Imagine for
a moment that there is a big, important job that needs doing. It’s not going to
be easy and will take quite a lot of time, effort and commitment. The job is
offered to two different people. They both outwardly express a willingness to
take on the responsibility and get the work done, but their approach and
attitude varies considerably.
Person A
(can’t think of a better name but ‘Selfie Feet’ randomly springs to mind) makes
their offer in this way:
“If I take
on this job then I will immediately pass the buck and ensure that the real work
is done by somebody else. Many people will be relying on me to do the job
competently, and many will lose out when I don’t, but I don’t really care about
this. The only thing that matters is that if things go well I can, by a
vicarious sleight of hand, claim all the credit for myself, whereas if things
go badly I will quite reasonably blame someone else. It’s all about having the
opportunity to scapegoat as far as I’m concerned.”
Person B on
the other hand (any number of names would work, but not Theresa, Boris or Dave.
Definitely not those) has this to say:
“I’ll take
on this job and take on all the responsibility for it. I’ll need some help and
support from others, but hopefully once the job is done those same people will
benefit from it. And when the work’s been completed you’ll have the chance to
judge for yourself whether or not I did a good job.”
Who would
you have more respect for? Who would you prefer to give the job to? It seems
pretty clear to me that A is all about the image and the kudos, whereas B is
willing to put his/her head above the parapet, get the job done and take
responsibility for the outcome.
Lately I’ve
had taxes on my mind (it’s all rock and roll at our house, believe me). They’ve
been on my mind all the more since reading this excellent article in The
Guardian. The Conservative party want to convince us all that tax is a burden
and should be reduced as much as possible. They are proposing cutting
corporation tax to 17%, which would be one of the lowest rates in the developed
world. I think I have a basic grasp of the ideology: low tax rates are needed
to attract and keep the entrepreneurs, innovators, wealth-creators and
money-makers whose work benefits us all and whose absence would plunge Britain
into a Third-World state of poverty and despair.
The problem
is, it just doesn’t seem to be true. As the Guardian article makes clear, the
wealthiest Swedes are not leaving their country in droves despite having a top
income tax rate of 60%, because they understand that this gives them great
state welfare and ensures that future generations receive a great education. In
Germany (where their economy is even bigger than Britain’s which has THE FIFTH
LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD DIDN’T YOU KNOW!!!) the rate is 30%, and their
infrastructure is the envy of Europe.
So why does
the Conservative party persist with this myth that tax is a bad thing? Why keep
arguing and arguing that higher tax rates don’t bring any benefits when they quite
clearly do, in all sorts of different ways?
Honestly I
can think of only one explanation: like Person A, they just want to duck the
responsibility. They want to be able to blame someone else when it all goes
wrong.
Take the NHS
as one example. When the whole thing is privatised and the childish, immature
notion of providing good healthcare for everyone regardless of their income has
finally been put to bed, the Conservatives will quite legitimately be able to
blame other people for any mishaps or mistakes. “Don’t blame us!” they’ll say.
“You don’t pay us any tax for this
anymore! Talk to your provider. Talk to your insurance company. It’s all their fault.”
Similar
things would happen in education. When we have nothing but free-schools and
academy chains (and I’m very suspicious that the savage cuts are a backdoor
attempt to continue the policy of getting rid of all state schools) then the
government of the day will absolve themselves of all responsibility for
educational standards. Shrink the state and you shrink its accountability too.
A braver
government would not cut taxes. A more courageous, caring and forward-thinking
government would, like Person B, say to its citizens: “We’re not passing the
buck to anyone. Give us the money to do these things for you, then judge us by
the results. If you don’t like what you get, then vote for someone else.”
There are
lots of things to consider when we vote on June 8th. A vote for the
Conservatives would, in my view, be a mistake. And one of many reasons for that
is their ongoing refusal to have the guts to take responsibility.
Hi Joe, I agree with your sentiments, we have been thinking about taxes recently in our house. We have to give incomes for our working family tax credit ( theoretically a good idea) so we sit down and systematically work through the numbers and then listen to green sleeves for about 20 minutes on hold, once we get through, we patiently tell the person our precise numbers. About a week later they send us a payment schedule through with totally incorrect data, it took over a year to sort it out last time....
ReplyDeleteSounds infuriating Rob! Currently engaged in my own battle to try and get HMRC to pay me back some money that I'm convinced they owe me. Watch this space...
DeleteI guess there are always going to be frustrations with the practicalities of collecting tax. I'm more concerned with the principle of it, to be honest. I don't really understand why many on the right of the political spectrum view it as a bad thing when we clearly reap benefits from paying it.
Thanks for commenting.