The Political Thread

[The Legendary Shark]

This Apple thing. As I understand it, Apple came to an agreement with the Irish Mafia government to channel large lumps of its profit through Ireland in return for low tax rates on those profits. Apple was happy. Ireland was happy. Then the Fourth Reich EU decided it didn't like sovereign countries managing their own sovereign taxation affairs and imposed an anti-trust type fine on Apple.

So, if the EU can do this, what does it matter which party you vote for? One of the fundamental scams duties of any criminal gang government is to manage its own sovereign tax system. If the EU can override taxes, legislation and plans you essentially voted for, your vote is worthless.

[Theblazeuk]

Their only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.

The Labour that was, if you believe the rhetoric, focused on vote-winning compromise did spectacularly badly at either winning votes or making constructive compromises. And had the least electable leader of all time to boot.

[IndigoPrime]

Folks I dont think its fair called Brexit voters Idiots all the time.

I was referring to this specific case. The UK exploded when Vodafone wiggled around corporation tax to the tune of £6 billion, but, hey, let's welcome Apple over here. And the very business model of Apple Europe is entirely dependent on membership of (not access to) the single market. Given May's current stance appears to be withdrawing the UK from the that (hello, massive tax hikes and public service cuts), Apple Europe could not exist in a post-EU UK and it would be politically insane to turn the UK into a massive tax haven, given how against that kind of thing the bulk of the public is. But Brexit people are in favour because it's against the EU. (It's almost like if someone in the EU said they like kittens, Brexit people would go about the place punching kittens, just because.) Hence: idiots, in this case.

As for Farron as a "Europhile Clown", I see a man desperately trying to differentiate his party and stop electoral wipe-out. Post-boundary changes, the Lib Dems are predicted to max out at four seats. They're a whisker away from going under, but there are 16 million people who voted Remain and a third of Brexit voters apparently wanted a soft Brexit that retains a lot of existing EU benefits. If your opening gambit is softish Brexit anyway (i.e. Corbyn, most of Labour and, increasingly, the Liberal Democrats – notably Vince Cable), that puts you in a crap position to argue. Whatever compromise you reach will be further away from your ideals.

A man leading party that used to represent the middle ground between Thatcherite tories and militant labourites is now positioning itself as "the party that ignores a democratic vote"

A non-binding referendum. It was basically a massive opinion poll. And it was about membership of the EU – nothing else. We seem to have accepted so much as a fait accompli. Freedom of movement? Gone. Single market membership? Gone. London passporting? Gone. If we want any of these things – or a reasonable compromise on them – we have to fight. At least the Lib Dems are standing up for what they believe in, while even the more liberal component of Labour's capitulating. (And the less said about Open Britain's early days, the better.)

Their only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.

Which won't happen. Labour won't split. It's simply too dangerous. But I suspect at the next GE, we're going to see a depressing flip of 1997, with about 130–150 Labour MPs at most, and a rampant Tory majority able to do whatever the hell it pleases.

This Apple thing. As I understand it, Apple came to an agreement with the Irish Mafia government to channel large lumps of its profit through Ireland in return for low tax rates on those profits. Apple was happy. Ireland was happy. Then the Fourth Reich EU decided it didn't like sovereign countries managing their own sovereign taxation affairs and imposed an anti-trust type fine on Apple.

Oh, give over. Ireland knew the rules and it broke them. Apple knew the rules and figured out a workaround in law, but that is morally bankrupt – and I say this as a big fan of Apple in general. It's one thing – even though I'd argue it's dodgy – to assign your digital purchases to one location. But to do the same with bricks-and-mortar stores? That's just bloody stupid.

So, if the EU can do this, what does it matter which party you vote for? One of the fundamental scams duties of any criminal gang government is to manage its own sovereign tax system. If the EU can override taxes, legislation and plans you essentially voted for, your vote is worthless.

I'm sure that line of thinking will come as great solace in a decade's time to people who are sick but cannot afford health insurance in the UK, once the Tories privatise the NHS.

[The Legendary Shark]

I don't see any difference between the EU concentrating its power in Brussels and Apple concentrating its power in Ireland. They may be different types and levels of power but each entity concentrates as it deems preferable.

I'd be surprised if the EU doesn't have some kind of local agreements with Belgium so why should not Apple have local agreements with Ireland?

I am not a fan of corporatism, government or mandatory taxation, as you all know, but so long as these things exist they should be as voluntary as possible. As far as I am concerned, Apple and Ireland did nothing wrong in coming to a mutually acceptable arrangement. All taxation should be negotiable because if it isn't it's just extortion, plain and simple.

Your last paragraph is simply an appeal to possible consequence and does not address the issue I raised, which was the question of the  sovereignty and value of your vote.

[Professor Bear]

Sharky, the enforcement of taxation on Apple is actually a good thing, as the Irish government have been running the Republic's finances into the ground by skimming off the top, middle and bottom for years.  The only bad thing about this is that all of that £13bn will go into private hands and paying off Irish debts to the EU while Ireland will still end up with privatised utilities like water and healthcare.

Their only hope is when Labour party members overwhelmingly reelect Corbyn because THEY WANT A TRUE LABOUR PARTY rather than a vote-winning compromise party, all the Tory-lite members will leave and join the remains of the SDP/LDs to form a " ooooh, we're not nasty tories or commy labourites" party.

Which won't happen. Labour won't split. It's simply too dangerous.

Dangerous for the party, perhaps, but a lot of MPs have made it clear that the interests of the party - if they register at all - are a distant concern well behind the interests of the MP.  Between the boundary changes and the more-than-likely demands from members and CLPs to deselect coup particpants after the leadership contest is over, you have figure there are a few MPs staring into an abyss where their career used to be and figuring that a split is a risk worth taking, while others with higher profiles - like Benn - may simply cross the floor.

[The Legendary Shark]

Bear, I agree that tax revenue is sorely misused. This is why I believe all contributions should be voluntary. If it's mandatory, more and more can be taken to cover and/or exacerbate the poor choices of the past. If it's voluntary, people can decide for themselves whether they want to contribute to bloated, inefficient, unethical, abused institutions or not.

[Jim_Campbell]

This is why I believe all contributions should be voluntary.

I'm not ill -- why should I pay for the NHS? I don't have kids -- why should I pay for education?

We all pay, because we all benefit, even if indirectly. That's how societies work.

[Professor Bear]

Corporations also aren't people, and thus should - and are - taxed on different terms.

[sheridan]

This is why I believe all contributions should be voluntary.

I'm not ill -- why should I pay for the NHS? I don't have kids -- why should I pay for education?

We all pay, because we all benefit, even if indirectly. That's how societies work.

And on a similar note, you may not to pay for your neighbour's kids to be vaccinated, but the upshot of that is you end up surrounded by people with disease (some of which we thought we'd eradicated from first world countries a century ago).

[Old Tankie]

Excellent news from Markit manufacturing survey which measures activity in UK factories, which is now at a ten month high.

[Fungus]

As said, the UK choosing - in this wonderfully unfettered position it will inhabit shortly - to become a tax haven* would be utterly pointless. The Revenue would then find people very reluctant to file their own tax returns as normal. Me included.

* 'Haven'... as if they're not vital to making societies work. Sigh.

[IndigoPrime]

Professor Bear: You might be right. It feels like Labour's doomed for a generation, in much the same way as the Lib Dems are. (The Lib Dems are just one cycle 'ahead'.) If they stick with Corbyn, MPs will be deselected and the party is screwed. If Corbyn loses, Momentum will throw a wobbly and cause untold problems. If there's a split, whichever bit is no longer called Labour is done for, and the remaining bit will be hit hard. Even crossing the floor is risky. If, say, 100 MPs decided to join the Lib Dems (assuming that's even possible), how many would vanish in 2020? What a horrible mess, and all entirely avoidable in so many ways.

Old Tankie: such reports are good to hear, but we need to find out the context behind this. According to the FT, Sterling getting a kicking has helped SOME factories bounce significantly. Presumably, those are the ones not affected heavily by the increased costs of import. However, if we exit the single market and don't enter any kind of customs union, we'll see a massive downswing again. (Also, the banking sector is looking shaky for the future; education is in disarray; science is having significant problems with funding and inclusion; various media industries, including film, are finding life tough; and so on. And we still haven't left, and don't have a plan for leaving — although the words coming from May now suggest the worst-case scenario for economic and societal impact. Buckle up.)

[Theblazeuk]

I'm just going to go and suggest something utterly bonkers and unthinkable, but maybe Labour wouldn't be doomed for a generation if the MPs didn't keep throwing wobblies about the leadership election of 2015 and just got on with things.

[Modern Panther]

Silence, Communist!  The only role of the Labour Party^tm is to win power, and the management consultants they employed insist that only Citizen Smith can become the next PM.  Policy and principle be damned.

[Professor Bear]

MPs get paid a salary, expenses, get to travel, stay in relative luxury, and all regardless of whether or not there's a recession, so it's not unreasonable to assume that this is a job to some, rather than a calling, and once you accept that, it's not really that much of a stretch to then consider it plausible that maybe some MPs don't want to be elected to higher, more demanding office, they just want to be opposition MPs for as long as they can.  As opposition MPs, they get to promise the moon without ever having to deliver, and they get to live a pretty sweet life of relative importance - and in some cases minor celebrity - on the taxpayer's penny.
Certainly there's the odd good MP who'll put in more effort than the minimum required, but if you can tell me what Jess Phillips or Chukka Umunna actually do, you've clearly been paying a lot more attention than I have.