Thursday 21 June 2012

Carrm Down

I've been out of town and out of touch, but even I know that David Cameron has considered himself hard enough to come and have a go at Jimmy Carr's tax arrangements. Is this a wise move, I ask myself considering the long history of successful entertainers and tax avoidance? Surely everybody remembers the case of Ken Dodd and his famous Diddy Men - Diddy Pay and Diddy Fuck.

But maybe it is a good tactical  move after all, because it poses something of a problem for the left. It shines a feeble sort of light on the hypocrisy of show business, which is almost entirely populated by folk who declare themselves the epitome of caring socialism and the enemy of what they think of as conservatism. Show business attracts the young and hopeful, who often earn little throughout their lives and live in an extended, often ill-educated, mutually supportive peer group as they struggle to make ends meet by dressing up to make the grown-ups laugh and clap.

The grown-ups, of course, are happy to pay to keep performers in their juvenile and starry-eyed state, in the hope that they'll continue to entertain them for next to nothing. Sounds a lot like Socialism to me, where a ruling elite keeps the poor barefoot and helpless, while pulling their strings and offering crumbs of encouragement in place of real wages.

But all the sweet bonhomie does little to disguise the fact that in the fiercely competitive world of entertainment the big breaks are few, far between, fought-over and favour the hardest-working and most persistent. (What's that? A capitalist work ethic?) Your time in the spotlight - if it ever comes - may be short-lived and could be the only chance you get to build a nest egg. The question shouldn't be, "How dare you?" but more why wouldn't you avoid paying tax?

Many years of "progressive" politics have led us to be forced to hand over ever more of our earnings to support experimental policies of social engineering, touchy-feely (failed) multiculturalism and an infantilisation of the entire population - we're all in show business now. Which of us wouldn't - given the opportunity - pay an expert to allow us to legally avoid that high price and put something aside for those rainy days ahead?

Breaking free of the bounds of mediocrity, it is rarely long before achievers in all walks of life seek to separate themselves from the masses. Give a lefty a bit of money and pretty soon he or she buys a secluded house with security to keep the little people outside. Let people improve themselves and see how long they continue to espouse their former quaint notions of equality.

Jimmy Carr is only doing what most of us would do if we could. If there is fault here it is that the tax burden is too high, to pay for things that we don't need and ultimately don't really believe in. The irony is that the showbiz masses are natural Labour supporters - somebody has to pay the welfare bill for when they're 'resting' - but quickly reassess their priorities once they've made it. It's called human nature.

Who's laughing now?


  1. I agree 100%.

    99% of this was driven by jealousy. It is sickening.


  2. I'm with the esteemed Cap'n. A very excellent post.

  3. Cash is King Jimmy, every self-employed chap knows that. The more we pay in taxes, the more the Govt can spunk off to Space programs in India and climate change projects in Ghana. Keep it firmly in your back pocket and admit to nothing.

  4. "We pay tax to create the society we wish for......"

    So wot went so horribly wrong?

    1. Dunno where you got your quote from, but in the UK we pay taxes to help perpetuate the unreasonable demands of socialism.

  5. My point exactly!
    If, let us say, the UK experienced a revolution tomorrow, and the Status Quo as regards the current fiscal set-up was totally destroyed, how would the UK tax system best be reconstructed?

    For example, I can see a lot of Town Hall Chief Execs (along with the likes of Trampoline Therapists et al) who earn more than the PM suddenly being made redundant - which cannot be a bad thing.

    Which does make me wonder what the true value of their skills would be in the World Of Real Jobs?

  6. Schools, National Healthcare Service, Education, Social Services, Benefits + Welfare, Dentists, etc., are not social experiments - they are state-funded essentials - destroying the funding for this will destroy the fabric of a decent society - the envy of much of the world.

    Yes, give a lefty a bit of money and they'll move to a secluded house with security to keep the little people outside. Yes, socialists want what they dont what others to have. But, doing the right thing has to remain primacy.

    Short-term personal gain from racing to the bottom of a free-for-all society will result in what, precisely?

    1. Schools, National Healthcare Service, Education, Social Services... etc... are what we like to think we are paying for. The reality is that - just like an individual funding an expensive lifestyle on a credit card - we simply cannot afford to be as generous as we have been.

      The UK has to live within its means and part of that is collecting a reasonable amount of tax without scaring the well-off into tax avoidance.

  7. Which brings me back to my original question, if we had to rebuild what Govt should and should not do with our money, what should be left in and in what form, and what should definitely be left out without question?

    Some low hanging fruit to begin with - Overseas Aid. Charity begins at home.
    IVF & Cosmetic surgery - If you cannot have children, someone on high is sending you a message - heed it or pay for it yourself.

    Cosmentic surgery? Pay for your own vanity - remedial surgery as part of treatment for serious disfigurement resulting from burns or accident excepted, why should I?

    Nurses - Do away with the graduate program for Nursing and its ensueing bloating pay scales - if you entered Nursing to nurse, then do just that. If you wish to go higher, then retrain elsewhere, or if the RCN wish to retrain its nurses on the job, both the existing duties and the salary should remain the same, otherwise, leave, and retrain as a GP somewhere else. Nurses are paid to nurse, which includes some unpleasant duties which, once they begin retraining, seem to be left to unqualified labourers, which then results in yet more costs to the NHS.

    These costs could be cut back if the 'supernurses' actually carried on doing what they joined the profession for in the 1st place.

    Local Govt - How many 'Assistant' directors, deputy to the assistant director, assistant deputy to the assistant deputy director do we really need? You only have to look at the Appointments page of the Guardian to see how much tax is wasted on these vaccuous job creation schemes. That's the trouble with empires, they eventually grow to self-serve rather than to continue to serve those who sanctioned their creation.

    1. Haha! Sounds like you HAVE been reading my blog! With you all the way.

  8. Indeed!

    I have been following it since it's inception, but have at times. found it a little 'soft' in its outlook!

    Now all we have to do is to crystallize the ideals within into hard policy.


    1. Or... we could treat the whole thing as an exercise in the fantasy it really is and not take it all that seriously! ('They' are always watching!)