The peeps do not agree

I think we can all agree here. Tories do not tax according to social justice – not the definition usually used of social justice at least.

We also have an actual fact here. The Tories won the last election. Gained the plurality of votes necessary to do so.

A tax system is based upon mutual trust. An electorate has to believe that its government will impose appropriate taxes and then administer them not just legally but in accordance with the principles of social justice.

Therefore that’s bollocks, isn’t it? A plurality of the population doesn’t agree because they voted for the Bastard Tories and against taxation based upon social justice.

A government has to trust that its electorate (and those, like companies, who owe tax even though they rightly have no vote) will pay in accordance with the spirit as well as the letter of the law of the country.

And that is petitio principii. El Tuberoso wants to insist that all should obey the spirit of tax law – except himself in those well documented instances. The British system disagrees, it states that people must obey the law as it is written.

23 thoughts on “The peeps do not agree”

  1. What is social justice? I am serious.
    During Blair’s time I was working in a well paid job and living in accomodation, worse than my taxes paid for acquaintances on benefits to live in.
    For me that does not seem at all just. However for the Labour party it was just (I assume it was).

  2. I wouldn’t have such a negative view of taxation if I knew that the government would spend my money wisely. Imagine how small the tax bill would be if the government stopped spending money on stuff that I don’t want, don’t need and didn’t ask for.

  3. Bloke in North Dorset

    You’re forgetting the “60% (or whatever) of people didn’t vote Tory therefore they’re illegitimate” argument they like to make.

  4. An electorate has to believe that its government will impose appropriate taxes and then administer them not just legally but in accordance with the principles of social justice.

    I know he’s a monomaniac about tax but it shows how far his head is up his hole. People tolerate taxes, mainly because they are backed up by threat of force. I pay em cos I have to, and if I can reduce them I will. Social justice can fuck off.

  5. ‘the definition usually used of social justice at least.’

    He must be referring to the well known rule that the adjective “social” implies negation.

    Thus social justice => the opposite of justice.

    Social housing => disproportionately occupied by anti-social elements.

  6. And if the state isn’t keeping to its side of the bargain according to the terms as he sees it, then the taxpayer would seem justified in withholding payment.

  7. ‘A government has to trust that its electorate (and those, like companies, who owe tax even though they rightly have no vote) will pay in accordance with the spirit as well as the letter of the law of the country.’

    Murphy is a statist turd. In democratic societies, the electorate is in charge, not the government.

  8. One slight problem is that the government doesn’t trust the people; we know that because they are continually reducing the leeway we have to act freely. They have taken our guns and want to take all our money, determine what substances we can put into our bodies and nowadays even how long we are allowed outside our house.

    Another slight problem is that the people don’t trust the government.

    Most people accept that there needs to be one, but increasingly there is great (and wholly justified) scepticism regarding its competence or trustworthiness.

  9. Did Capt. Potato really claim that the government has to trust it’s electorate?

    With his encyclopaedic knowledge of everything he must know Bert Brecht’s poem, The Solution.

    After the uprising of the 17th of June
    The Secretary of the Writers’ Union
    Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee
    Stating that the people
    Had forfeited the confidence of the government
    And could only win it back
    By increased work quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
    for the government
    To dissolve the people
    And elect another?

  10. Christ. You should read Spud’s doom-laden blog about the ‘hundreds of thousands’ of coronavirus deaths that will occur in the UK and how the rest of the world will cut us off.

    At least he’s pulled back from his earlier prediction of 10,000 deaths a day to now predicting 11,000 deaths a week.

  11. Bit of a load of bollocks that; the government could not impose the Poll Tax or establish that they, rather than the Unions were running the country. Plurality means “minority” in a system whereby you get all the power for god knows what reason.
    We have a two Party system one of which is liken the dead side of a conjoined twin. I think it became clear it many of us during the “ask the dumbs ” exercise, that the system was not working and I would not mistake current heads down for a wish to put up with this shit for long afterwards
    Its not as if sinecures for arseholes is that old a “democratic process”.We have only had mass democracy for just over 100 years during which time collectivism and capitalism battled. That is over.
    It does not matter what the law states .It stated, prior to 1832 two men and their dogs got the vote and only very very gradually did that change only because pepes would not out up with it any more.
    If this cretinous Brexit state starts putting people out of work and stealing yet more form our children next year after all this you will see how much what is written counts

  12. “You will see how much what is written counts”

    You going to start a revolution then?

    Or write an angry letter to your local paper?

  13. @Newmania – hilarious. Are you expecting a revolution from the liberal elite*? Don’t get yourself put in charge of leafletting or no-one will know where they’re meant to go or what they’re supposed to be rebelling against.

    *did I say liberal elite? Apologies, I meant no-marks with degrees from former polys, low ranking council workers, senile libdem geography teachers, soy-addled Guardianistas and #FBPE harridans with 37 cats.

  14. “You will see how much what is written counts”

    If Newmania is going up against the written word, I predict a short bout.

  15. Bloke in North Dorset

    Christ. You should read Spud’s doom-laden blog about the ‘hundreds of thousands’ of coronavirus deaths that will occur in the UK and how the rest of the world will cut us off.

    At least he’s pulled back from his earlier prediction of 10,000 deaths a day to now predicting 11,000 deaths a week.

    Does he ever do any research? There’s so many errors in the start that its impossible to read the rest. For starters:

    Covid is a notifiable disease and has to be reported within 3 days.

    There is no need to do a PM of CV victims unless something is suspicious.

    Deaths have to be registered within 5 days.

    The daily deaths are hospitals only.

    The ONS waits 2 weeks to get the numbers correct.

    The cumulative death rate is currently forecast to double every 11 days or so, that has gone up from 3 days about 3 weeks ago, a sure sign the rate is slowing.

    Of course there’s some errors in categorisation and the CV numbers are probably a bit low but to get to 11,000 in a week needs a couple of orders of magnitude error in the ONS numbers.

    And at the start of the post he says he’d just been teaching and had only just looked at the numbers. I doubt that, nobody could look at the numbers, research what they mean and draw his conclusions.

    I wish I had time to do a full fisking, or maybe not, suffice to say he’s wittering about 50% error rates, at least with all the numbers.

  16. ‘To dissolve the people
    And elect another?’

    They are replacing them with people from the Middle East. Get over it.

  17. he’s wittering about 50% error rates, at least with all the numbers.

    He’d kill for a mere 50% error rate.

  18. I’ve stumbled into Conservative Woman or was it Conservative Home and seen Newmania saying there that not centralising powers and programmes to Brussels was really a bad thing to vote for, because he didn’t like the voters for it, not because he has any objection to the policy outcome.
    Can I just say how much I like this blog. It’s far from the biggest thing in classical liberalism on the net but nine-tenths of the panel are worth reading.

  19. Tories do not tax according to social justice

    I agree, social justice is a flat tax not different tax rates

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *