banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 If other taxes are used to capture revenue, like employer social contributions, VAT, or business rates, then I don't see why it needs to be race to the bottom. because then all this "investment" CT was "supposed" to attract would go to rUK instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 If other taxes are used to capture revenue, like employer social contributions, VAT, or business rates, then I don't see why it needs to be race to the bottom. That's like saying increasing VAT to 40% is fine, and not at all regressive, as long as you change other taxes accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Neither do I, but they have been used on here to support the Yes campaign particularly in light of "Wastemonster" policies.. Again, if you wish to use a think tank to support your point, you have to also accept when you are an SNP fanboy that when they slate the SNP's policy you are going to be called on it. You appear to lack the slightest desire to separate YES from SNP on anything, should I now highlight every policy difference between the 3 main Westminster parties? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 That's like saying increasing VAT to 40% is fine, and not at all regressive, as long as you change other taxes accordingly. Can't say I'm wild about increasing business rates to make up for this lost revenue - they are far more likely to effect SMEs rather than corporation tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 There is nothing odd at all about a government taking a mix of economic policy ideas from various sources. I'm genuinely baffled you find this new and shocking. I am not sure if you are thick, or are deliberately choosing not to see the point here. If, like the First Minister has on numerous occasions in Holyrood,specifically referred to "Joe" Stiglitz's views as a silver bullet to indicate the SG really know what they are doing - A NOBEL PRIZE WINNING economist thinks our policy is great!! Except when he doesn't, suddenly the "Nobel Prize winning" economist's views are quietly ignored, and well, we look at all views, and what does one guy really know anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 You appear to lack the slightest desire to separate YES from SNP on anything, He quoted Yes Scotland board member Patrcik harvie criticisng the CT cut earlier in the thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 He quoted Yes Scotland board member Patrcik harvie criticisng the CT cut earlier in the thread. And? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I am not sure if you are thick, or are deliberately choosing not to see the point here. If, like the First Minister has on numerous occasions in Holyrood, specifically referred to "Joe" Stiglitz's views as a silver bullet to indicate the SG really know what they are doing - A NOBEL PRIZE WINNING economist thinks our policy is great!! Except when he doesn't, suddenly the "Nobel Prize winning" economist's views are quietly ignored, and well, we look at all views, and what does one guy really know anyway. Except he hasn't said anything about the SNPs plans at all, has he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 And? So he HAS seperated Yes from the SNP.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Except he hasn't said anything about the SNPs plans at all, has he? Yes he has. He has specifically stated his views on reducing Corporation Tax, which is the SNP's "plan". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Yes he has. He has specifically stated his views on reducing Corporation Tax, which is the SNP's "plan". No, he's said bugger all about the SNP or their fiscal plans. Are you abandoning your obsessive love of specifics now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 No, he's said bugger all about the SNP or their fiscal plans. Are you abandoning your obsessive love of specifics now? i addressed this strange point on the last page - i don;t understand where you are oing with this.... This is the other thing yourself and Burma have been sticking to - direct advice to the SG, specific mention of the SG. I don't understand it. Are we to expect that a longstanding critic of lowering corporation tax is going to change this postion when it comes to this case? And in any case - the SNP, specifcally the First Minister, have used dtiflitz postions to endorse their own before, even wehn those stated postions did not refere explcitily to their agenda. As far as I'm aware Stiglitz has never passed comment on the living wage in the UK, but he favours raising the minimum wage in the uSA. Is it fair to assume he would do likewise here, or do we need to wait for Ed MIliband to comission direct adevice from him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 So he HAS seperated Yes from the SNP.... No, Patrick Harvie was explaining that he had differences and agreements with parties on both sides of the argument, H_B decides to use a crumb from that to score points, no surprise there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 No, he's said bugger all about the SNP or their fiscal plans. Are you abandoning your obsessive love of specifics now? So if I say "I think genocide is a really bad thing" I haven't said anything about genocide in Rwanda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 You appear to lack the slightest desire to separate YES from SNP on anything, should I now highlight every policy difference between the 3 main Westminster parties? "Yes" isn't a political party. It's a complete irrelevance in terms of post-Yes politics. Also, it has a CE who is an SNP stooge, and regularly contradicts the views of the likes of Fox and Harvie to act as cock gobbler in chief for the SNP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 No, Patrick Harvie was explaining that he had differences and agreements with parties on both sides of the argument, H_B decides to use a crumb from that to score points, no surprise there. You accused H_B of failing to distinguish between the SNP and Yes Scotland - he did exactly that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bendan Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 Can't say I'm wild about increasing business rates to make up for this lost revenue - they are far more likely to effect SMEs rather than corporation tax. My point is that countries benefit in various ways from business taking place within them. Of course it would be odd to scare people away with significant rises in other areas, but many other revenue streams are more stable than CT and much harder to avoid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 "Yes" isn't a political party. It's a complete irrelevance in terms of post-Yes politics. Also, it has a CE who is an SNP stooge, and regularly contradicts the views of the likes of Fox and Harvie to act as cock gobbler in chief for the SNP. I'm not interested in the SNP, I've never voted for them, I'm on here talking about independence as it's in the Scottish Independence Debate sub forum. You're more of a SNP fanboy than me, you've actually crossed their box on at least 1 occasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 I'm not interested in the SNP, I've never voted for them, I'm on here talking about independence You defended the SNP's plans to decrease Corporation tax, despite "Nobel Prize winning" economist Joseph Stiglitz telling us that doing so widens inequality in society. At the same time you've tried to paint yourself as a class warrior, interested in helping the poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted March 5, 2014 Share Posted March 5, 2014 My point is that countries benefit in various ways from business taking place within them. Of course it would be odd to scare people away with significant rises in other areas, but many other revenue streams are more stable than CT and much harder to avoid. Yeah, but the point is that the CT cut is supposed to encourage investment, it is intended to do so by undercutting rUK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.