Yes, you’re right, Will Hutton is a tosser

The public sector isn’t perfect but at least it doesn’t fleece us

The pensioners of the Work Foundation would like a word Mr. Hutton. But here’s his conclusion:

Regulation, derided as a burden on business, is, rather, what society deploys to keep business honest, whether it emanates from London or Brussels.

No, it isn’t. Competition is what society deploys to keep business on the straight and narrow. That’s why we use markets, you see? And that’s also why we want to use markets in the provision of public services. Because we get that competition that keeps the system honest….

14 comments on “Yes, you’re right, Will Hutton is a tosser

  1. The public sector doesn’t fleece us?. Is this fucker sending his dispatches back from Mars?

    From car tax that doesn’t get spent on the roads to council thieving to waste, corruption—you fucking what?. Govt clowns who have no money for legal aid (to help the cops crap on you) but 80 billion on a high speed train set that takes an entire 20 mins off the trip to London to printing money to help destroy the economy because they are thick crooks who don’t even understand their own evil business. Fuck it—a million posts wouldn’t even begin to cover the evil and bungling waste of the public sector. Hutton is beyond stupid–you could use his head instead of a sledgehammer–a useless shite that boy.

  2. It’s partially the old intentions vs outcome issue. Hutton thinks that because regulations are intended to have a positive effect on society, they will always have that effect.

    Of course he also labours under the delusion that there’s no such thing as corruption in the public sector. But that’s primarily because he’s a bit thick.

  3. The government puts VAT on fuel for our own good, not to fleece us. It is for our own good that old people shiver in their houses because they cannot pay their fuel bills.

    I’m struggling to see what even the good intentions of VAT on fuel were.

    And wasn’t it last week that this clown was going on about innovation, small business and the private sector? MAKE YOUR BLOODY MIND UP HUTTON.

  4. Did you see that the education authorities in California are trying to regulate coding schools? No-one’s complained that they’re doing anything wrong, it’s a cheaper way to get people working as programmers than a degree, but because California has laws about further education regulation, they need to register. And instructors under the law need to have a bachelor’s degree and 3 years of teaching experience.

  5. Feed Willie to the good people of Somerset who have very personal experience of the misallocation of tax by the EA.

  6. I’m struggling to see what even the good intentions of VAT on fuel were

    There weren’t any. Just an all inclusive EU diktat. Directive 2006/112/EC (and its predecessors.)

  7. The public sector takes my taxes to house single mums in housing that I can’t afford (but I could if they weren’t subsidised to live there).
    Compared to that being ripped off by a tax driver is not too bad.

  8. On the whole, I don’t think people like Hutton view tax wastage as “fleecing”, even though there is very little difference.

    Although not entirely public sector, but the wholly government owned Post Office not only fleeced sub postmaster franchises over a fault in the computer system but actually sent some of them to jail and bankrupted many more.

    http://www.jfsa.org.uk/

  9. Well he did spend four years at the Gruniad and then sold of all that was valuable at the Work Foundation before leading them into bankruptcy, so he must know what he is talking about.

  10. Pingback: Sunday Morning Links: Backstage with The Beatles | motorcitytimes.com

  11. Is this not just the artful deployment of the false dichotomy? “It is not X because it is Y” only works when X and Y are mutually exclusive.

    I have no problem with the idea that many regulations are intended to produce some kind of level playing field. Or with the idea that regulations are a burden. They can clearly be both.

    The problem is identifying whether the cost of the burden is compensated for by the benefits the regs bring – itself a function of their efficacy. You can’t make the question of whether that balance is achieved go away by dint of mentioning an intended benefit. That’s as weak an argument as claiming “here are some pros so there can’t be any cons”…

  12. Rob, the VAT on fuel is 5%. Old people will presumably be shivering in the houses and using less fuel than a family – so probably below averge fuel bill? Perhaps not as much as a thousand pounds a year?
    That 5% will then likely be under £50 a year. If under £1 a week is an issue then the old people have bigger problems than the VAT on fuel.

  13. @Martin Davies: £50 equates to a 2000w heater on full for an extra hour a day for 190 days a year, (assuming units of electric at 13p). It may only be price of a good meal out for you, it makes the difference between sitting in a cold room/going to bed early for a lot of people.

    Incidentally, as £50 is of so little consequence to you won’t mind sending me that amount will you? I’ll give you the bank account details and you can transfer it right over. I fancy a night out on someone else’s coin.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.