John McDonnell said during his speech yesterday [Monday 28-Sep-2015] that he will clamp down on large company tax dodgers like Amazon, Google, Starbucks & Vodafone. Vodafone hits back.
The telecoms company said it was “disappointing” the issue of its tax affairs had been raised again. The company has come under fire from campaigners in the past over the amount of corporation tax it pays on UK earnings. It claimed there was “no truth in the allegations in the past and there are none now. As we have made clear on numerous occasions, Vodafone has always paid its taxes and for the last financial year (2014/15) we paid around £360m in direct taxes in the UK,” a spokesperson said.
In a statement, the company argued investment in a competitive market had left it making “minimal profits” (£41m) in the UK. “As the Government wants to promote investment in essential infrastructure like ours, the UK tax rules mean that relief’s for our investment are set against the profits we make,” the spokesperson said. “In addition the Government understands that we have to borrow huge sums of money to be able to invest for the long term, so they allow us to take the interest we pay on those borrowings off our profit too.
Vodafone paid no UK corporation tax in the year 2012-13, arguing at the time Britain was "one of the least-profitable mobile markets anywhere in the world".
We are in an age of deep public spending cuts and real austerity. And this [tax avoidance] is not a victimless crime, if you like. If this was seven or eight years ago, pre-financial crisis, I do not think it would have had the same impact it has had now.
The four companies mentioned will continue for as long as they can to dodge their responsibilities because they can, I suspect there is no government that can change this, it is up to people to stop using the relevant companies, but how likely is that going to happen when Joe Public says, where do I buy my books from, coffee from, how do I search the net and I’m not giving up my phone, the companies will continue to take the piss.
Tuesday, 29 September 2015
Monday, 28 September 2015
Electoral Reform
The current voting system is called First Past The Post [FPTP], also known as Single Member Plurality, Simple Majority Voting or Plurality Voting and has been in place since 1922.
Breakdown of the positions at the general election of 2015
Conservative [36.8%]
Labour [30.5%]
UKIP [12.7%]
Liberal Democrats [7.9%]
SNP [4.7%]
Green [3.8%]
DUP [0.6%]
Plaid Cymru [0.6%]
Sinn Féin [0.6%]
UUP [0.4%]
SDLP [0.3%]
Other [1.1%]
Let us take one example, the obvious one UKIP. Total votes cast 30,691,680, UKIP received 3,881,129 which is 12.7% and they have 1 MP. 3.8 million people feel aggrieved because their voice is not being heard.
In a time of greater political pluralism, British politics is no longer well served by a voting system that was designed for a two-party era. Nor are the interests of British democracy. Arguably the biggest democratic-deficit associated with FPTP is that election outcomes are effectively decided by a handful of voters who happen to live in all-important marginal seats. The overwhelming majority of us live in safe seats where we are increasingly neglected by the political parties both during and between elections –and where we have little chance of influencing the result of general elections.
Proportional representation [PR] is an electoral system in which the distribution of seats corresponds closely with the proportion of the total votes cast for each party. For example, if a party gained 40% of the total votes, a perfectly proportional system would allow them to gain 40% of the seats.
PR is used by more nations than single winner systems. Among the world's 35 most robust democracies with populations of at least two million people, only six use winner-take-all systems for elections to the legislative assembly (plurality, runoff or instant runoff); four use parallel systems; and 25 use PR.
PR dominates Europe, including Germany and most of northern and eastern Europe; it is also used for European Parliament elections. France adopted PR at the end of World War II, but discarded it in 1958; it was used for parliament elections in 1986. Switzerland has the most widespread use of proportional representation, which is the system used to elect not only national legislatures and local councils, but also all local executives. PR is less common in the English-speaking world; New Zealand adopted MMP in 1993, but the UK, Canada, India and Australia all use winner-take-all systems for legislative elections.
Maybe now is the time for change?
Breakdown of the positions at the general election of 2015
Conservative [36.8%]
Labour [30.5%]
UKIP [12.7%]
Liberal Democrats [7.9%]
SNP [4.7%]
Green [3.8%]
DUP [0.6%]
Plaid Cymru [0.6%]
Sinn Féin [0.6%]
UUP [0.4%]
SDLP [0.3%]
Other [1.1%]
Let us take one example, the obvious one UKIP. Total votes cast 30,691,680, UKIP received 3,881,129 which is 12.7% and they have 1 MP. 3.8 million people feel aggrieved because their voice is not being heard.
In a time of greater political pluralism, British politics is no longer well served by a voting system that was designed for a two-party era. Nor are the interests of British democracy. Arguably the biggest democratic-deficit associated with FPTP is that election outcomes are effectively decided by a handful of voters who happen to live in all-important marginal seats. The overwhelming majority of us live in safe seats where we are increasingly neglected by the political parties both during and between elections –and where we have little chance of influencing the result of general elections.
Proportional representation [PR] is an electoral system in which the distribution of seats corresponds closely with the proportion of the total votes cast for each party. For example, if a party gained 40% of the total votes, a perfectly proportional system would allow them to gain 40% of the seats.
PR is used by more nations than single winner systems. Among the world's 35 most robust democracies with populations of at least two million people, only six use winner-take-all systems for elections to the legislative assembly (plurality, runoff or instant runoff); four use parallel systems; and 25 use PR.
PR dominates Europe, including Germany and most of northern and eastern Europe; it is also used for European Parliament elections. France adopted PR at the end of World War II, but discarded it in 1958; it was used for parliament elections in 1986. Switzerland has the most widespread use of proportional representation, which is the system used to elect not only national legislatures and local councils, but also all local executives. PR is less common in the English-speaking world; New Zealand adopted MMP in 1993, but the UK, Canada, India and Australia all use winner-take-all systems for legislative elections.
Maybe now is the time for change?
Friday, 25 September 2015
The future of oil
Oil futures settled lower at the beginning of the week, as a slumping U.S. stock market fed concerns that the outlook for energy demand will continue to soften.
Prices, however, pared some of their losses by the settlement as petroleum-products futures took a last minute turn higher following a report that Colonial Pipeline Co. has shutdown petroleum-product pipelines. The October contract for West Texas Intermediate crude settled at $45.83 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, down 85 cents, or 1.8%, on its expiration day. November crude, fell 60 cents, or 1.3%, to $46.36 a barrel.
Meanwhile, November Brent crude on London’s ICE Futures exchange, [which is priced as US] +0.59% turned a bit higher, up 16 cents, or 0.3%, to settle at $49.08 a barrel.
Last week’s decision by the Federal Reserve to leave interest rates unchanged rattled investor confidence over the state of the U.S. economy and, in turn, the outlook for energy demand. U.S. equities, meanwhile, traded sharply lower Tuesday, following losses in Europe. Analysts polled by Platts forecast a weekly decline of 700,000 barrels in crude supplies.
The oil market is also seriously concerned about an economic slowdown in China, which is currently dragging key commodities like crude oil and base metals down and China has accumulated about 200 million barrels of crude in its reserve so far and aims to have 500 million by the end of the decade, according to the International Energy Agency. It’s currently filling a 19 million-barrel facility at Huangdao and will add oil at six sites with a combined capacity of about 132 million barrels over the next 18 months, the Paris-based adviser on energy policy estimates.
This does not bode well.
Prices, however, pared some of their losses by the settlement as petroleum-products futures took a last minute turn higher following a report that Colonial Pipeline Co. has shutdown petroleum-product pipelines. The October contract for West Texas Intermediate crude settled at $45.83 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, down 85 cents, or 1.8%, on its expiration day. November crude, fell 60 cents, or 1.3%, to $46.36 a barrel.
Meanwhile, November Brent crude on London’s ICE Futures exchange, [which is priced as US] +0.59% turned a bit higher, up 16 cents, or 0.3%, to settle at $49.08 a barrel.
Last week’s decision by the Federal Reserve to leave interest rates unchanged rattled investor confidence over the state of the U.S. economy and, in turn, the outlook for energy demand. U.S. equities, meanwhile, traded sharply lower Tuesday, following losses in Europe. Analysts polled by Platts forecast a weekly decline of 700,000 barrels in crude supplies.
The oil market is also seriously concerned about an economic slowdown in China, which is currently dragging key commodities like crude oil and base metals down and China has accumulated about 200 million barrels of crude in its reserve so far and aims to have 500 million by the end of the decade, according to the International Energy Agency. It’s currently filling a 19 million-barrel facility at Huangdao and will add oil at six sites with a combined capacity of about 132 million barrels over the next 18 months, the Paris-based adviser on energy policy estimates.
This does not bode well.
Thursday, 24 September 2015
HS2 finance
High Speed Rail 2 has not even started yet and the money being thrown at executives is unbelievable.
Simon Kirby is Chief Executive of High Speed Two [HS2] Limited. Kirby is also a director of the Major Projects Association and the National Skills Academy for Railway Engineering. He is receiving £750,000.00 just for HS2, and remember he is a civil servant.
For that staggering salary he is not the top man in charge, he will only oversee certain infrastructure projects such as the redevelopment of King's Cross station in London, the Forth bridge overhaul and the Thameslink upgrade.
He has been promised a £300,000 loyalty bonus from Network Rail in April, just before he leaves, no matter what happens whether it succeeds or is a total failure.
So what will the public get for this expense?
This morning on BBC Radio 4 Today program he refused to answer directly any question put to him by the presenter Mishal Husain and merely repeating his broadcast statement showed that we are paying for a mouthpiece that has no clue as to what is going on.
Simon Kirby is Chief Executive of High Speed Two [HS2] Limited. Kirby is also a director of the Major Projects Association and the National Skills Academy for Railway Engineering. He is receiving £750,000.00 just for HS2, and remember he is a civil servant.
For that staggering salary he is not the top man in charge, he will only oversee certain infrastructure projects such as the redevelopment of King's Cross station in London, the Forth bridge overhaul and the Thameslink upgrade.
He has been promised a £300,000 loyalty bonus from Network Rail in April, just before he leaves, no matter what happens whether it succeeds or is a total failure.
So what will the public get for this expense?
This morning on BBC Radio 4 Today program he refused to answer directly any question put to him by the presenter Mishal Husain and merely repeating his broadcast statement showed that we are paying for a mouthpiece that has no clue as to what is going on.
Tuesday, 22 September 2015
China's best friend
The UK and the People's Republic of China were on opposing sides of the Cold War, while the Republic of China and the UK were allies during World War II. Both countries are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.
Today, however, China and Britain enjoy a friendly, cooperative, and close relationship. China and Britain have established a full strategic partnership and close cooperation, this is currently being consolidated by the chancellor‘s visit to Beijing the capital of China.
The reason being China acting as a powerhouse. Its economy now is over three times what it was in 2005. While the UK and most other developed countries suffered during the great financial crisis from 2008, the country that exists now has an emerging middle class, working in the services sectors, living in the vast new cities being renovated or simply built from scratch, whose future patterns of consumption will be crucial for global growth.
Like it or not, China supports the unity the EU offers, at least financially and economically, and while it would never publicly state anything on this, it would almost certainly regard a UK exit negatively one would presume.
The UK as an intellectual partner of China, as it attempts to build a new kind of economic structure and deal with some of its huge environmental and sustainability issues, is a new kind of role, and one of the few where it can be liberated from the shadow of its historic issues with the People's Republic.
I have already mentioned their stock market crash caldariborderzone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/chinas-bad-month.html so no need to revisit that, but what about human rights? Well that is another matter entirely...
Today, however, China and Britain enjoy a friendly, cooperative, and close relationship. China and Britain have established a full strategic partnership and close cooperation, this is currently being consolidated by the chancellor‘s visit to Beijing the capital of China.
The reason being China acting as a powerhouse. Its economy now is over three times what it was in 2005. While the UK and most other developed countries suffered during the great financial crisis from 2008, the country that exists now has an emerging middle class, working in the services sectors, living in the vast new cities being renovated or simply built from scratch, whose future patterns of consumption will be crucial for global growth.
Like it or not, China supports the unity the EU offers, at least financially and economically, and while it would never publicly state anything on this, it would almost certainly regard a UK exit negatively one would presume.
The UK as an intellectual partner of China, as it attempts to build a new kind of economic structure and deal with some of its huge environmental and sustainability issues, is a new kind of role, and one of the few where it can be liberated from the shadow of its historic issues with the People's Republic.
I have already mentioned their stock market crash caldariborderzone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/chinas-bad-month.html so no need to revisit that, but what about human rights? Well that is another matter entirely...
Monday, 21 September 2015
Europe in crisis
The crisis in the Eurozone lays bare a range of problems that go way beyond the issues of Greek debt or political paralysis at the European level. It is often discussed as a crisis of European integration or a crisis of national economies within Europe.
Critical political economy stands in the tradition of classical political economy. It analyses the economy as part of society and provides a framework for an integrative analysis of the economy and political processes. For this reason, it can be considered a disciplinary perspective. At the core of a critical political economy, there is a class-based framework for the analysis of society, which aims at contributing to the struggles and overcoming specific historical forms of capitalism such as the current neo-liberal European mode of production.
It is obvious that the current economic policy framework of the Euro area is inappropriate to deal with the current requirements. In fact, the current policy framework and the stance of the policies applied have even reinforced current account imbalances through different channels.
First, they have been unable to prevent significant inflation differentials to emerge within the Euro area, mainly by undermining the conditions for effective wage bargaining conditions as a main tool for this.
Second, they have not provided the appropriate tools for domestic demand management to adjust the actual growth rate of each country towards the BPCGR [balance of payments constrained growth rate], mainly by applying a ‘one size fits all’ policy with respect to government budget balances and government debt in the context of the SGP [Stability and Growth Pact].
Third, due to the lack of any consistent industrial and development strategy for the Euro area as a whole and for the catching-up countries in particular, ensuring that capital inflows into these countries support long-run sustainable growth, they have not provided any effective policy tools to adjust the BPCGR of the high-growth current account deficit countries towards the respective growth rates.
There should be changes in the objectives of the ECB to include that of the external value of the currency, and interest rates would have to be set with regard to their effects on the exchange value of the euro. The target exchange rate would be set by the Council of Ministers of the Eurogroup, and the ECB would be required to support that policy [through its interest rate policy and through interventions in the foreign exchange markets].
The objectives of the ECB would have to be changed to include that of support of the external value of the currency. Interest rates would have to be set with regard to their effects on the exchange value of the euro. It is very important for the EMU to formulate an official exchange rate policy and abide by it. The achievement of full employment without inflationary pressures should be the ultimate objective.
We might be looking for an out within the next two years, but every political change in Europe will affect us whether we are in or out.
Critical political economy stands in the tradition of classical political economy. It analyses the economy as part of society and provides a framework for an integrative analysis of the economy and political processes. For this reason, it can be considered a disciplinary perspective. At the core of a critical political economy, there is a class-based framework for the analysis of society, which aims at contributing to the struggles and overcoming specific historical forms of capitalism such as the current neo-liberal European mode of production.
It is obvious that the current economic policy framework of the Euro area is inappropriate to deal with the current requirements. In fact, the current policy framework and the stance of the policies applied have even reinforced current account imbalances through different channels.
First, they have been unable to prevent significant inflation differentials to emerge within the Euro area, mainly by undermining the conditions for effective wage bargaining conditions as a main tool for this.
Second, they have not provided the appropriate tools for domestic demand management to adjust the actual growth rate of each country towards the BPCGR [balance of payments constrained growth rate], mainly by applying a ‘one size fits all’ policy with respect to government budget balances and government debt in the context of the SGP [Stability and Growth Pact].
Third, due to the lack of any consistent industrial and development strategy for the Euro area as a whole and for the catching-up countries in particular, ensuring that capital inflows into these countries support long-run sustainable growth, they have not provided any effective policy tools to adjust the BPCGR of the high-growth current account deficit countries towards the respective growth rates.
There should be changes in the objectives of the ECB to include that of the external value of the currency, and interest rates would have to be set with regard to their effects on the exchange value of the euro. The target exchange rate would be set by the Council of Ministers of the Eurogroup, and the ECB would be required to support that policy [through its interest rate policy and through interventions in the foreign exchange markets].
The objectives of the ECB would have to be changed to include that of support of the external value of the currency. Interest rates would have to be set with regard to their effects on the exchange value of the euro. It is very important for the EMU to formulate an official exchange rate policy and abide by it. The achievement of full employment without inflationary pressures should be the ultimate objective.
We might be looking for an out within the next two years, but every political change in Europe will affect us whether we are in or out.
Friday, 18 September 2015
Syrian update
Last Wednesday Syrian President Bashar al-Assad [speaking for the first time on the global immigration issue] blamed Europe's refugee crisis on Western support for "terrorists".
The Syrian government describes all the armed groups fighting it as terrorists. The insurgents in Syria range from the hard line Islamist Islamic State to nationalists viewed as moderate by the West.
Assad has been buoyed in recent weeks by signs of increased military support from his ally Russia. In his comments he made no mention of reports of Russian military activity in Syria. What he might not realise is Putin's ultimate goal is not to help Syria but merely control it as they [Russia] move through.
Moscow says the Syrian government should be part of a broad coalition to fight Islamic State, taking it out of the final calculation during the land grab programme.
I wrote about this earlier:-
caldariborderzone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-russian-bear.html
Is the Foreign & Commonwealth office just sitting indoors reading about this and nodding their heads in disbelief or do they have their finger on the button?
The Syrian government describes all the armed groups fighting it as terrorists. The insurgents in Syria range from the hard line Islamist Islamic State to nationalists viewed as moderate by the West.
Assad has been buoyed in recent weeks by signs of increased military support from his ally Russia. In his comments he made no mention of reports of Russian military activity in Syria. What he might not realise is Putin's ultimate goal is not to help Syria but merely control it as they [Russia] move through.
Moscow says the Syrian government should be part of a broad coalition to fight Islamic State, taking it out of the final calculation during the land grab programme.
I wrote about this earlier:-
caldariborderzone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/the-russian-bear.html
Is the Foreign & Commonwealth office just sitting indoors reading about this and nodding their heads in disbelief or do they have their finger on the button?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)