Corbyn economics backed

Status
Not open for further replies.
AlpineExile said:
Have you got a linkie to a quote from Corbyn where he says that? cos all I can find is stuff like this [from the BBC]:

<< Critics, including Labour's current shadow chancellor Chris Leslie, say this would lead to higher inflation and interest rates, with the poorest households paying the price. Mr Leslie also questions Mr Corbyn's claim that £120bn could be recovered from tax avoidance and evasion. >>
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell the £120bn figure was first mentioned in Corbyn's economic policy document which is itself is a quote of Richard Murphy;

A detailed analysis last year produced by Richard Murphy suggests that the government is missing out on nearly £120 billion in tax revenues, per year.
Click to expand...

and

The £120bn figure is made up from:
• about £20bn in tax debt, uncollected by HMRC which continues to suffer budget and staffing cuts (only partially reversed in the last Budget)
• another £20bn in tax avoidance
• and a further £80bn in tax evasion.
Click to expand...

It doesn't say that all of the money is recoverable just that we are losing it, as mentioned above, Richard Murphy estimates £20bn may be recoverable. The figure has then been widely misquoted by every bugger as £120bn that will be recovered or in the case of a clown from the Times as a £100bn gap in Corbyn's economic policy.
 


Inkman said:
As far as I can tell the £120bn figure was first mentioned in Corbyn's economic policy document which is itself is a quote of Richard Murphy;



and



It doesn't say that all of the money is recoverable just that we are losing it, as mentioned above, Richard Murphy estimates £20bn may be recoverable. The figure has then been widely misquoted by every bugger as £120bn that will be recovered or in the case of a clown from the Times as a £100bn gap in Corbyn's economic policy.
Click to expand...
You should also quote this bit:

<< Another option would be to strip out some of the huge tax reliefs and subsidies on offer to the corporate sector. These amount to £93 billion a year - money which would be better used in direct public investment, which in turn would give a stimulus to private sector supply chains. >>
 
Inkman said:
What irritates people is that the majority of government and media attention goes on cracking down on benefit fraud when tax evasions and avoidance loopholes cost the country much more than fraud. By a factor of ten iirc using HMRC figures. The actual figure for evasion, avoidance and uncollected tax might be closer to forty times that lost to benefit fraud and over payments.

Benefit fraud is wrong and should be cracked down upon, nobody will argue against that, what people will argue about is how the government prioritises combating fraud and evasion.
Click to expand...
They should be doing stuff like this:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...nationals-and-tax-evaders-in-budget-crackdown
 
AlpineExile said:
You should also quote this bit:

<< Another option would be to strip out some of the huge tax reliefs and subsidies on offer to the corporate sector. These amount to £93 billion a year - money which would be better used in direct public investment, which in turn would give a stimulus to private sector supply chains. >>
Click to expand...

Why?

If it was relevant to your question I might have quoted it, you asked for a link, I gave you a link.

Market Where? said:
They should be doing stuff like this:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...nationals-and-tax-evaders-in-budget-crackdown
Click to expand...

Yes, they should be doing that and well done to Osborne for doing it but there is much more they could be doing, reversing the cuts to HMRC staff and budgets would be a great start.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Inkman said:
Can't say I've noticed may people actually arguing against investigating benefit fraud, though I've seen plenty of people arguing about the balance of investigation / coverage between the two.
Click to expand...

Most of the comments I have seen fail to condemn benefit fraud,frequently using tax evasion as some sort of excuse,when both are wrong and separate issues.
 
Inkman said:
Why?

If it was relevant to your question I might have quoted it, you asked for a link, I gave you a link.



Yes, they should be doing that and well done to Osborne for doing it but there is much more they could be doing, reversing the cuts to HMRC staff and budgets would be a great start.
Click to expand...
Cos many [most?] people seem to be thinking that that's part of the 120 billion when it's actually additional.
 
Voice of fair play said:
Most of the comments I have seen fail to condemn benefit fraud,frequently using tax evasion as some sort of excuse,when both are wrong and separate issues.
Click to expand...
Really? Most I've seen simply dislike the demonisation of one group of criminals and not another. They also get frustrated at the perception of being on benefits as somehow swinging the lead. And they also like to point out that one costs far more than the other.
 
Randy Ostrich said:
Really? Most I've seen simply dislike the demonisation of one group of criminals and not another. They also get frustrated at the perception of being on benefits as somehow swinging the lead. And they also like to point out that one costs far more than the other.
Click to expand...

As I said mate both wrong IMO,not sure where they is a link or why people make that comparison.

Already said tax evasion worse.
 
redandwhiterob said:
Probably because your average worker sees benifit fraud by people on a day to day basis
Click to expand...
This cant be possible as fraud rates are usually said to be about 0.5%. Your average worker is obviously lying to support the tories.

I believe there is also an interesting point that is usually not discussed in the benefit fiddlers/tax avoidance argument - not one that I agree totally with mind. Tax is money that an individual or company has earned whereas benefits are not - indeed they are funded from tax on others earnings. And yes I do get the point that tax pays for infrastructure that allows individuals and companies to make money in the first place. Secondly there is some evidence - Norway as an example - that people taking the piss on benefits has some impact on tax avoidance/evasion. If you think you are getting ripped off - or if you like the social covenant is broken - then you are less likely to want to pay. I don't think the reverse is true - people take the piss on benefits because of tax avoidance/evasion.
 
Market Where? said:
This cant be possible as fraud rates are usually said to be about 0.5%. Your average worker is obviously lying to support the tories.

I believe there is also an interesting point that is usually not discussed in the benefit fiddlers/tax avoidance argument - not one that I agree totally with mind. Tax is money that an individual or company has earned whereas benefits are not - indeed they are funded from tax on others earnings. And yes I do get the point that tax pays for infrastructure that allows individuals and companies to make money in the first place. Secondly there is some evidence - Norway as an example - that people taking the piss on benefits has some impact on tax avoidance/evasion. If you think you are getting ripped off - or if you like the social covenant is broken - then you are less likely to want to pay. I don't think the reverse is true - people take the piss on benefits because of tax avoidance/evasion.
Click to expand...

The problem with official figures such as the 0.5% quote,does not always show the real problem.

For example people caught speeding on the A19 will be relatively low percentage wise,however that does not mean everyone else is driving under 70mph.
 
Voice of fair play said:
The problem with official figures such as the 0.5% quote,does not always show the real problem.

For example people caught speeding on the A19 will be relatively low percentage wise,however that does not mean everyone else is driving under 70mph.
Click to expand...
I agree. And even worse if you say we don't need police patrols on the A19 because there is such a small number of people caught it would bring your whole argument into disrepute.

I have no idea why we have to have this confrontational all or nothing politics. Wouldn't it be much better to say yes there are a significant number of people taking the piss on benefits - now can we discuss the best approach. And that approach might be to do nothing as the return on investment is not worth it - you would have to carry out a proper holistic analysis mind taking into account such things as potential impact on tax avoidance.
 
tiptoad said:
When supposed Labour supporters use terminology such as "politics of envy", which is straight off every Tory's crib sheet, then the party has a serious problem. And that problem isn't Jeremy Corbyn.
Click to expand...

The Labour Party's biggest problem is not from within its own organisation, its with the English electorate who have since the mid 1970's rejected socialism. I don't see that changing any time soon, the reason there is a Tory government is because Milliband was an unelectable wishy washy liberal lefty, why would they vote in a 1970's style hard left pensioner who associates with Republican terrorist sympathisers, nut job anti-Semitics and has a soft spot for Vladimir Putin?
 
danbob said:
The Labour Party's biggest problem is not from within its own organisation, its with the English electorate who have since the mid 1970's rejected socialism. I don't see that changing any time soon, the reason there is a Tory government is because Milliband was an unelectable wishy washy liberal lefty, why would they vote in a 1970's style hard left pensioner who associates with Republican terrorist sympathisers, nut job anti-Semitics and has a soft spot for Vladimir Putin?
Click to expand...
I like his hat.
 
danbob said:
The Labour Party's biggest problem is not from within its own organisation, its with the English electorate who have since the mid 1970's rejected socialism. I don't see that changing any time soon, the reason there is a Tory government is because Milliband was an unelectable wishy washy liberal lefty, why would they vote in a 1970's style hard left pensioner who associates with Republican terrorist sympathisers, nut job anti-Semitics and has a soft spot for Vladimir Putin?
Click to expand...
Revisionist agenda ridden Bollocks. Were you asleep from 1997 until 2010 ?
Logon or register to see this image
Logon or register to see this image

 
danbob said:
The Labour Party's biggest problem is not from within its own organisation, its with the English electorate who have since the mid 1970's rejected socialism. I don't see that changing any time soon, the reason there is a Tory government is because Milliband was an unelectable wishy washy liberal lefty, why would they vote in a 1970's style hard left pensioner who associates with Republican terrorist sympathisers, nut job anti-Semitics and has a soft spot for Vladimir Putin?
Click to expand...
Logon or register to see this image
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top