Collaborative Blogging

For me, a major benefit of blogging is networking and this brings me on to what I think will be the next identifiable phase of blogging. Collaboration. The only thing that makes me uneasy about this prediction is how much ego drives blogging. Most of the big political blogs are run by one person. However, I think this model will be vigorously challenged in the near future.

It is already noticeable that bloggers are collaborating in a variety of ways. A successful example is the magazine style Pickled Politics that currently has nine regular contributors, but looser affiliations such as Blogpower also seem to achieve synergies. Campaign blogs such as Anyone But Ken (all six contributors are on my blogroll) also appear very suited to collaboration.

I don't want to get too distracted ahead of the May elections, but once they have passed, I would like to work with other right-wing bloggers on some collaborative projects. All ideas gratefully received. On the subject of networking, I am meeting an Icelandic Conservative for lunch tomorrow to discuss a blog that he is looking to set up. Should be fun.

Guess The Politician

Who committed the following to text?

"I do think certain individuals are disposed to crime because of their genetic inheritance"

Tony Sharp

One of my favourite bloggers is Tony Sharp who writes the Waendal Journal. His blogging personality reveals a man of principle and his arguments are brilliantly informed and crystal clear. He blogs about what he cares about and right now he feels passionately about the injustices being perpetrated in Zimbabwe under Mugabe. Like him, I urge you to watch this film and admire the courage of those prepared to sacrifice their lives for freedom.



It was a pleasure to discover that Tony is running for council in the Brickhill Ward of Wellingborough this May. I don't know what his ambitions are, but I'd love to see him in Parliament. He's the kind of straight talking/street fighting Conservative that the general public would relate to.

Land Value Tax 4 - A Good Tax

Back in October I kicked off a discussion on land reform and land value tax (LVT) with the provocative title where's my acre? alluding to the fact that the UK contains 60 million people living on 60 million acres. I followed that post up with a couple more, but let the subject wither on the vine somewhat.

Having at least convinced myself of the virtues of LVT, my next post was to be on how to implement LVT, but it is an extensive project. Fortunately a bright spark has taken up the cause and has given me sight of his paper on implementing LVT. His work is particularly strong on addressing potential issues and objections. I hope to be able to let you know when he finalises it. In the meantime, I thought I would prepare a few lines on why replacing CGT, IHT, council tax and stamp duty with LVT would be efficient.

1. Economic efficiency. Tax should not distort business decisions and should discourage neither economic growth nor individual enterprise and effort.

The introduction of LVT would address several market distortions in the UK tax system. The current system taxes built property heavily. LVT removes this disincentive to build which would address housing shortages through the market. Secondly, it would level the playing field between land and other asset classes that are taxed such as cash and shares. Further, because land is finite there is no deadweight cost associated with lost output as a result of LVT.

2. Fairness The least well-off should pay a smaller proportion of tax. People in similar circumstances should be treated equally.

Counter-intuitively, more expensive residential properties have a lower council tax to property value ratio than cheaper properties. In the round LVT would be more progressive than the existing basket of property taxes.

3. Simplicity and transparency Tax should, as far as possible, be clear, easy to understand, of certain application, easy to calculate and easy to collect.

LVT is a very simple tax to understand. There would be no exemptions and due to its nature, avoidance or cheating would be very difficult. Replacing the existing taxes will reduce the number of unfair loopholes that currently exist.

4. Stability and predictability Once a tax has been adopted, changes to tax law should be kept to a minimum.

There are three parameters related to an LVT assessment ; land area (a matter of fact), land value (to be independently assessed) and the LVT rate applied (I would apply a single rate such as 1.5% of land value per annum). Herein lies a risk. If land values fall, so will LVT revenues and there could be a risk of the government tinkering with the rate and precipitating further falls in land values. I would legislate that LVT rates can only be moved incrementally and within a range (say 1% to 2.5%).

This topic has stimulated enjoyable debates in the past. Looking forward to another one.

Blogging At The Taxpayer's Expense

MPs have just voted for a £10,000 communications allowance each to add to their already exorbitant expenses. This bung is expected to be used on blogs and websites. Need I say that this adds insult to injury. Sensible commentators have been up in arms about the abuse of public money on Labour Environment Minister Miliband's blog. The government's response - a £6.5m freebie to sitting MPs to allow them to do the same thing.

It was good to see the Conservatives oppose this sleazy and unfair measure and I want them to commit to reverse it. Mr Straw who supported the measure said websites funded by the extra £10,000 must not promote a party or politician. The other one's got bells on it. Here's a safe prediction - most of that £6.5m will be misspent - not only does this measure help incumbent MPs, but it is an open invitation to corruption. I know I bang on about Labour sleaze, but are there any depths left for them to plumb?

Catch Up

Ok, I'm back sooner than I promised, but I've just booked a week's holiday in the first part of April when I will get a couple of friends to guest for me - I can't keep taking breaks.

Real World

Nice weather in Prague and getting out and about a bit more has been fun. As a result of a chance meeting, I might be able to land a little part-time job here in Prague which will be easier to fit in around blogging than my last position. Last night, I went to chess club for the first time in a while. It's really lively there these days and there's always a good conversation to be had. It's been mentioned by others that Prague has something of a sordid reputation which was rather cemented when two strangers I was chatting with independently admitted to running successful porn sites - yes I did feel like a gooseberry. More disturbing were the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that I overheard several regulars floating. One chap was harking back to Jewish bankers and 15th Century Spanish history (or at least his version of it). Your typical Bush-hating Leftie really wants to believe these conspiracies. This sort of stuff borders on madness in my opinion.

May Elections

I'm about to book flights back to the UK to help with the May elections. I shall probably manage a week of campaigning before the elections and I am still finalising my top secret plans. When I was initially preparing my ideas concerning where to help, my first thoughts were to work in certain "target seats", but as I've been evaluating things I have become a bit more discerning. Firstly, I am going to help friends even if winning would be a Herculean task - moving the vote to within striking distance is a very worthwhile exercise in my opinion. Secondly, although I'm quite happy to trudge the streets for hours if I'm freeing up the candidate's time for him or her to knock doors or undertake other electioneering or council activities, I am not going to break my back delivering for a lazy councillor.

Other Stuff

I've been asked to do a presentation on blogging to some fellow Tories in the Summer. Anecdotally, the benefits of blogging can be quite unexpected and bloggers' reasons for continuing to blog are often quite different to the reasons that they started, so I'll probably explore that theme a bit. Martine Martin's research project into right-leaning blogs should be finished soon, which might provide some insights based on evidence. Anyway, on this theme I would certainly appreciate any tips or advice from my readers.

BBC Budget Calculator Needs Fixing

There has been a load of rubbish spouted by the MSM about this budget. Nick Robinson and Evan Davis on the Beeb's "expert blog" are amongst the worst. But the prize for the worst example of kindergarten incompetence is the BBC's budget calculator. Everyone's a winner, baby. They say that their calculator can not yet reflect the proposed changes to the income tax regime (why not?), but type in that you're earning £7k (in other words you will be paying tax at 20% instead of 10%) and it shows you as being £20 better off due to income tax!!! BBC lies or BBC incompetence. You decide.

Supertax Updated For The 21st Century

Super-tax Mark I - Super-tax For The Super-rich

The last time Labour were in power between 1974 and 1979, the very rich suffered from exorbitant tax rates. In the first budget when Thatcher came to power, Geoffrey Howe cut top rate tax from 83% to 60% on earned income and from 98% to 75% on unearned income. Those suffering top rate tax could generally arrange their affairs to avoid these punitive rates. For example, Rod Stewart became a tax exile in California in 1975 and called that year's album "Atlantic Crossing". Unsurprisingly, in reducing these exorbitant tax rates the Tories stimulated higher tax revenues. Super-tax was a poor economic idea grounded in the politics of envy.

Super-tax Mark II - Super-tax For The Masses

In their latest incarnation Labour have been keen not to frighten the rich. Access has been widened - these days anybody can suffer supertax. As a result of increased income tax, national insurance and reduced housing benefit and tax credits, those in the £10k to £15k household income range can face 90% plus marginal tax rates (and that was before yesterday). Faced with the clarity of yesterday's post on Gordon's regressive budget, certain Labourites have scampered away to try to prove that extra benefits will mean that low earners are not worse off after all as a consequence of the budget. If they can prove that, I think that will mean there are some poor souls facing 100% marginal tax. Aside from the obvious disincentives to work and the deep poverty trap that Labour are digging, this tinkering forces more and more people to wade through the government's byzantine benefits system to get back in benefits what they've just been taxed. Under New Labour, the client state rules thanks to the return of supertax. This rant is brought to you in association with the most incompetent, sleaziest, meddling, authoritarian government I have ever had the misfortune to cross.

Learning About The EU

The Independent produced a 50 point eulogy to the EU on its cover the other day which has been throroughly fisked. As someone who lived and worked in the Czech Republic before and after their 2004 EU accession, I reckon that the EU has made little positive difference to my life. As you may know the gf is studying in Prague (which means we will be here until at least 2009). She has just started a law module which includes some EU law. For this study, we bought a textbook which shall remain nameless as I don’t want to give the authors any publicity (and as they are lawyers they’d probably find a way to sue me for reproducing their "work"). Here’s the very first section of their book. I have put the abridged bits in brackets.

One problem that appears to confront students of EU law is an apparent assumption in the UK that Europe is something foreign, that it refers to a place and to people across the English Channel that has nothing to do with the UK. This is, of course, not the truth since … (boring timeline discussion about the 1972 EC Act and the 1975 referendum)

Paraphrase - in the first paragraph of this textbook we patronise the British reader!

Nevertheless, Euro-scepticism is not uncommon within the country and it would not be unreasonable to suggest that this, in part at least, follows the encouragement of certain elements of the media. (Here follows a blustering and at times shocking discourse outlining the misconceptions that Euro-sceptics suffer from and how a united Europe has been desired since the Romans, name-dropping Napoleon and incredibly Hitler(!) as aspiring for a united Europe).

Paraphrase - Although a united European has never stuck, we find it surprising that some opposition remains. We blame, at least in part, dark forces operating within the British media (Ed. and presumably believe that BBC are unbiased).

Historically, then, it is true to say that the so-called Euro-sceptics" are in a minority and that there has always been in a widest sense a European identity and the desire for European unity. In this way it is Euro-scepticism which is the recent phenomenon and indeed exists only in restricted elements of national feeling that is hostile to the idea of Community. It has a particular foothold in the United Kingdom.

Paraphrase - We've made the biggest leap since Neil Armstrong stepped on the moon in our first sentence, but we're hoping you'll ignore that. Euro-scepticism means being opposed to anything foreign and only exists amongst nationalist/individualists (oxymoron alert) mainly amongst those horrible islanders in the cold, north-west of the continent.

I get the feeling that I may share more from this tome. I haven't got to the social chapter chapter yet.

Regressive Budget!

I said on my last post that I would like to abolish payroll taxes for those earning the minimum wage. Incredibly, Gordon Brown has just doubled the marginal rate of income tax for some minimum wage workers from 10% to 20%. There will be many low earners who have just had their income tax bill doubled!!! His "cut" has increased income tax liabilities for almost anyone* earning more than £5,000 but less than £17,935.


This table shows the impact of the 10% rise and 2% reduction on people who have reached this break-even point. Nobody earning less than £17,935 is better off as a result of this budget and that will include most part-time workers. Whilst I would normally applaud simplification of the tax system, this move is very regressive. Poor show, Mr Brown.

*exceptions due to different personal allowances do not change the overall picture.