You might also be interested in
Replies (31)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
Typical
Like the overwhelming majority of would-be Labour leaders past and present, Corbyn is a complete ignoramus when it comes to economics while this chap Murphy sounds like he's the heir to Russel Brand.
hang on, abaco...
Please see the letter in the Observer on 22 August for a list of economists who are probably not to be considered "ignoramus's".
Russell is spelt with two l's, by the way.
People in glass houses
Please see the letter in the Observer on 22 August for a list of economists who are probably not to be considered "ignoramus's".
Russell is spelt with two l's, by the way.
If you're commenting on the spelling of others, I'd suggest checking your own spelling. The plural of ignoramus is ignoramuses. There is certainly no apostrophe in the word (unless you work for a greengrocer).
Murphy's Law
Murphy needs to update his Wikipedia page where he reckons tax evasion amounts to £25bn per year - now apparently up to £80bn. I suppose that's inflation for you. I now remember why I never read the Guardian.
Good luck to him
With New Labour having stolen the Cons clothes in 1997 and the Cons having recently stolen Labour's clothes, we are sick with centre-right, one-liner, synthetics.
We need someone like JC to encourage a decent opposition. He is unlikely to lead it long-term but maybe he'll encourage some new blood with a feel for what a decent society should be like.
BBC seem to be listening in...
It may be complete coincidence, but this morning's 'Today' programme on Radio 4 devoted a significant chunk of time to Richard Murphy, "the architect of Corbynomics" at around 7:16am. He did a pretty cogent job of explaining his stance, and frankly sounded more logical and coherent than the Tory politician who appeared later to defend the amounts of money being pumped into the married couple's allowance.
Richard has already blogged about his appearance, and you can listen again on the BBC website. Click the link and when the player appears, move the rectangular white slider next to the time figure until it shows 01:16:16 or thereabouts.
And today in Dreamland...
So, tax the rich disproportionally, stifle enterprise, centralise everything and nationalise it without compensation and everything will go swimmingly?
I sometimes wonder what planet these people live on..
Please don't impugn the reporter's integrity
I've revisited the article and cannot see any obvious signs of bias or favouritism. The decision to publish the piece was taken by the site's editors, so any brickbats for giving Richard the oxygen of publicity should be aimed in our direction.
The article makes clear that he is a divisive figure and does not state his figures as undisputed facts. For years, however, we have highlighted the extent to which Richard has helped to shift the debate on tax avoidance - which has caused discomfort for some practitioners and AccountingWEB members. The Labour leadership debate is everywhere at the moment - including the Today programme. Richard Murphy's behind the scenes role provides a great accountancy angle that we judged to be of both political and professional interest to members.
Can we now get back to the main subject of the debate rather than bias (and spelling)?
Biased Article
"who else’s fingerprints should we find on economic policy – so called Corbynomics – than tax campaigner Richard Murphy?" Fingerprints are used in the context of crime and getting caught out. You would never use the term in a positive context.
"Corbyn has repeated, verbatim, Murphy’s claim that government is missing out £120bn in tax revenues". So what if he used the same words if that is the only available research on the subject? Can we have the wording used please?
The whole tone of the article is as if Corbyn has been caught consorting with some sort of criminal and it sounds like the fact that Corbyn has drawn on some of Murphy's research has been used to imply that Murphy has written the entire tax section of Corbyn's manifesto.
To hear Richard explain it...
He HAS written the entire tax section of Corbyn's manifesto and is quite pleased to have done so (Richard likes nothing better than for politicians to recognise his efforts and give them a running chance of being enacted).
@chatman - The "fingerprints" interpretation is yours, I think you can also have your fingers all over something without being thought of as being a criminal.
Just to confirm that bias is in the eye of the beholder, I was concerned that you were accusing Francois of being biased in favour of Murphy's left-wing stance, since covering the Labour campaign at all could be construed as giving publicity to their tax policies. But whatever his (or my) political tendencies, our job is to put the facts in front of you in clear, but compelling terms that encourage AccountingWEB members to offer their own thoughts on the matter.
I'm satisfied that we've acheived that.
Meanwhile, the source document for Corbyn's economic and tax policies contains the bulletpoints listed at the end of the article.
Richard's relationship with the Corbyn campaign has cropped up frequently in his blog, from an episode where he provided technical support to the candidate at a speech in July, and discussions of the £120bn tax gap figures. In this blog, he states, "It was quite explicitly an attack on Jeremy Corbyn’s use of my tax gap data to support what now seems to be called Corbynomics."
@John Stokdyk
He HAS written the entire tax section of Corbyn's manifesto and is quite pleased to have done so (Richard likes nothing better than for politicians to recognise his efforts and give them a running chance of being enacted).
Well why not say that then, instead of just implying it? And if it's true, can we have a reference?
@chatman - The "fingerprints" interpretation is yours
Well there's a statement of the obvious if ever I heard one. Who else's interpretation would I make when I read something? Whose interpretation do you get when you read something? Perhaps what you really wanted to say was that no-one else but me has drawn that interpretation. If so, do you have evidence to support such a claim?
I think you can also have your fingers all over something without being thought of as being a criminal.
Well of course you can; this is another statement of the obvious that does not address the issue; fingerprints are left on most things you touch, but that is hardly the point is it? Fingerprints are used to uncover crimes when people seek to conceal their involvement. The connection is obvious.
our job is to put the facts in front of you in clear, but compelling terms that encourage AccountingWEB members to offer their own thoughts on the matter.
Exactly; hence my surprise.
I'm satisfied that we've acheived that
Can you explain why? I have explained why I think you haven't.
.
Not sure what the fuss it about on the article. Seems to be exactly the sort of thing Accounting web should be reporting on.
As for Corbyn, this to me is exactly what Labour should be doing and not trying to be "Tory light". Good government needs a good opposition, and I personally would rather see the Tories running scared of left wing policies than hard line right wing ones.
Being "in bed" with our old friend Mr Murphy does however strike me as rather worrying. Reality and rhetoric are not clearly separate in his universe which does seem slightly different to the one most other people occupy.
Still it shows excessive self promotion will get you places.
hello from Greece JS
I listened to Today this morning on the bbc iradioplayer, he does bang on but he has created a niche for himself so love or loathe his national investment bank he is at least trying to come up with solutions. He is a quantative easer and Imo that ain't going to work
waiting for .....
This is also being discussed, in some detail, on Jolyon Maugham's waitingfortax.com
The catch
I agree with Paul and Ireallyshouldknow... Corbyn seems prepared to live and die on his principles, which whether you agree with them or not, is refreshing. Compared to a political shape shifter like Osborne, it'll be nice to have lefty rabble rouser leading the opposition rather than yelling from the back benches.
The catch Corbyn may find is that to lead Labour in the Commons he has to stand in front of his own benches and present them with his back. The real danger he will face will not be across the despatch box
It could well be more like the pantomime,
"They're behind you"
Corbyn
I can't help but think that Corbyn is the right choice of Labour leader, based on 'traditional' Labour values etc.
However in terms of winning elections, that won't happen based on 'traditional' Labour values.
So Corbyn is the right man for Labour but a Corbyn Labour would be unelectable.
Maybe the 'moderates' or 'New Labour' types should start their own party because the truth is that Blair may have won a few elections but he wasn't 'Labour'.
Corbyn and Murphy
Having followed Murphy on Twitter for over 3 years I would summarise my thoughts thus:
1. His tax justice campaign has been very effective, and in my view generally accurate and spotlighting the right areas whereby the proportion of the cake hoovered up by the guys at the top has increased over the past 30 years.
2. Whilst some of his economic analysis is very good - for example his critique of quantitative easing - in my view Corbynomics is "same old same old". The same old stuff which has been tried in extreme forms by USSR, Chairman Mao and the like, and in milder forms by various Western countries including our own. The vast majority of these have been disasters of one sort or another.
I consider myself to be the ultimate swing voter, having voted for 7 different parties in the past 32 years of voting. When I have voted Labour they have always won. When I have voted elsewhere they have always lost, except 2005 when the only reason I voted elsewhere was Iraq.
Corbyn and his like have no chance of getting my vote, and I very much doubt their chances in Stockton South, Norwich, Nuneaton, Carlisle etc. We could do with a more credible Labour party as history tells us that when the Tories are supremely confident they cannot lose the next election, muck-ups happen.
always good to meet a swinger on the internet
I disagree , if he is elected leader he could well win the GE , every so often there is an almighty political blip and this might well be the next
£10,000
You can have £10k at even money if he gets elected that he is not PM of this country 5 years from now. We simply set up an escrow account, transfer in our £10k deposits and whoever wins takes out the lot in 5 years time.
Election
It would take more than an almighty political blip. A "true" Labour party will never get enough seats to win a Gen Election, and Corbyn is pretty much "true" Labour.
i remember in the early 80's
40 economists wrote to the Times saying Geoffrey Howes budget with tax and spending cuts was the wrong approach . We know that the economists were wrong and I have that wonderful feeling of deja vu sweeping over me all over again ;)
Economists, say no more.
40 economists wrote to the Times saying Geoffrey Howes budget with tax and spending cuts was the wrong approach . We know that the economists were wrong and I have that wonderful feeling of deja vu sweeping over me all over again ;)
ONE
Three econometricians went out hunting, and came across a large deer. The first econometrician fired, but missed, by a metre to the left. The second econometrician fired, but also missed, by a metre to the right. The third econometrician didn't fire, but shouted in triumph, "We got it! We got it!"
TWO
A mathematician, a theoretical economist, and an econometrician are asked to find a black cat (who doesn't really exist) in a closed room with the lights off. The mathematician gets crazy trying to find a black cat that doesn't exist inside the darkened room and ends up in a psychiatric hospital. The theoretical economist is unable to catch the black cat that doesn't exist inside the darkened room, but exits the room proudly proclaiming that he can construct a model to describe all his movements with extreme accuracy. The econometrician walks securely into the darkened room, spends one hour looking for the black cat that doesn't exist and shouts from inside the room that he has caught it by the neck."
Francois
Osborne is no more a shape shifter whatever that may mean than Corbyn. Tories are trying to encourage people into work and not live on welfare. I think that's a good thing. I suspect that Corbyn wants to raise more tax to pay more welfare its all a bit Animal Farm for me. Just look back to when tax credits were introduced... Oh they will only cost 3billion and turned out to cost over 100 and became the biggest gerrymandering exercise ever in the UK. how civil servants would deal with Corbyn and vice versa is fascinating. Was there really a near coup against Wilson