Comments on: Tax, rap, Jews, boxes, hangovers, and that cunt Robert Kilroy-Silk

By: Chris B

Chris B — Sun, 24 Apr 2005 14:27:00 +0000

"It's somewhat more complicated than that. Essentially if you include NI contributions (and you should) we have a 0% rate, then a 21% rate, then a 33% rate, then bizarrely back down to a 23% rate, and then a 41% rate. "

This is making my point there is no rational reason for the different rates and the effect is quite odd, i.e. someone who starts to earn more than £30k experiences a lower marginal tax rate WTF?

By: Jimmy Doyle

Jimmy Doyle — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:08:00 +0000

That Bizzarre sure is out there.

By: Larry

Larry — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 11:37:00 +0000

"he might actually be one of David Icke's lizard people/aliens"

This is a compelling idea. However the only way to test it would be to dissect RKS and experiment on his internal organs. So let's do that.

By: Andrew Bartlett

Andrew Bartlett — Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:29:00 +0000

I e-mailed a mate the idea that RKS was a spoof. He replied:

"An interesting concept. Too much theatrical make-up though - a real actor wouldn't make that mistake. Because of this, I think he might actually be one of David Icke's lizard people/aliens. Think about it... If they got all their information about earth from tv broadcasts, how would they end up disguising themselves eh?"

By: sean

sean — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:00:00 +0000

Ta, John mate. Though actually I think Kilroy Silk adds to the gaiety of nations. Sean T!

By: Vicus Scurra

Vicus Scurra — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:05:00 +0000

I think the slogan "That cunt Kilroy Silk" is the most engaging that I have heard since the election was announced.
I recommend we all adopt the phrase "Vote for that cunt Kilroy Silk" forthwith.

By: Matthew Turner

Matthew Turner — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:56:00 +0000

"the step change from 22% to 40% is stupid"

It's somewhat more complicated than that. Essentially if you include NI contributions (and you should) we have a 0% rate, then a 21% rate, then a 33% rate, then bizarrely back down to a 23% rate, and then a 41% rate.

What I've never really understood about flat-tax advocates is why they insist on the tax-free allowance (and usually a hefty one). That removes the 'flatness'.

By: Larry

Larry — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:22:00 +0000

Is RKS in fact an Ali G type caricature? If so the actor who plays him should win an award. His election campaign launch looked hilariously deadpan – he just opened a copy of the Daily Mail and worked himself into a self-righteous fury about asylum seekers.

By: Scott Campbell at Blithering Bunny

Scott Campbell at Blithering Bunny — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:50:00 +0000

>If I die with a $10 million estate and want to give $5 to 2 million different people, there doesn’t seem to me to be a good reason why the estate should be taxed. Better to tax inheritance since the actual concern is that I’ll give $10 million to my son…"

But this presumes that the government wants richer people’s money to go to poorer people, when in fact they want richer people’s money to go themselves.

By: Chris b

Chris b — Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:27:00 +0000

Actually the economic thinking behind a flat tax rate is pretty simple and highly compelling. But it would probably be better phrased as a "single tax rate on all income irrespective of source, payable at the time of the event which leads to that income". Not very catchy but more explanatory. It could in theory then be tapered (much as the current income tax system is) if required but frankly I'm more in favour of a flat rate or more gentle progression up the slope (the step change from 22% to 40% is stupid).

I consistently fail to see why income should be taxed at different rates depending on how it was earned....
Simplifying the whole system would elimate (as a guess) about two thirds of the IR staff at least and make disposing of highly paid and socially worthless tax planning professionals easy.

If anyone is having thoughts about asset income and so called earned income don't even start, your time (life) which you rent is an asset which you earn credits for which can be spent on other assets to maximise your overall asset return. The distinction between capital assets and income assets is purely an accounting and tax distinction, which isn't conceptually valid