So let’s get this straight; a tiny elite of financial wizards made themselves obscenely wealthy by developing a financial system that is essentially a global casino using the pension funds of ordinary workers as chips. No risk for these ‘City Boys’ but huge gains guaranteed.
When this system inevitably crashed, this tiny elite, literally a few hundred thousand people across the globe, turned to governments to save the system that had made them obscenely wealthy but now threatened to take it all away again.
The governments were forced to act because the pensions and livelihoods of low and middle-income earners had become entirely interlinked with the fortunes of the casino – because it was the money of the poor and middle-income earners that had been gambled with.
So governments saved this integrated casino system by borrowing huge sums of cash from this same tiny elite. This elite then looked at the level of this government debt and decided it was not sustainable and demanded that governments cut public spending to ‘balance the books’ and protect the repayment of the loans that had been made to protect the value of the money that was used to make the loans!
Then it turns out that this elite also resent having to pay a tax rate of 50% on income over £150,000 a year. And lets be clear what that means; a tax rate of 50% above £150,000 means that the 50% rate is only paid on income above £150,000.
It seems that this uber-wealthy elite so resents this 50% tax rate that the only way to get them to pay their taxes is to reduce the rate of tax to one they are willing to pay.
“If the rate is too high, which it is, then people go offshore and change their bonus arrangements, and so on…….At that end of the income scale people can afford good accountants and lawyers and if they think the rate is too high then that is what they will do.”
So Redwood seems to be suggesting that the rich are morally justified in not paying their taxes if they think the rate is too high!?
If I were to refuse to pay part of my taxes because I don’t believe in them or think they are too high, or don’t want to contribute to certain expenditure (Trident for example) I would be hounded by the tax man unto prison – as happens all the time in the UK.
And yet it appears that Redwood and the Tories think it is acceptable (or simply a regrettable fact of life) that the super-rich will avoid (or evade) paying tax if they don’t like the rate and that the only way round this is to reduce the rate.
I have yet to hear anyone argue that the way to get benefit scroungers to stop breaking the law is to increase benefits to a level that they are willing to accept without cheating!!? Which is essentially what the rationale for this tax cut is suggesting.
Using this rationale the obvious reason why benefit cheats are cheating is because the rate of benefits is too low. Therefore, according to this Tory argument, the way to stop benefit fraud is to increase the rate of benefit to a level that clients accept.
It really is Kafkaesque this stuff and why the British people aren’t rioting in the streets and hanging these bastards from lampposts is beyond me.
 Basic rate: 20% = £0-£34,370; Higher rate: 40%= £34,371-£150,000; Additional rate: 50%= Over £150,000.