Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Poetry corner 3

Thursday, January 28th, 2010

“Hornpipe”
by Dame Edith Sitwell (1887–1964)
from “Façade”
set to music by William Walton (1923)

Sailors come
To the drum
Out of Babylon;
Hobby-horses
Foam, the dumb
Sky rhinoceros-glum

Watched the courses of the breakers’ rocking-horses and with Glaucis,
Lady Venus on the settee of the horsehair sea!
Where Lord Tennyson in laurels wrote a gloria free,
In a borealic iceberg came Victoria; she
Knew Prince Albert’s tall memorial took the colours of the floreal
And the borealic iceberg; floating on they see
New-arisen Madam Venus for whose sake from far
Came the fat and zebra’d emperor from Zanzibar
Where like golden bouquets lay far Asia, Africa, Cathay,
All laid before that shady lady by the fibroid Shah.

Captain Fracasse stout as any water-butt came, stood
With Sir Bacchus both a-drinking the black tarr’d grapes’ blood
Plucked among the tartan leafage
By the furry wind whose grief age
Could not wither — like a squirrel with a gold star-nut.
Queen Victoria sitting shocked upon the rocking horse
Of a wave said to the Laureate, “This minx of course
Is as sharp as any lynx and blacker-deeper than the drinks and quite as
Hot as any hottentot, without remorse!

For the minx,”
Said she,
“And the drinks,
You can see
Are hot as any hottentot and not the goods for me!”

Poetry corner 2

Thursday, January 21st, 2010

“Translation”
by Roy Fuller (1912-1991)
from “Counterparts” (1954)

Now that the barbarians have got as far as Picra,
And all the new music is written in the twelve tone scale,
And I am anyway approaching my fortieth birthday,
I will dissemble no longer.

I will stop expressing my belief in the rosy
Future of man, and accept the evidence
Of a couple of wretched wars and innumerable
Abortive revolutions.

I will cease to blame the stupidity of the slaves
Upon their masters and nurture, and will say,
Plainly, that they are enemies to culture,
Advancement and cleanliness.

From progressive organisations, from quarterlies
Devoted to daring verse, from membership of
Committees, from letters of various protest
I shall withdraw forthwith.

When they call me reactionary I shall smile
Secure in another dimension. When they say
‘Cinna has ceased to matter’ I shall know
How well I reflect the times.

The ruling class will think I am on their side
And make friendly overtures, but I shall retire
To the side furthest from Picra and write some poems
About the doom of the whole boiling.

Anyone happy in this age and place
Is daft or corrupt. Better to abdicate
From a material and spiritual terrain
Fit only for barbarians.

CUCA in the press

Saturday, January 16th, 2010

The Association is mentioned twice this week:

Firstly, in The Tab:

Cambridge University Conservative Association (CUCA) Registrar Callum Wood called the current system a “quangoburaucracy” governed by red tape.

Labour’s blasé attitude to tax-and-spend over the past decade has racked up a huge public debt (the vast majority of which is nothing to do with the recession) and so it shouldn’t come as a surprise that cuts will have to be made”, he said. “This is the morning after the night before.”

“For Cambridge to continue to be a major protagonist on the international stage, it is imperative that politicians are committed to supporting world-class research institutions.”

 

Secondly, in The Times:I couldn’t bring myself to join the CU Conservative Association because they were such braying, cravat-wearing, port-gargling, social-networking prats.”

Personally, I’m rather pleased.

Poetry corner 1

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

“The Sons Of Martha”
by Rudyard Kipling (1865-1936)
from “The Years Between” (1919)

The Sons of Mary seldom bother, for they have inherited that good part;
But the Sons of Martha favour their Mother of the careful soul and the troubled heart.
And because she lost her temper once, and because she was rude to the Lord her Guest,
Her Sons must wait upon Mary’s Sons, world without end, reprieve, or rest.

It is their care in all the ages to take the buffet and cushion the shock.
It is their care that the gear engages; it is their care that the switches lock.
It is their care that the wheels run truly; it is their care to embark and entrain,
Tally, transport, and deliver duly the Sons of Mary by land and main.

They say to mountains “Be ye removèd.” They say to the lesser floods “Be dry.”
Under their rods are the rocks reprovèd—they are not afraid of that which is high.
Then do the hill-tops shake to the summit—then is the bed of the deep laid bare,
That the Sons of Mary may overcome it, pleasantly sleeping and unaware.

They finger Death at their gloves’ end where they piece and repiece the living wires.
He rears against the gates they tend: they feed him hungry behind their fires.
Early at dawn, ere men see clear, they stumble into his terrible stall,
And hale him forth like a haltered steer, and goad and turn him till evenfall.

To these from birth is Belief forbidden; from these till death is Relief afar.
They are concerned with matters hidden—under the earthline their altars are—
The secret fountains to follow up, waters withdrawn to restore to the mouth,
And gather the floods as in a cup, and pour them again at a city’s drouth.

They do not preach that their God will rouse them a little before the nuts work loose.
They do not preach that His Pity allows them to drop their job when they damn-well choose.
As in the thronged and the lighted ways, so in the dark and the desert they stand,
Wary and watchful all their days that their brethren’s ways may be long in the land.

Raise ye the stone or cleave the wood to make a path more fair or flat;
Lo, it is black already with the blood some Son of Martha spilled for that!
Not as a ladder from earth to Heaven, not as a witness to any creed,
But simple service simply given to his own kind in their common need.

And the Sons of Mary smile and are blessèd—they know the Angels are on their side.
They know in them is the Grace confessèd, and for them are the Mercies multiplied.
They sit at the feet—they hear the Word—they see how truly the Promise runs.
They have cast their burden upon the Lord, and—the Lord He lays it on Martha’s Sons!

Representing the Party

Tuesday, December 29th, 2009

A Daily Mirror journalist tries to serve George Osborne some champagne so they can take a photo of him portraying him as a “toff”. Someone asks candidates in an OUCA election to tell the most “inappropriate” joke they know, attracting masses of negative media coverage. The Party is forced to expel a Conservative at another university after bad publicity when someone draws a moustache on him and takes a photo. Someone else is expelled for their facebook quotations wall.

It’s very easy to get caught out nowadays, especially with websites like facebook, and opponents deliberately trying to create negative stories about the Conservatives. Seemingly innocous comments, sometimes months old, can attract disproportionate media attention without warning. Even with very high privacy settings on facebook, it is possible for photos and comments to escape into the public domain.

Be careful not to do something you might regret, even if it seems harmless at the time. And if you feel a situation is developing that might end unpleasantly, make sure it is stopped as quickly as possible.

(I might point out , following coverage of this post in Hugh Muir’s enlightened column in the Guardian, that “Views expressed are those of the poster, not the Association or Party”. – CW.)

Merry Christmas

Friday, December 25th, 2009

“The Burning Babe”
by Robert Southwell (1561-1595)
from “St. Peter’s Complaint” (1595)

As I in hoary winter’s night stood shivering in the snow,
Surprised I was with sudden heat which made my heart to glow ;
And lifting up a fearful eye to view what fire was near,
A pretty babe all burning bright did in the air appear ;
Who, scorchëd with excessive heat, such floods of tears did shed
As though his floods should quench his flames which with his tears were fed.
Alas, quoth he, but newly born in fiery heats I fry,
Yet none approach to warm their hearts or feel my fire but I !
My faultless breast the furnace is, the fuel wounding thorns,
Love is the fire, and sighs the smoke, the ashes shame and scorns ;
The fuel justice layeth on, and mercy blows the coals,
The metal in this furnace wrought are men’s defilëd souls,
For which, as now on fire I am to work them to their good,
So will I melt into a bath to wash them in my blood.
With this he vanished out of sight and swiftly shrunk away,
And straight I callëd unto mind that it was Christmas day.

Labour: civil liberties are “middle class”

Tuesday, December 1st, 2009

“John”:

“Anyone who thinks these trifling ‘civil liberties’ issues are worth not voting Labour for is a selfish prick, frankly. We shouldn’t pander to them.”

“ID cards are a complete waste of money. My point was just that you’d have to be a moron to think that they were a legitimate reason not to vote Labour, morally speaking.”

George Owers, head of the Labour Club:

“Well, I think John has a point, in that anyone who votes purely on the basis of civil liberties clearly can afford to – middle class people who basically don’t have to struggle for their daily existence can afford the luxury of voting on such a basis. I also think that some of the civil liberties stuff is grossly exaggerated – the degree of scaremongering is unbelievable. This is not to deny that there are some legitimate worries, but the idea, so often trotted out by the civil liberties brigade, that we’re living in a ‘Police State’ etc is an insult to people who really do live under authoritarian regimes.”

John:

“ASB [anti-social behaviour] is far more important than any amount of databases and 90-days detentions, and if people can’t see that, well they’re not Labour people.”

Indeed.

Now my advice for those who die –
Declare the pennies on your eyes

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table
At which he’s fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for peanuts
Anyway!

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers.
If he cries
Tax his tears.

Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won’t be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers,
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He’s good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he’s laid.

Put these words
upon his tomb,
“Taxes drove me to my doom…”

When he’s gone,
Do not relax,
It’s time to apply
The inheritance tax.

List of UK taxes

  • Income Tax
  • Value Added Tax
  • National Insurance
  • National Insurance Employers Contribution
  • Corporation Tax
  • Council Tax
  • Business Rates
  • Capital Gains Tax
  • Stamp Duty Land Tax
  • Stamp Duty Reserve Tax
  • Inheritance Tax
  • Alcohol Duty
  • Tobacco Duty
  • Hydrocarbon Oils Duty
  • Air Passenger Duty
  • Climate Change Levy
  • Aggregates Levy
  • Gambling Duties (Bingo Duty, Gaming Duty, General Betting Duty, Amusement Machine Licence Duty, Pool Betting Duty and Lottery Duty)
  • Insurance Premium tax
  • Landfill Tax
  • Petroleum Revenue Tax
  • Tonnage Tax
  • Vehicle Excise Duty
  • Vehicle First Registration Fee

“Taxes! upon every article which enters the mouth, or covers the back, or is placed under the foot—taxes upon everything which is pleasant to see, hear, feel, smell, or taste—taxes upon warmth, light, and locomotion—taxes on everything on earth and the waters under the earth— on everything that comes from abroad, or is grown at home—taxes on the raw material—taxes on every fresh value that is added to it by the industry of man—taxes on the sauce which pampers man’s appetite, and the drug that restores him to health—on the ermine which decorates the judge, and the rope which hangs the criminal—on the poor man’s salt, and the rich man’s spice—on the brass nails of the coffin, and the ribands of the bride—at bed or board, couchant or levant, we must pay.—The schoolboy whips his taxed top—the beardless youth manages his taxed horse, with a taxed bridle on a taxed road: —and the dying Englishman, pouring his medicine, which has paid 7 per cent., into a spoon that has paid 15 per cent.,—flings himself upon his chintz bed, which has paid 22 per cent.,—and expires in the arms of an apothecary who has paid a license of a hundred pounds for the privilege of putting him to death. His whole property is then immediately taxed from 2 to 10 per cent. Besides the probate, large fees are demanded for burying him in the chancel; his virtues are handed down to posterity on taxed marble; and he is then gathered to his fathers, —to be taxed no more.”
(Sydney Smith, Edinburgh Review, 1820)

Taxes in this country are too high and too complicated. Gordon Brown claimed that “the UK is best placed to weather the economic climate”, and that the recession will be over by Christmas. But in fact the UK economy is still in recession, unlike the US where the economy is now growing. (The Mirror’s ludicrous take on this is “Gordon Brown will be pleased Britain helped US out of recession”.) Japan, China, Germany and France are already growing again. Britain is now the world’s sixth largest economy. It used to be the fifth, but has been overtaken by Italy. They are still in recession too, which does not bode well for us. In 2000 the UK economy was 35 per cent larger than Italy’s. Under Labour, the UK economy has been suffering slow sclerotisation. Growth has been lower than it could have been, and as a result we are falling behind.

Yesterday I identified one factor contributing to slow growth: regulation.

Taxes are another.

Taxes disincentivise work. If you tax income, people will start to value leisure time more than work, and will work less. If you tax production (VAT), there will be less production. If you tax jobs (National Insurance), there will be fewer jobs. The left are happy to admit that taxes on tobacco and alcohol reduce their consumption, but for some reason they have difficulty accepting that this principle also applies to work, production and jobs.

Taxes make work more difficult. Taxes are a form of regulation, and have all the problems of regulations explained yesterday. You have to know them: you have to know what they are and how they work. They are fiendishly complicated. You have to navigate through a dense thicket of taxes and tax law before you can start a business. Or you have to hire expensive accountants and lawyers. All this has immense costs to the UK economy.

KPMG carried out an audit of the UK tax system in 2006. They found that its complication places immense burdens on UK businesses. “Some businesses commented that they are actually discouraged from conducting international trade because of the challenges faced by complying with Customs requirements.”; “This is a complex form (with over 54 boxes covering the different uses of the declaration; businesses only need to complete the boxes relevant to the shipment in question).”; “some businesses do unnecessary work believing that it is required.”; “government is constrained by the fact that 80% of the VAT burden is derived from EU legislation with no domestic discretion.”; “the large number of notifications and information retention requirements”; “the very complex range of schemes for particular types of business”; “the high degree of complexity in relation to the number of schemes that HMRC have made available in an attempt to make the VAT requirements simpler for small business. Small businesses must still familiarise themselves with a lot of information in order to make a decision on the best approach. Interview feedback indicates that they will often make that decision on the basis of what means least tax to pay, rather than an administrative saving”; “complexity (perceived or actual) of the various returns and supplementary pages, Income Tax returns [for businesses] are often outsourced and hence there are very high external costs”.

According to LexisNexis, publishers of Tolley’s Yellow Tax Handbook, the UK now has the longest tax code in the world. The 1997 handbook was 4,998 pages in two volumes. The 2009 handbook is 11,520 pages long over four volumes. It would have been five volumes and many more pages if they had not reduced the font size. Even the experts at Tolley’s find tax law “bewildering”.

Again, as detailed yesterday, burdens are greatest on small businesses. And we mustn’t forget the monetary burden as well as the administrative burden. Taxation reduces the profitability of ventures, so some ventures never get started in the first place.

Taxes are too complicated and too high for ordinary people, too — not just for businesses. The tax credits system creates marginal tax rates in some cases as high as over 100%. Someone with no job and a marginal tax rate of over 100% is never going to start a job even if they wanted to. It is not worth working 40 hours a week if it will reduce your income! Who would work 40 hours at a negative wage per hour? Marginal tax rates of 70% or more on the poor are common. Clearly, this disincentivises work, keeping people in poverty. So does the low level at which taxation kicks in. Even someone working only 20 hours per week, on minimum wage, still pays tax. It seems rather odd, given that the minimum wage is supposed to lift people out of poverty, that the state then taxes them back into poverty.

We can tell taxes are too high because they are not maximising revenue. As taxation increases, each additional increase raises proportionally less revenue. Once taxation gets beyond a certain point, each additional increase actually reduces revenue. The government’s proposal to raise the top rate of income tax to 50% will do this. (In fact, because of the withdrawal of the personal allowance, the marginal rate of tax is 60%.) The Institute of Fiscal Studies reckons the move will lose the government about £1 billion in revenue, even on optimistic projections. The total decrease in revenue could well be greater than that.

High taxes not only reduce the absolute amount of tax paid by the rich. They also reduce the percentage of government revenues from the rich. In the US, lower taxes have increased the percentage paid by the rich as well as the amount. The US has a more progressive tax system than the UK. Revenue will increase if UK taxes are cut. It will decrease further if they are raised.

Taxation doesn’t just reduce revenue. It also reduces work. Read these stunning letters — so many of them — about people deciding to scale back their work because of high tax rates. Doctors deciding to treat fewer patients, for example.

Many firms are leaving the UK because of high personal taxation and high regulation. Gradual tax reductions to a flat tax of 20% with a high personal allowance could attract them back and more. Countries like Georgia and Dubai deliberately have very low tax rates to attract business. They know they will raise more revenue in the long run. Whereas the UK both encourages firms to leave the country or to spend lots of money hiring accountants and lawyers to examine whether they should leave the country.

It’s not enough to cut taxes. On its own, that would just increase the amount the government borrows. They are already borrowing over £10 billion per month, and this will probably never be paid off.

Spending must be cut too. Even if “the rich” were taxed 100%, it would still raise nowhere near enough to fund the current expenditures of the British state.

Leftism is inherently short term. They want high spending now, even if this requires huge amounts of debt and reduced long-term prosperity. Lower taxes would cause massive wealth creation and increase prosperity for a variety of reasons. And in the long run there would be more wealth for the government to tax.

If we want a dynamic economy, taxes must be cut. If we want to stop taxing the poor, spending must be cut.

Let me tell you how it will be,
There’s one for you, nineteen for me.
Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don’t take it all.
Don’t ask me what I want it for,
If you don’t want to pay some more.

(If you drive a car) I’ll tax the street;
(If you try to sit) I’ll tax your seat;
(If you get too cold) I’ll tax the heat;
(If you take a walk) I’ll tax your feet.

‘Cos I’m the Taxman,
Yeah yeah, I’m the Taxman,
And you’re working for no one but me.

Deregulation

Monday, November 2nd, 2009

Often, when someone advocates deregulation, the response is something like “But without regulations, there’d be nothing to stop Tobias McCapitalist feeding starving child workers into his Raddling Nancy!”

Clearly, some regulations are good. But most are awful.

Here’s an example. The Housing Act 2004 defines a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) as one inhabited by three or more tenants forming two or more households. All HMOs must be registered with the local council — for a fee (£500/unit or more is common).

In certain circumstances, every room must have its own basin. Even if there are already plenty of wash basins in the house. Even if the residents complain when they are installed, because they take up a useful corner of a room.

Bedrooms may not be smaller than 6.5m2. One landlord owned an HMO where one of the bedrooms was smaller than this. It was the only room in the house with a waiting list. The current tenant was happy paying less, and three other tenants had asked about moving into it: one wanted to save up to go travelling, another was going back into full-time student education and wanted to avoid going into debt, and a third only wanted a bed-sit to use three nights a week.

But now the room can’t be rented at all. The tenant now has to live in a more expensive room. These regulations force up costs for landlords and rents for tenants. They inconvenience landlords and tenants alike.

It is easy to see how many of these regulations were intended to protect the vulnerable. But it is also easy to see that the costs of the regulations outweigh the benefits by miles, and easily can and do harm the very people they were intended to protect.

Regulations intended to protect employees, by making it harder to fire them, have the unintended consequence of incentivising employers not to hire them in the first place. Like the minimum wage, they cause unemployment: they protect those with jobs, but stop plenty of people getting jobs at all. They encourage the replacement of labour with capital.

There’s a chilling effect caused by regulation, too. You have to read it. You have to read reams and reams of regulations to make sure you comply with them. Or hire a lawyer. Many people simply decide not to bother, reducing the amount of economic activity that would otherwise occur. Many people don’t even look at the regulations: they just assume that regulation will prevent them from whatever enterprise they might have considered. It’s a reasonable default assumption: with so many hundreds of thousands of regulations, it’s more than likely that at least one will prevent you doing business.

It’s so difficult to start a business and employ people nowadays — there are so many regulations you have to know — that many people, who would be otherwise perfectly capable of running a sound business, cannot do so. Everybody loses: the businessman, the would-be customers, the would-be employees who never get hired, even the tax-man!

Government regulation has the same effect on the economy that molasses has on an engine: it slows everything down. The more hoops one has to jump through in order to start a new venture — permits, licenses, taxes, fees, mandates, building codes, zoning restrictions, you name it — the fewer new ventures will be started. And the least affluent will be hurt the most. The richest corporations can afford to jump through the hoops — they have money to pay the fees and lawyers to figure out the regulations. Small businesses have a tougher time, and so are at a competitive disadvantage. For the poor, starting a business is close to impossible. So the system favors the rich over the middle class, and the middle class over the poor.” Regulation protects big companies from competition, encouraging corporatism, not capitalism. Regulatory capture is also a concern.

In Russia, there are 54 bureaucratic hurdles to overcome before you can build a warehouse in Moscow, many with associated fees. The costs constitute a significant proportion of the value of a project, and these are just the official costs.

It is fascinating to see how complicated regulation can make the building of a simple shed. “If anyone wants to know why Russia remains poor despite a well educated population possessing impressive technical skills, looking at how long it takes to complete a simple construction project and what is involved is a good place to start looking.” Similarly, in “The Mystery of Capital” Hernando de Soto identifies lengthy and overly-bureaucratic application processes as one of the major factors in explaining why the Third World is so poor (the principal reason is the lack of secure property rights).

The problem is not just the onerousness of contacting the officials and paying the fees, but also the fact that you have to know who to contact or what your obligations are in the first place. The costs are borne by the whole of society as lower productivity and lower living standards.

Eamonn Butler gives another example at the Adam Smith Institute:

But what has made the banks so big and bloated? Regulation is the answer. Lots and lots of it. Regulators crawl over every aspect of a bank’s operation, right down to how quickly they answer the phone. It costs a fortune. You cannot run a bank without hiring a huge compliance team to keep you within in the rules. So smaller banks cannot survive, and have to merge to create bigger banks. Bigger, less competitive, more profligate banks. Yes, this is entirely a problem of government’s own making. And if the government is being forced to break up the banks, it should lighten the regulatory burden on them at the same time. Otherwise, they will not survive.

Or as Tim Worstall says, “there are only so many tens of thousands of pages of regulations and directives that a three man company can read through before we decide to flee the Continent.”

We need a bonfire of regulations, and regulations with automatic expiry dates. That way, they will have to be re-legislated when they expire. If anyone still wants them, that is. This system would help to mitigate the unforeseen and unintended consequences of regulation.

The advocates of regulation are making the classic error of seeing only “That Which is Seen”, and ignoring “That Which is Not Seen”. Regulation may have apparent benefits, but it has hidden costs. And all too often it has no benefits at all.

Privatise the post

Wednesday, October 28th, 2009

Postal strikes begin tomorrow.

As a result of the strikes, Royal Mail have lost several lucrative contracts. Customers switch from Royal Mail during strikes, and plenty of them don’t switch back. It used to be fax machine sales that jumped during strikes — and people still used them after the strikes were over. Now scanner sales are up 25%. It is just like when Paris Metro, fed up with strikes, decided to replace train drivers with robots.

The strikers are shooting themselves in feet. They are sowing the seeds of their own destruction. Instead of getting higher wages, the workers may just end up unemployed. It is a sad thing when an unsound company is driven into the ground by above-market wage demands.

Of course, this is the problem. Royal Mail wages aren’t set by the market. In competitive markets, wages are also set by the market. But where there is only one big state-owned company, wages have to be set by “national pay deals” and the like.

So you might say to the strikers: fair enough. If the only way you can raise your wages is to lobby the government, then you’ll have to lobby the government. But surely we should instead change the system so that their wages are set by the market. Then they wouldn’t have to go on strike. Private companies suffer far less from strikes that state-owned companies. And when they do, you can use someone else. Unions flourish in the public sector where competition is not allowed: they are rent seekers out for a cut of the monopoly profit.

The proposed privatisation of Royal Mail is really a distraction. If we had competition, it wouldn’t matter who owned Royal Mail.

Currently, any firm can collect and distribute post, but Royal Mail has a monopoly on the delivery of all post weighing less than 350 grams or costing less than £1 to send. Other firms must turn post over to Royal Fail for delivery (the “last mile”). Far from being “completely deregulated”, the postal market is only “somewhat deregulated”. It’s not enough.

Royal Mail’s monopoly must be ended.

The Universal Service Obligation could be maintained to placate subsidised voters living in remote places. The government could simply insist that new firms could only enter the market if they also fulfilled the Universal Service Obligation.

(A few final points: Royal Mail should not be confused with the Post Office. Planning laws should be relaxed to allow competitors to build post boxes. And while privatisation of Royal Mail is not necessary, the money it raised would help pay off the government’s debt.)