CentreRight

With its 45p tax plans, New Labour is as dead as a dodo

Brown’s proposal to increase the top rate of income tax from 40 to 45% shows that he is retrenching into class warfare. As the severity of his self-induced economic crisis kicks in he realises that come the next general election the best he can hope for is his core vote. That motley lot now consists of the dogmatic extreme left and the scroungers who think it just that hardworking families pay for their lifestyle on benefits and TV. 

Brown wants to make the rich pay. He does not hesitate to ditch his previous claims to be the party of aspiration. If aspiration is helped and results in social mobility – the aim of Conservative policies – then everybody would be a potential top rate tax payer. Not so under Brown whose policies keep the little man firmly in place. Social mobility has substantially decreased under the socialists.

The 45% income tax would raise very little money - as even Denis Healey admitted in The Telegraph.  It proves that Brown’s intention has nothing to do with funding state coffers but everything with declaring class warfare. The rich rarely pay the top rate – because the amounts involved justify paying tax experts to reduce their tax bill. The only ones who will pay Brown’s 45% income tax are the middle classes. So Conservatives should feel encouraged: Brown’s tax promise proves that he has given up hope to win the middle class vote. New Labour is as dead as a dodo.

While Brown harks back to a nasty past Conservatives fight for a better future. Socialist re-distribute the pie; Conservatives make the pie grow. Tax cuts, reducing the size of government, cutting red tape, and re-introducing the free market will make everybody better off – as it has done in all times and in all places. Mass prosperity in peace instead of mass poverty in class warfare. The politics of aspiration versus the politics of envy.

One penny spent by the state is one penny not spent by you

Are you tired of world economy experts popping out of the woodwork all over the place, in particular at Christmas parties?  Dying to tell you what caused the crisis and how to solve it?

In fact the remedies for an economic crisis are distinctly old hat.  F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman told us how to tackle it.  Their principles are of a baffling simplicity – yet for the last months we have utterly failed to explain them.

Labour still believes that money grows on trees.  We know that it comes out of our pockets: a penny spent by the state is a penny we can’t spend.  State spending makes the economy grow, but at the same time contracts it as private spending is reduced.   As Milton Friedman said: “There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”.  A job created by the state is a job that will not be created in the private sector.  Over time Labour’s increased state spending results in a net loss of jobs.

Individuals are said to hide their savings under the mattress whereas we need a boost right now. Tomorrow’s tax rises will pay for today’s state spending.  Individuals do not save in order to exhibit coffers with bullion at their funeral.  Saving is postponed spending.  Individuals may hoard their pennies now, but will spend when trust returns.  Brown’s future tax rise promise will make them leave it under the mattress for longer.  Thanks to Brown the crisis will be prolonged.

Lads' mags and cigarettes: New Labour, new tyranny

Claire Curtis-Thomas MP (Labour) wants to ban teenagers from buying lads’ mags.   The Department of Health wants cigarettes to be sold under the counter.  According to Labour, the state knows best: you need to be protected from yourself.  The state must tell you what you can eat, smoke and read.

Lads’ mags sell more copies if a scantily dressed lady occupies the cover.  Less is more for the sales figures.  So age restrictions are proposed.  This may seem reasonable (= electorally beneficial) and this is why Lads’ Mags are targeted this time around.  But think about what would happen if we extended the logic.  Will Ms. Curtis-Tomas want to impose age restrictions on The Sun?  Are we really saying that whenever a breast is exposed for a bathroom advert the state censor should investigate with his magnifying glass to decide whether to issue a certificate 18 or PG?  House and Garden on the top shelf?

Restricting nudity is often done for the best of reasons:  some individuals might get ideas into their heads and go on to rape etc.  But actually, how many convictions have there been where the fact that the criminal in question bought lads’ mags was a material factor?  In the unlikely event where there were a few, that still doesn’t mean that the millions of others who never went on to commit any crime of that nature should be punished?  I could see the point of restricting some very extreme pornography, but lads’ mags?  Some tabloids’ comments may have fuelled some deranged individuals to commit homophobic or racist crimes.  But should we therefore have an age limit or a ban on tabloids?

The longitudinal axis of aubergines

Why should politics be dull? For a good laugh, I suggest you read European Union Commission Regulation 1292/81 of 12 May 1981.  It lays down the marketing standards for aubergines. You can find it here.

Allow me to wet your appetite. Thanks to the EU Regulation aubergines cannot have sun-scorching covering more than 4 cm2. I couldn’t ascertain whether British food inspectors have been issued with European rulers (satisfying the European Regulation on Rulers) to catch evil market traders who sell aubergines which transgress the threshold.

In addition, the allowed size of aubergines is measured by either the maximum diameter of the equatorial section on the longitudinal axis. The minimum diameter is fixed at 40 mm for elongated aubergines and 70 mm for globus aubergines. Aren’t we blessed with European civil servants who in examples like this show how much they have our best interests at heart? Not in our part of the world, undersized aubergines!

Some in Brussels have come to their senses and have proudly announced that for certain produce the exacting standards will be scrapped. Not to their full senses though: regulations for citrus fruit, apples, pears, strawberries, tomatoes etc. will remain in place. We have been reassured that bananas will have to remain “free from abnormal curvature” as no complaints have been received.  Do they read the press in Brussels?