Polly's Politburo

According to Polly Toynbee of the Guardian, we at the Adam Smith Institute are mistaken to question the amount we pay in tax. With disjointed logic, she suggests that we are not paying enough (some of us that is) and this impacts badly upon the poorest. It is a shame that she has not found the time to explore our website a bit further, as she may not have had to go to the trouble of writing the article.

At the Adam Smith Institute we call for the introduction of A Flat Tax for the UK. This proposal includes a tax-free personal allowance of £12,000 that will take the poorest out of the tax net. Also, a low flat tax will stimulate investment, make businesses more productive, and so boost jobs, pulling people out of poverty. The low-paid in work also benefit, for as more jobs are created and the demand for workers goes up, wages will rise.

However, Toynbee might well still disagree with us. In reality nothing short of full-blown Communism accords with Pollyland. Her statist utopia (dystopia) includes not a semblance of meritocracy or individual choice. She has no trust in the people to act for the good of themselves; this is why she and others in Polly's Politburo decide everything for us.

Toynbee fears that tax cuts will become a central policy for all three parties in the next election. Let's hope she is right…

Ah
written by Vindico, June 04, 2008

We all make the mistake of assuming she has a shred of commonly identifiable intellect. As yet science is not so advanced to prove the existence of any.

For some reason she believes that the state is benevolent, whereas we all know that, despite it not being the case, it is also impossible. The state, in undertaking to direct the values, judgments, and activity of individuals becomes malevolent, if only by unconscious result.

Hmm
written by Jenny S-T, June 04, 2008

Are the figures in her fourth paragraph all correct? Her figures, at least, seem mostly plausible, though I don't agree with all her logic.

What a surprise!
written by David, June 04, 2008

Or not. We all know that in Pollyland the utterly infallible, totally benevolent and completely efficient government always knows best, and that the poor ignorant drones can't be trusted to take any decisions, particularly on spending their own money.

...
written by PJF, June 05, 2008

I certainly agree with the Adam Smith Institute's call for a flat tax but it's interesting to note that Adam Smith himself appears to have supported something more akin to a progressive tax:

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion."

Shhh, don't tell Polly.

Written by Philip Salter
Wednesday, 04 June 2008
According to Polly Toynbee of the Guardian, we at the Adam Smith Institute are mistaken to question the amount we pay in tax. With disjointed logic, she suggests that we are not paying enough (some of us that is) and this impacts badly upon the poorest. It is a shame that she has not found the time to explore our website a bit further, as she may not have had to go to the trouble of writing the article. At the Adam Smith Institute we call for the introduction of A Flat Tax for the UK. This proposal includes a tax-free personal allowance of £12,000 that will take the poorest out of the tax net. Also, a low flat tax will stimulate investment, make businesses more productive, and so boost jobs, pulling people out of poverty. The low-paid in work also benefit, for as more jobs are created and the demand for workers goes up, wages will rise. However, Toynbee might well still disagree with us. In reality nothing short of full-blown Communism accords with Pollyland. Her statist utopia (dystopia) includes not a semblance of meritocracy or individual choice. She has no trust in the people to act for the good of themselves; this is why she and others in Polly's Politburo decide everything for us. Toynbee fears that tax cuts will become a central policy for all three parties in the next election. Let's hope she is right… Bookmark Comments (4) Subscribe to this comment's feed Ah written by Vindico, June 04, 2008 We all make the mistake of assuming she has a shred of commonly identifiable intellect. As yet science is not so advanced to prove the existence of any. For some reason she believes that the state is benevolent, whereas we all know that, despite it not being the case, it is also impossible. The state, in undertaking to direct the values, judgments, and activity of individuals becomes malevolent, if only by unconscious result. Hmm written by Jenny S-T, June 04, 2008 Are the figures in her fourth paragraph all correct? Her figures, at least, seem mostly plausible, though I don't agree with all her logic. What a surprise! written by David, June 04, 2008 Or not. We all know that in Pollyland the utterly infallible, totally benevolent and completely efficient government always knows best, and that the poor ignorant drones can't be trusted to take any decisions, particularly on spending their own money. ... written by PJF, June 05, 2008 I certainly agree with the Adam Smith Institute's call for a flat tax but it's interesting to note that Adam Smith himself appears to have supported something more akin to a progressive tax: "It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more in proportion." Shhh, don't tell Polly. Write comment This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment. Powered by Azrul's Jom Comment for Joomla!