Jonathan Calder points us to a fascinatingly revealing quote from Gideon Osborne:
“Of course we want a very dynamic and successful City of London. But Britain cannot just be the City of London and then 50-odd million people living off the back of those who work in financial services.”
This line has clearly been carefully crafted to simultaneously look like a genuine concern for the poor, while making it absolutely clear to the city that the Tories not only are not having a go at it, but consider it to be the main source of wealth. According to this rubric, a speculator who has been profiteering on the selling on of financial products based on unsecured loans to the poorest in society is creating wealth, while someone who works a 48 hour week in a factory (longer, if Gideon and John Redwood have anything to do with it) is a parasite. The conclusion is that the rich City stoke broker must pay less tax while the “recipient” (i.e. everyone else) should be prepared to make up the shortfall.
This really is the world turned upside down. I’m looking forward to the Jock Coats response.
Come off it James.
Firstly – it sounds to me more like a criticism of the current welfare state and the dependency culture it has developed not some attack on people who work hard being parasites.
Secondly – speculator who has been profiteering on the selling on of financial products based on unsecured loans to the poorest in society is creating wealth – where did this come from? The people who make the loan lose money if you can’t pay it back so I doubt they’re making much money from it.
Thirdly – The conclusion is that the rich City stoke broker must pay less tax while the “recipient†(i.e. everyone else) should be prepared to make up the shortfall. – Where does that come from? Nothing suggests that. They want to reduce the regulatory burden on business – that’s great. Especially for small business. Have I missed them announce big tax cuts for the rich and rises for the poor?
Point one:”50-odd million people” live off welfare in the UK? In this universe? Come back to Earth and read what he actually said.
Point two: that depends entirely on at what point he sold on. No-one is proposing to tax non-profits, but there are a lot of profits to be made selling on debt – just don’t be the one who ends up owning it if it defaults.
Point three: see my above post. The proposals announced in Redwood’s paper today are ALL about lowering taxes for the rich and relatively well off.