civil please?

I think no policy is perfect and any politicion prepared to learn from their mistakes is a good thing. The opposition will always capitlise on any move you make U-turn or not so I don’t think the oppositions response should be the issue, the issue is finding correct ways forwards. Therefore honest u-turns are a good thing.

Still not listening THM?

What you accuse me of is what you are doing. You are the one who is continually repeating the same false point and making false accusations.

When you stop with the humbug and cant then I will stop attacking you for it. As for the accusations of me being a bully – frankly laughable.

Which one of us hides their identity?

teej you are not listening, please shut up.

Toys – crossed posts – fair enough – but does that mean THM is not to be challenged on his continual stating of discredited right wing economic theories as facts?

well that’s your opinion isnt it, and you spout lots of stuff people would consider to be wrong or discredited, including logical fallacies, made up stuff and outright lies. But this isn’t about that, its about you going on at him all the flipping time and making it boring and off putting.

I reallywas enjoying this discussion until you landed your first blow. Leave it up to others now seeing as your attempts at discrediting him have gone into the realms of mentalness…

OK toys – I will go back to ignoring him most of the time. I do have no problem with being attacked for what I say – I do take umbrage at being called a bully.

To take it back to the OP

TJ
As for the OP – it became an article of faith amongst politicians that they must not change their mind – one of Thatchers contributions to the political world. I do not believe this is the right thing to do – if a policy is wrong it should be changed.

However the recent U turns are usually panicked responses to bad publicity and have often made a bad policy worse

Edit

A great example of this is the reduction in child benefit for higher rate taxpayers – doing it at the tax threshold would be simple and cheap – now they are gong to do it at a higher threshold – thus creating another bureaucratic nonsense which will cost significant amounts to do

Good man for backing off, it edifies you.
TBH it did kind of come across as bullying. If this were areal life forum (as in real people sat in a room) and I was chairman, I would have censured you by now…

—————————————————-

I would have censured you by now…

That’s OUR job, not yours! Play nicely now. Mod

Is that really a mod comment on there?

wasnt me JY. I think it was mod jealousy as I got TJ to pipe down in two posts…

Anyway whats wrong with the forum policing itself? Its about discussion after all, its a sign of good thigns that TJ listened to us and backed off.. {Looks to skies, waits for pillar of lightning}