Post B2sPFi7htbReFGJWIS by Npars01@mstdn.social
(DIR) More posts by Npars01@mstdn.social
(DIR) Post #B2qEQYQomYxJYnIjS4 by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-01-31T08:09:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
The Jospeh Rowntree Foundation's latest UK Poverty Report shows that:The average person in poverty in 2021-24 was 29% below the poverty line, up from 23% in 1994-97. More than 1 in 5 people in the UK were living in poverty in 2023/2-4. This amounts to 14.2 million people. Of these, 6.8 million were living in very deep poverty. When 20% of our population are living in poverty, this is not happenstance but the result of deliberate political choice(s)! #Poverty #politics h/t JRF/LinkedIn
(DIR) Post #B2qEQZYIcEXB2HoDke by clarebee@mastodon.green
2026-01-31T10:09:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 Reminds me of this article from last year - about how the top 50 UK families own more than the bottom 50% of the population. Worsening wealth inequality has got to be the #1 sign of a failed society. And yes - an ongoing strategy, not an accident.https://www.theguardian.com/news/2025/may/19/uk-50-richest-families-hold-more-wealth-than-50-of-population-analysis-finds
(DIR) Post #B2qEQaphr03J0YxdWS by h4890@alive.bar
2026-01-31T10:43:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@clarebee @ChrisMayLA6 Not necessarily. What if the bottom has all they need and all they want? With that thought experiment, it is clearly shown, that inequality, in itself, is not a problem at all. Add to that, that my guess is that the bottom 50% has it much, much worse 100 years ago, than today, and we can see that this is not a static condition, but as long as we continue to allow capitalism and markets, the bottom 50% will get it better.
(DIR) Post #B2qEyjNuZ6hfNPEpc0 by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-01-31T09:14:30Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 Did the UK invent billionaire tax evasion?https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/04/04/britains-empire-of-tax-evasion-panama-papers-mossack-fonseca/https://www.jennywestanderson.org/articles/britains-elite-still-enjoying-a-tax-break-100-years-oldhttps://taxjustice.net/2014/06/09/tax-dodging-birth-british-empire/https://www.thenational.scot/news/14860577.tv-pick-january-22-a-look-at-britains-ultra-secretive-tax-haven-island/https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/jul/10/whos-who-britain-legal-offshore-tax-avoidance-james-dysonJacques Perettihttps://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2016/03/britains-trillion-pound-paradisehttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/18/the-cayman-islands-home-to-100000-companies-and-the-850-packet-of-fish-fingershttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/inside-the-strange-taxfree-world-of-the-cayman-islands-where-a-pack-of-fish-fingers-costs-ps8-50-a6827336.html
(DIR) Post #B2qEyk9lhAz5lpd3Cq by h4890@alive.bar
2026-01-31T10:50:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Npars01 @ChrisMayLA6 Tax evasion is good. It forces politicians to do a better job, and to provide services that are so attractive, that people actually want to pay taxes. It can also be used as a measurement of the incompetence and ineptitude of the public sector. The worse the quality becomes, the less prone people are to pay for the crap they get.
(DIR) Post #B2qIAsjzu8tzjR3R7g by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-01-31T11:25:50Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @clarebee sadly what the data on well-being shows is that inequality exerts a cost to all levels of society - there's a greta book on this called The Spirit Level which looks at how inequality is corrosive of society
(DIR) Post #B2qIIIXqMeVJmwuE2i by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-01-31T11:27:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 Tax avoidance, i.e. tax planning, may serve to improve the tax code; tax evasion however is illegal & as such demonstrates people's asociality (which I think is a major problem)
(DIR) Post #B2qLh6C7if5yaRGQl6 by h4890@alive.bar
2026-01-31T12:04:54Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @clarebee I haven't read it, but I'd suspect that they committed the falacy of looking at too short a time frame. Capitalism doesn't work without inequality. Inequality is just a naturally function of our different skills and abilities, and must be allowed to exist, for capitalism to function. If you artificially remove inequality, you'll get the soviet union and and that resulted in starvation and everyone getting it worse. In order to show _why_ we need inequality, and why it is actually a good thing in the long term, I think Johan Norbergs The capitalist manifesto is an excellent book.
(DIR) Post #B2qMCPXVqSVrYrCQ4m by h4890@alive.bar
2026-01-31T12:10:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 Here I disagree. It is illegal if you are a die hard democract. If you are oriented towards libertarianism, then there is no a priori ground to acknowledge unjust laws. I, for instance, recognize no law from the government, since the government does not exist. It is, at the end of the day, just the maffia with the biggest guns, and just like the maffia extorts victims, so does the state. So tax evasion, I'd argue is closer to self defense, than something illegal. You can easily see this if you think about yourself living in russia or ww2 germany. Would you still think that evading taxes in russia would be illegal? Or would it be an act of freedom? Would you comply with ratting out jews in ww2 germany? These examples are just different in degree, but not in kind. My most important point is this... _if_ politicians steal from you, with the threat of violence, _but_ put this to such good use that you won't be able to find a better option on the market, then there would be no problem with tax evasion, since that would be irrational. And that is why it is so important as a quality signal of western democracies. Do they do a bad job, tax evasion increases, do they do a good job, tax evasion decreases. But since politicians lack the market mentality, they'd rather crack down on tax evasion with violence, which is the same as silencing the opposition with a punch in the face. If they were smart, they would engage and try to find out _why_ the evaders do not think they get "value for money" and then they would adapt, and then society, and everyone, would actually benefit. By not doing that, you just end up with the classic problem of modern western democracy which has just devolved into mob rule where a majority exploits a minority, and this, over time, leads to polarization, and possibly to authoritarianism as people slowly lose the faith in democracy.
(DIR) Post #B2qQENIpX3PP1HWWqu by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-01-31T12:56:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @clarebee I think what experiment with worker organisation in Yugoslavia in the 60s/70s & in Spain with Mondragon now show is that even when workers organise themselves there is a need for some inequality in a formal sense - the notion of absolute equality is a straw man, but what is needed is a less unequal society - the Spirit Level take s quiet a long view & I think while yo would not agree with a lot of what it says, you would find it an interesting & worthwhile read
(DIR) Post #B2qQP7mzYFGE5gl1KS by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-01-31T12:58:02Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 Well, I think it all comes down to the legitimacy of the Govt. and that would be value call for the individual but a matter of law for the state.... I see tax as broadly a social good & so I'm always looking for ways for the system to be fairer & work better.... tax evasion is not the way forward
(DIR) Post #B2qVU8TSvncVQyphya by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-01-31T13:54:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 thinking about this a little further I find an anomaly in my own thinking. When thinking about the Rule of Law, I see some justification for breaking unfair/unjust laws via cicvil disobedience (and indeed explore this justification) in my book on the Rule of Law; but in our exchange I said I didn't agree with your argument about tax evasion.I think where tax evasion was organised as a collective action I can see how it would fit my RoL argument, but not as a personal action.
(DIR) Post #B2sOESbtzHDLtAHFqq by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T11:43:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @clarebee Sadly, at 352 pages, I don't think I have the time to spare. What I _would_ find interesting though, would be a debate between the authors and Johan Norberg. Since Norberg argues the opposite point (somewhat, there is nuance here so I do not think he is arguing the naive opposite) with a similar data-based and historical approach, it would be very interesting to have them debate each other.
(DIR) Post #B2sOXwXkv9fcE7d06K by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T11:46:14Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 This is the truth! It is, indeed, a subjective value judgment. For me, any state that takes in more than half of what someone earns, does not have legitimacy, but is a slave owner and not a state. So for me, in order to talk about any kind of legitimacy, the total tax level must come down to below 50%. After that... a new conversation starts, when it comes to how the tax level can be brought down to thte 5-10% range, at which point I think many (but not all) tax evaders wouldn't bother any longer. Probably myself included, even though the amount of evasion in my case is not bigger than 10-15% of the total income. Based on those criteria, what do you think of the channel islands?
(DIR) Post #B2sOsTc1gITqa0Pszg by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T11:50:00Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 You are brutally honest with yourself and that deserves a lot of respect! I really like that aspect of our discussions, even though I am not as brutally honest myself. But one can always improve! ;) What I think is important to keep in mind, based on the discussion so far in this thread, is that no law should ever be seen as eternal and absolute, and depending on the circumstances, it can be justified to break them. A too rigid stance towards "the law" at worst risks you becoming a useful idiot to authoritarian regimes. This is also the wonderful subjective borderland of ethics vs law. When does your personal code of ethic demand that you break the law? That's a very interesting question to think about! So how come you would theoretically be open to tax evasion as collective action and not as a set of uncoordinated individuals?
(DIR) Post #B2sPFIsbkbVpxC3bn6 by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T00:49:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @h4890 The current system of the working & middle classes paying taxes and billionaires evading taxation is simply unsustainable. Billionaires get to extract wealth. Everyone else gets to contribute to billionaire wealth, via consumer spending & paying for exhorbitant private government contracts funded by taxpayers. There's a number of ways to do a tax revolt that are legal. 1. Stop working. Retire early if you can afford it.2. Reduce consumption. Spend less.1/
(DIR) Post #B2sPFKS5u9UapXfSk4 by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T11:54:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Npars01 @ChrisMayLA6 I agree and disagree with you. I _do_ agree, as a libertarian, that private government contracts funded by tax payers should not exist, and that any man who has become a billionaire that way, is not a billionaire but just an expert at manipulating the state for his benefit. This is also an argument for why the state should be small, and not be an actor on the markets to such an extent that it is today. You'll just end up with a small clique manipulating it and loads of political corruption. What I do not agree with, is that billionaires who became billionaires on the private market is something we must worry about. They became billionaires by providing a serivce you and I freely buy from them, so they helped us, and should not be punished for it. In terms of taxes, also note that you must consider the tax revenue resulting as a consequence of the entire empire they built. That includes jobs created, the income taxes on those jobs, money they spend in local markets, tariffs etc. Once a billionaire you cannot compare taxes like you do with your neighbours. If you look at the taxes the billionaire pays directly, and indirectly, you will see that they actually pay 100s of millions in tax. Demanding they should pay more, while we do not, is juts pure greed. They pay more than enough.
(DIR) Post #B2sPFRrANKhtnKS5IG by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T00:53:45Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
2/There's no sales tax or VAT due if no one is buying much. Boycott Amazon.3. Switch to renewable energy. Get a heat pump, balcony solar panels. Ditch the car.Don't feed the fossil fuel fascists frying democracy & the planet.4. Work less. Retirement savings are being eyed by the 1%. They are working to eradicate savings, property ownership, & assets, with another global financial crisis or world war.So why bother growing a nest egg that'll just be stolen from you anyway?
(DIR) Post #B2sPFZoylLi8UrURzk by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T00:57:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
3/Earn less. Downsize your life.Take a job that pays the bills but is less stressful & pays less. No fascist government can force a labor force to work a crappy job for rich jerks.5. Grow food. The first thing a kleptocracy does is food shortages, price gouging, & orchestration of famines.The fossil fuel industry is forecasted to kill 1 billion people this way by the end of the century. Don't be one of them.6. Start a "cash only" business, mutual aid or a barter system.
(DIR) Post #B2sPFi7htbReFGJWIS by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T01:02:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
4/Keep local economies local. Boycott Walmart. India had to resort to demonetizing their most commonly used monetary notes in an attempt to counter what the government considered "black markets". If monetary exchange never goes through a bank etc is it taxable?7. Delay paying taxes. Apply for a postponement. Many of them.Delayed tax payments can be as destructive to billionaire wealth extraction as complete non-compliance.
(DIR) Post #B2sPFqR8zDkK1rT9hg by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T01:05:44Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
5/They can't charge people exorbitant interest rates if they avoid endebtedness with no car loans, no credit cards etc8. Ronald Reagan orchestrated a tax revolt using property taxes to force public universities to institute high tuition protocols & exclude black Vietnam vets from using the GI bill for economic mobility. The same strategy can be used against Trump’s regime. States can withhold their remittances. 9. Non-tariff barriers.Stop maintaining the airports used by private jets.
(DIR) Post #B2sPFys1dA0CBY6jiK by Npars01@mstdn.social
2026-02-01T01:07:21Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
6/Thwart access to a Trump golf course.Withhold permits for transporting & storing jet fuel for private jets.Stop maintaining the roads going to a Trump golf course.Cut off the public water supply to Miami billionaire bunker islands.Much of what the Tories & Republicans have done to the world was done with taxpayer money.Oil wars. Bailouts. Corporate welfare.What happens when an electorate decides to voluntarily drop their taxable income by 5% or 10%?
(DIR) Post #B2sPUMwSvhZ4td2sTY by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-02-01T11:57:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 The Channel Islands are not a good example as the benefit from a UK security umbrella & some state functions undertaken (in trade affairs for instance) by the main UK state - so not a fully functioning state (not comparable to the states we are interested in)
(DIR) Post #B2sPVU8vdrX5WGPIyu by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T11:57:28Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@Npars01 @ChrisMayLA6 P.S. I agree with 2. This is just rational behaviour and is advisable regardless of ones stance towards taxes and billionaires. When it comes to 1, I'd argue that only if you would enjoy it, should you do it. If your job is your vocation, not working would be cutting off your nose to spite the face.
(DIR) Post #B2sPauKZhgUgBgRLma by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T11:58:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 But if they benefit in such a one sided way, how come the UK still allows it? What is the unique selling point of the channel islands for the UK?
(DIR) Post #B2sQbIc1WekVRuLtzc by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-02-01T12:09:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 I think if there was a coordinated campaign of not paying some specific tax, organised across social groups - i.e. not just some & their friends, but a wider campaign - and then yes it would be more like civil disobedience... and as you say, law is not fixed; civil disobedience is one mechanism by which law *does&* change - in the end law must be build on forms of consent to be 'efficient' and so when consent declines so law(s) must respond to stay normative not just force
(DIR) Post #B2sQhNz6SsDXqf39o8 by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-02-01T12:10:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 Its a good Q; I'd say its more historical friction (i.e. too difficult to change) than any real benefit flowing towards the UK
(DIR) Post #B2sS1ldmK0FAxiMFjk by ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us
2026-02-01T12:25:40Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@h4890 @Npars01 here we are getting caught up in the difference between absolute levels of payment (in nominal terms) & relative (proportional) taxes - as has been pointed out frequently, such are the advantages of the rich that they are often subject to a lower (proportional) tax rate than normal folk... if one believes in a fair tax system, this doesn't seem right
(DIR) Post #B2t2wv7VLXYtDaoWye by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T19:19:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 This is the truth!
(DIR) Post #B2t32UpO0sejPazwm0 by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T19:20:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 Yes, it does seem that history is a powerful ally of microstates and independent areas. As long as they don't rock the boat, they can live a surprisingly long time.
(DIR) Post #B2t38LdZ63t8e3G8FE by h4890@alive.bar
2026-02-01T19:21:29Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@ChrisMayLA6 @Npars01 Ahh... here we are looping back to one of our old discussions about the concept of fairness. I think, in order to repeat ourselves, I'll refrain from commenting.