Just how long is it since we saw Polly T make an interesting point?

Polly Toynbee gives us the list of things that the current government really just must do. The argument is that they know they’re fried come the next election so why not just do all the things that must be done but cannot be because they’ll lose you the next election. If you’re gonna get fried anyway why not do the things you know should be done?

Which is, in itself, an interesting commentary upon politics and democracy. They’re a bar to doing the right things which therefore means that we should use democracy and elections sparingly as a method of getting things not done. Gralloch the state of the power to insist things are left undone that is. Well, yes. That’s the death knell for that idea of a truly democratic economy therefore.

But in more detail, this is a good point:

Offer the public government bonds at lower than market rate interest but with an incentive: bonds exempt from inheritance tax could entice an avalanche of buyers, raising billions more for public investment than would be lost in IHT. Growth needs heroic investment in housing, defence and renewable energy.

If people face lower taxes then they’ll invest more in the sort of things we want invested in. Seems logical enough to us, incentives matter after all. Of course, this is Polly, so she doesn’t take that next logical step which is that if we desire more investment then we should cut all the taxes upon investing, in having invested. A country attempting to increase investment needs to reduce taxation of capital and the returns to capital. As we say, this is Polly:

The government should signal the depth of this national crisis with a one-off wealth tax that could raise £160bn, a shock-and-awe levy that would be easier than a tricky annual tax.

Sigh. Increasing the taxation of having invested is not a known incentive to invest. But then, as we say, Polly. You can lead a Guardian columnist to logic but you cannot make them think.

Tim Worstall