UK Politics Thread IX: The Masses Against the Classes

[Fartsniffage]

I'm not mad. I'm amused. You've become a caricature.

People discuss politics on a politics forum. It's as valid as using economics models and so on. People who support the status quo don't like the fact that it is based on ideology rather than some natural order, and that's pretty much what you're doing here. You're desperate to cast my, you know, discussing politics as something out of the norm in terms of behavior here because the lens I use isn't one you agree with, but all that does is show you don't actually have a counter-argument or a defense for this shitty hate movement.

You may as well be whining that someone keeps bringing up capitalism, welfare, and tax rates in response to social issues being discussed. All it does is show you are ignorant, perhaps willfully so, of how those things are connected.

You don't want to understand how feminism causes many of the problems we're seeing in society because it threatens your simplistic worldview. Got it. You're loud and clear.
Not going to stop pointing it out, sorry.

Notably I only bring this up when it's relevant. (See above). Your real beef is you're angry or in massive amounts of denial at just how relevant it is and how often really negative effects can be pointed out.

Imagine a rich toff who is absolutely invested in refusing to see the connection between class and economic issues and other issues and mocks people for pointing out those connections and the negative impacts of our system.

That's your mindset, right there. You're the same person, behaving the same way, when you're basically acting like the worst tier of Tory voter with the least grasp on reality and politics.

But i'm the caricature. Right. How about this. I'll stop pointing out how capitalism and feminism are shit, when capitalism and feminism stop being shit?

And you say I'm angry....

[Ostroeuropa]

People discuss politics on a politics forum. It's as valid as using economics models and so on. People who support the status quo don't like the fact that it is based on ideology rather than some natural order, and that's pretty much what you're doing here. You're desperate to cast my, you know, discussing politics as something out of the norm in terms of behavior here because the lens I use isn't one you agree with, but all that does is show you don't actually have a counter-argument or a defense for this shitty hate movement.

You may as well be whining that someone keeps bringing up capitalism, welfare, and tax rates in response to social issues being discussed. All it does is show you are ignorant, perhaps willfully so, of how those things are connected.

You don't want to understand how feminism causes many of the problems we're seeing in society because it threatens your simplistic worldview. Got it. You're loud and clear.
Not going to stop pointing it out, sorry.

Notably I only bring this up when it's relevant. (See above). Your real beef is you're angry or in massive amounts of denial at just how relevant it is and how often really negative effects can be pointed out.

Imagine a rich toff who is absolutely invested in refusing to see the connection between class and economic issues and other issues and mocks people for pointing out those connections and the negative impacts of our system.

That's your mindset, right there. You're the same person, behaving the same way, when you're basically acting like the worst tier of Tory voter with the least grasp on reality and politics.

But i'm the caricature. Right. How about this. I'll stop pointing out how capitalism and feminism are shit, when capitalism and feminism stop being shit?

And you say I'm angry....

Not angry, not amused either, just making an observation. Not that there's anything wrong with being angry by the way.

[Fartsniffage]

And you say I'm angry....

Not angry, not amused either, just making an observation. Not that there's anything wrong with being angry by the way.

The Jedi would disagree with you.

[Ostroeuropa]

Not angry, not amused either, just making an observation. Not that there's anything wrong with being angry by the way.

The Jedi would disagree with you.

The Jedi supported Jar Jar for the senate.

[Fartsniffage]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48280272

The Tories have been supporting an increase in taxes.

[Philjia]

Not angry, not amused either, just making an observation. Not that there's anything wrong with being angry by the way.

The Jedi would disagree with you.

The Jedi were all fucking repressed. Getting angry's human, but it has to be focused into meaningful action.

[Fartsniffage]

The Jedi would disagree with you.

The Jedi were all fucking repressed. Getting angry's human, but it has to be focused into meaningful action.

Anger was okay only if you let it pass through you. Holding on to it was what lead to the dark side. Holding on to anger tends to lead to bad decisions.

[Bombadil]

Apparently the UK is the worst nation in the world for causing mass scale tax evasion.

The UK, with its corporate tax haven network, is by far the world’s greatest enabler of corporate tax avoidance and has single-handedly done the most to break down the global corporate tax system, accounting for over a third of the world’s corporate tax avoidance risks.

“That’s four times more than the next greatest contributor of corporate tax avoidance risks, the Netherlands, which accounts for less than 7%.”

1/3rd of all taxes not being paid to governments properly are down to us.

Eight out of the 10 jurisdictions whose systems received the highest corporate tax haven scores for enabling avoidance were part of the UK network of territories and dependencies, the Tax Justice Network said.

Eight out of ten.

The Tax Justice Network said the scale at which jurisdictions have enabled corporate tax avoidance risks to entice multinationals has made countries’ corporate tax rates “meaningless”.

It warned this had also triggered a “race to the bottom” that would further deplete tax revenues.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... study-says

This is basically the reason for Brexit, why so many at the top are essentially in favour. It means the pesky EU cannot halt the huge financial rewards of Britain's tax havens.

There's a relatively decent documentary here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8

The Spider's Web: Britain's Second Empire is a documentary released in Mexico in July 2017 which details the transformation of the UK as a colonial super power to a global financial power. It suggests that the City of London Corporation and its banks have done tremendous damage to the world economy since the 1960s and that up to half of all offshore wealth (globally) is hidden in one of many British offshore jurisdictions. With contributions from leading experts, academics, former insiders and campaigners for social justice, the film claims to highlight how in the world of international finance, corruption and secrecy have prevailed over regulation and transparency, and the UK is right at the heart of this.

The film was co-produced by Tax Justice Network founder John Christensen, and is based in part on the book, Treasure Islands, by expert on British offshore havens Nicholas Shaxson; an interview with Shaxson is one of its major elements. Christensen was an advisor to the Queen’s government of the island of Jersey for a number of years.

[Uan aa Boa]

Raab sounds like the best atm, I just wish Davis was running

Raab was at least in theory the Brexit secretary responsible for negotiating the withdrawal agreement, a role he excelled at so much that when the agreement was made public he resigned from the cabinet in order to vote against it... except he later voted for it. Sounds like real leadership material.

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

James Cleverly has joined the leadership race.

I'm still waiting for an 'official' ERG candidate, like Steven Baker to announce they are standing.

[Hirota]

This is basically the reason for Brexit, why so many at the top are essentially in favour. It means the pesky EU cannot halt the huge financial rewards of Britain's tax havens.

It's a cute theory. Unfortunately there is evidence it's untrue.

I've picked up the raw data from the office of National Statistics, the Commons Library on median gross weekly pay for full-time employees per constituency, and the data from the 2016 referendum from Professor Chris Hanretty, a political scientist at Royal Holloway University, who combined official results and the BBC data with statistical methods in order to estimate the proportion of Leave and Remain voters in every seat in England, Scotland and Wales.

That last one isn't ideal, but it's the most accurate record I could find.

And I used two of those - the Commons Library data on pay, and the data on brexit voting. I stuck it into Excel, and then added a Trendline. I got this:



There is a demonstrable correlation between the lower the weekly median income in the constituency and increased likeliness the constituency was to vote to leave the EU.

I have not looked at the Casual links yet, and I've also got to look at if there is a difference based on the ONS data for average full-time salary, average age, percentage with degree, and percentage non-UK born.

I can make the data I'm working with available if anyone wants?

[Vassenor]

This is basically the reason for Brexit, why so many at the top are essentially in favour. It means the pesky EU cannot halt the huge financial rewards of Britain's tax havens.

It's a cute theory. Unfortunately there is evidence it's untrue.

I've picked up the raw data from the office of National Statistics, the Commons Library on median gross weekly pay for full-time employees per constituency, and the data from the 2016 referendum from Professor Chris Hanretty, a political scientist at Royal Holloway University, who combined official results and the BBC data with statistical methods in order to estimate the proportion of Leave and Remain voters in every seat in England, Scotland and Wales.

That last one isn't ideal, but it's the most accurate record I could find.

And I used two of those - the Commons Library data on pay, and the data on brexit voting. I stuck it into Excel, and then added a Trendline. I got this:



There is a demonstrable correlation between the lower the weekly median income in the constituency and increased likeliness the constituency was to vote to leave the EU.

I have not looked at the Casual links yet, and I've also got to look at if there is a difference based on the ONS data for average full-time salary, average age, percentage with degree, and percentage non-UK born.

I can make the data I'm working with available if anyone wants?

I think you've misinterpreted the question somewhat. The point wasn't "this is why people voted for Brexit", the point was "this is why Brexit was being pushed for".

[Platypus Bureaucracy]

James Cleverly has joined the leadership race.

I'm still waiting for an 'official' ERG candidate, like Steven Baker to announce they are standing.

Cleverly? I don't care what his positions are, I want him to win.

[Hirota]

It's a cute theory. Unfortunately there is evidence it's untrue.

I've picked up the raw data from the office of National Statistics, the Commons Library on median gross weekly pay for full-time employees per constituency, and the data from the 2016 referendum from Professor Chris Hanretty, a political scientist at Royal Holloway University, who combined official results and the BBC data with statistical methods in order to estimate the proportion of Leave and Remain voters in every seat in England, Scotland and Wales.

That last one isn't ideal, but it's the most accurate record I could find.

And I used two of those - the Commons Library data on pay, and the data on brexit voting. I stuck it into Excel, and then added a Trendline. I got this:



There is a demonstrable correlation between the lower the weekly median income in the constituency and increased likeliness the constituency was to vote to leave the EU.

I have not looked at the Casual links yet, and I've also got to look at if there is a difference based on the ONS data for average full-time salary, average age, percentage with degree, and percentage non-UK born.

I can make the data I'm working with available if anyone wants?

I think you've misinterpreted the question somewhat. The point wasn't "this is why people voted for Brexit", the point was "this is why Brexit was being pushed for".

Nope, I understood it perfectly. The evidence is the richest people (or "the top") voted against Brexit. It demonstrates that the narrative that the rich want to leave the EU is untrue.

Evidence would have to be provided to demonstrate that this trend reverses when you reach the one-percenters.

[Vassenor]

I think you've misinterpreted the question somewhat. The point wasn't "this is why people voted for Brexit", the point was "this is why Brexit was being pushed for".

Nope, I understood it perfectly. The evidence is the richest people (or "the top") voted against Brexit. It demonstrates that the narrative that the rich want to leave the EU is untrue.

Evidence would have to be provided to demonstrate that this trend reverses when you reach the one-percenters.

So how does that disprove that people were pushing for it to avoid being subject to tax haven rules?

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Boris Johnson ordered to appear in court over his lies during the referendum campaign.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48445430

[Old Tyrannia]

James Cleverly has joined the leadership race.

I'm still waiting for an 'official' ERG candidate, like Steven Baker to announce they are standing.

Cleverly? I don't care what his positions are, I want him to win.

I suppose that there's not much point jamesing if you're not going to be clever about it.

[The Blaatschapen]

James Cleverly has joined the leadership race.

I'm still waiting for an 'official' ERG candidate, like Steven Baker to announce they are standing.

Not very cleverly of him.

[Slongs]

James Cleverly has joined the leadership race.

I'm still waiting for an 'official' ERG candidate, like Steven Baker to announce they are standing.

Not very cleverly of him.

He surely has a cleverly surname but how cleverly is his campaign gonna be?

[Hirota]

Nope, I understood it perfectly. The evidence is the richest people (or "the top") voted against Brexit. It demonstrates that the narrative that the rich want to leave the EU is untrue.

Evidence would have to be provided to demonstrate that this trend reverses when you reach the one-percenters.

So how does that disprove that people were pushing for it to avoid being subject to tax haven rules?

Since the burden of proof is upon the person making the claim, not upon the one challenging it, I'll wait until there is actual evidence from the claimant before giving my position.

And, for the record, I'm absolutely in favour of tax haven rules being enforced and a clamp down on tax havens.

[Philjia]

Remain vs Leave was, like most conflicts in British history, between the rich and the also rich. Most will have campaigned and voted for remain, since that result would have greater direct benefits to them, but a significant minority backed Leave, some due to deeply held personal bigotry, and some because they'd worked out that they could profit from it, and provided the funding to make it happen.

[Ifreann]

Boris Johnson ordered to appear in court over his lies during the referendum campaign.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48445430

"Your Honour, it was just banter"

[Bombadil]

This is basically the reason for Brexit, why so many at the top are essentially in favour. It means the pesky EU cannot halt the huge financial rewards of Britain's tax havens.

It's a cute theory. Unfortunately there is evidence it's untrue.

I've picked up the raw data from the office of National Statistics, the Commons Library on median gross weekly pay for full-time employees per constituency, and the data from the 2016 referendum from Professor Chris Hanretty, a political scientist at Royal Holloway University, who combined official results and the BBC data with statistical methods in order to estimate the proportion of Leave and Remain voters in every seat in England, Scotland and Wales.

That last one isn't ideal, but it's the most accurate record I could find.

And I used two of those - the Commons Library data on pay, and the data on brexit voting. I stuck it into Excel, and then added a Trendline. I got this:



There is a demonstrable correlation between the lower the weekly median income in the constituency and increased likeliness the constituency was to vote to leave the EU.

I have not looked at the Casual links yet, and I've also got to look at if there is a difference based on the ONS data for average full-time salary, average age, percentage with degree, and percentage non-UK born.

I can make the data I'm working with available if anyone wants?

Daily Mail owners, live in tax exiles, same with Telegraph, Brexit mostly funded by 5 tax exiles and headed by a former investment banker. The Sun and The Times run by an anti-EU person who said..

"I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. 'That’s easy,' he replied. 'When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.'"

It's not about the average, it's about those with the power and means to influence.

[Mostrov]

Apparently the UK is the worst nation in the world for causing mass scale tax evasion.

The UK, with its corporate tax haven network, is by far the world’s greatest enabler of corporate tax avoidance and has single-handedly done the most to break down the global corporate tax system, accounting for over a third of the world’s corporate tax avoidance risks.

“That’s four times more than the next greatest contributor of corporate tax avoidance risks, the Netherlands, which accounts for less than 7%.”

1/3rd of all taxes not being paid to governments properly are down to us.

Eight out of the 10 jurisdictions whose systems received the highest corporate tax haven scores for enabling avoidance were part of the UK network of territories and dependencies, the Tax Justice Network said.

Eight out of ten.

The Tax Justice Network said the scale at which jurisdictions have enabled corporate tax avoidance risks to entice multinationals has made countries’ corporate tax rates “meaningless”.

It warned this had also triggered a “race to the bottom” that would further deplete tax revenues.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/ ... study-says

Yet, Britain still has relatively high marginal taxation rates, and the rich also pay the bulk of taxation in Britain.

Ironically, this tax avoidance is one of the reasons that London is so prosperous and still serves as the financial clearing house for much of the world. If you stopped this, which government in London isn't able to do given being the prerogative of other states, you would do away with much of Britain's remaining global influence. Surprisingly, dealing with the world often requires pinching one's nose at things in the advancement of the national interest rather than a neo-pelagian approach to moral purity I can only ascribe to those who are so naive to have never had the experience of actual suffering and thus in their incomprehension thinking they can eliminate it.

I don't understand the logic who is a Corbynite and wants to destroy the finance industry, given it is Britain's only remaining industry of value, as you would be making everyone poorer as a result; but I suppose emotional politics trump reason. I suppose this is also the same demographic who thinks that the 'capitalist class' are a global conspiracy who rub their hands together at the thought of impoverishing orphans, all suspiciously like a Jewish stereotype, rather than often simply being their parents or them never having actually interacted with anyone in the finance industry.

Rather than concentrating on questions of inequality (which is a fundamentally meaningless value and one which is also), instead of simply making the poor wealthier, wealth being non-zero-sum game, and revitalizing and creating new industries, like Japan, France, Italy and Korea all had to do at the end of the war.

This is basically the reason for Brexit, why so many at the top are essentially in favour. It means the pesky EU cannot halt the huge financial rewards of Britain's tax havens.

There's a relatively decent documentary here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=np_ylvc8Zj8

The documentary was made several errors and misleading statements, but I saw it many months ago and can't provide with what exactly which was which.

What I feel should often be mentioned is that the largest class of investors in the world are pension funds, so all this attack on financiers is also one against the welfare state.

A much better documentary, also online, is The Mayfair Set by Adam Curtis.

[Mostrov]

Daily Mail owners, live in tax exiles, same with Telegraph, Brexit mostly funded by 5 tax exiles and headed by a former investment banker. The Sun and The Times run by an anti-EU person who said..

"I once asked Rupert Murdoch why he was so opposed to the European Union. 'That’s easy,' he replied. 'When I go into Downing Street they do what I say; when I go to Brussels they take no notice.'"

It's not about the average, it's about those with the power and means to influence.

Rather like pointing out the small number of Trotskyite entryists who now have a solid grip over the Labour leadership: maybe 10-15 people, with an influence far exceeding their number. Should we look at them with an equal suspicion? Or, perhaps, understand that there will always be important people who have an influence all out of proportion with their number i.e. great men.

In saying this, you are making, in essence, a screed against democracy: that the people are so easily fooled that they can't be trusted to make decisions for themselves, while at the same time condemning governance by élite—which seems quite contradictory. You want a government conducted by people (a wise and benevolent minority) you agree with, but that is contrite and a doesn't deserve the sophistry you dress it in.