@charlessurface.bsky.social
Why no covert coat?
I live in the countryside, work on the City and if you're going to have one overcoat, I'd suggest it should be this type.
Avoid the velvet collar to minimise the Farage quotient.
I live in the countryside, work on the City and if you're going to have one overcoat, I'd suggest it should be this type.
Avoid the velvet collar to minimise the Farage quotient.
November 21, 2025 at 10:53 PM
Why no covert coat?
I live in the countryside, work on the City and if you're going to have one overcoat, I'd suggest it should be this type.
Avoid the velvet collar to minimise the Farage quotient.
I live in the countryside, work on the City and if you're going to have one overcoat, I'd suggest it should be this type.
Avoid the velvet collar to minimise the Farage quotient.
You don't even know what our tax system *is*.
November 21, 2025 at 8:00 PM
You don't even know what our tax system *is*.
Facts and figures may well seem like 'mental gymnastics' to you.
But if they do, you shouldn't really be commenting on our tax system.
But if they do, you shouldn't really be commenting on our tax system.
November 21, 2025 at 7:59 PM
Facts and figures may well seem like 'mental gymnastics' to you.
But if they do, you shouldn't really be commenting on our tax system.
But if they do, you shouldn't really be commenting on our tax system.
Yes, we must all pay more. Well, specifically middle earners, who are taxed at unusually low rates in the UK.
The rich *are* taxed. To suggest otherwise is just plain ignorant.
The rich *are* taxed. To suggest otherwise is just plain ignorant.
November 21, 2025 at 11:47 AM
Yes, we must all pay more. Well, specifically middle earners, who are taxed at unusually low rates in the UK.
The rich *are* taxed. To suggest otherwise is just plain ignorant.
The rich *are* taxed. To suggest otherwise is just plain ignorant.
Go learn something.
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia
The UK’s experiment in eating the rich while shrinking the state has left everyone worse off
on.ft.com
November 21, 2025 at 9:42 AM
Go learn something.
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
No, I'll gift you this FT article instead. Go learn something.
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia
The UK’s experiment in eating the rich while shrinking the state has left everyone worse off
on.ft.com
November 21, 2025 at 9:42 AM
No, I'll gift you this FT article instead. Go learn something.
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
More 'rambling' for you.
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
November 21, 2025 at 9:41 AM
More 'rambling' for you.
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
Britain’s tax system combines the worst of the US and Scandinavia - on.ft.com/49PwIPp via @FT
We have progressive taxation. Very progressive - look at the charts.
Would you be very fine with the massive cuts to public spending that sort of exodus would result in? If just the top 1% of income earners leave, you lose 30% of income tax.
Cutting benefits to gratify your spite. Smart.
Would you be very fine with the massive cuts to public spending that sort of exodus would result in? If just the top 1% of income earners leave, you lose 30% of income tax.
Cutting benefits to gratify your spite. Smart.
November 20, 2025 at 7:45 AM
We have progressive taxation. Very progressive - look at the charts.
Would you be very fine with the massive cuts to public spending that sort of exodus would result in? If just the top 1% of income earners leave, you lose 30% of income tax.
Cutting benefits to gratify your spite. Smart.
Would you be very fine with the massive cuts to public spending that sort of exodus would result in? If just the top 1% of income earners leave, you lose 30% of income tax.
Cutting benefits to gratify your spite. Smart.
If you're just talking about billionaires, it's even worse. There aren't that many billionaires and they're highly mobile.
Put Dyson on the street. Take everything off him.
You've just funded the NHS for six weeks.
His chums have left the country.
What's your next trick, genius?
Put Dyson on the street. Take everything off him.
You've just funded the NHS for six weeks.
His chums have left the country.
What's your next trick, genius?
November 20, 2025 at 7:33 AM
If you're just talking about billionaires, it's even worse. There aren't that many billionaires and they're highly mobile.
Put Dyson on the street. Take everything off him.
You've just funded the NHS for six weeks.
His chums have left the country.
What's your next trick, genius?
Put Dyson on the street. Take everything off him.
You've just funded the NHS for six weeks.
His chums have left the country.
What's your next trick, genius?
Plenty of other richer and more stable countries that aren't pursuing mad ideas like this.
November 19, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Plenty of other richer and more stable countries that aren't pursuing mad ideas like this.
It's not ideological, it's also practical.
What is 'wealth'? Real estate? Housing? Illiquid shares? Any of this held overseas?
Liquid shares in foreign companies?
What is 'wealth'? Real estate? Housing? Illiquid shares? Any of this held overseas?
Liquid shares in foreign companies?
November 19, 2025 at 11:04 PM
It's not ideological, it's also practical.
What is 'wealth'? Real estate? Housing? Illiquid shares? Any of this held overseas?
Liquid shares in foreign companies?
What is 'wealth'? Real estate? Housing? Illiquid shares? Any of this held overseas?
Liquid shares in foreign companies?
Oh it's the Magic MMT Man.
Bloody hell.
Bloody hell.
November 19, 2025 at 11:02 PM
Oh it's the Magic MMT Man.
Bloody hell.
Bloody hell.
2% of *wealth*?! Every year?
*Why* would you stay here?
*Why* would you stay here?
November 19, 2025 at 9:31 PM
2% of *wealth*?! Every year?
*Why* would you stay here?
*Why* would you stay here?
Let's take their option then.
Expropriate the wealth of billionaires.
Start with Dyson, please. Put him on the street. Take all his £20bn.
You just funded the NHS for *six* weeks.
What's your next trick?
The problem with billionaires is there aren't actually that many of them.
Expropriate the wealth of billionaires.
Start with Dyson, please. Put him on the street. Take all his £20bn.
You just funded the NHS for *six* weeks.
What's your next trick?
The problem with billionaires is there aren't actually that many of them.
November 19, 2025 at 7:23 PM
Let's take their option then.
Expropriate the wealth of billionaires.
Start with Dyson, please. Put him on the street. Take all his £20bn.
You just funded the NHS for *six* weeks.
What's your next trick?
The problem with billionaires is there aren't actually that many of them.
Expropriate the wealth of billionaires.
Start with Dyson, please. Put him on the street. Take all his £20bn.
You just funded the NHS for *six* weeks.
What's your next trick?
The problem with billionaires is there aren't actually that many of them.
It assumes everyone receives equally, which as you point out is not the case. High rate taxpayer's pay vast amounts in and take less out.
In many continental systems, unemployment pays a percentage of income. Here, you can pay six figures in a year and go straight onto basic JSA.
In many continental systems, unemployment pays a percentage of income. Here, you can pay six figures in a year and go straight onto basic JSA.
November 19, 2025 at 2:39 PM
It assumes everyone receives equally, which as you point out is not the case. High rate taxpayer's pay vast amounts in and take less out.
In many continental systems, unemployment pays a percentage of income. Here, you can pay six figures in a year and go straight onto basic JSA.
In many continental systems, unemployment pays a percentage of income. Here, you can pay six figures in a year and go straight onto basic JSA.
Sorry - all you're talking about there is the minimum wage increasing.
The fact is anyone on min is a massive net recipient from the state. Sure they're paying in more, but they're taking out way more than that.
You need to be earning 35k+ to be a contributor - 53.5% of households are recipients.
The fact is anyone on min is a massive net recipient from the state. Sure they're paying in more, but they're taking out way more than that.
You need to be earning 35k+ to be a contributor - 53.5% of households are recipients.
November 19, 2025 at 2:28 PM
Sorry - all you're talking about there is the minimum wage increasing.
The fact is anyone on min is a massive net recipient from the state. Sure they're paying in more, but they're taking out way more than that.
You need to be earning 35k+ to be a contributor - 53.5% of households are recipients.
The fact is anyone on min is a massive net recipient from the state. Sure they're paying in more, but they're taking out way more than that.
You need to be earning 35k+ to be a contributor - 53.5% of households are recipients.
But, I'm sorry - you're saying these things with no evidence. Chart 4 is a good test of how progressive our system is. Do you have a time series suggesting the system has become *less* progressive?
Because basic rate down, pa up, additional tax rate introduced suggests otherwise.
Because basic rate down, pa up, additional tax rate introduced suggests otherwise.
November 19, 2025 at 2:13 PM
But, I'm sorry - you're saying these things with no evidence. Chart 4 is a good test of how progressive our system is. Do you have a time series suggesting the system has become *less* progressive?
Because basic rate down, pa up, additional tax rate introduced suggests otherwise.
Because basic rate down, pa up, additional tax rate introduced suggests otherwise.
Are they?
November 19, 2025 at 2:11 PM
Are they?
Thresholds haven't increased for anyone.
Have you done the maths on your change? Given the income distribution be surprised if it increased the take, net.
Nope. Want to have Scandi services? Scandi taxes. That's on everyone, actually fairly, vs. Polanski's populist promises.
Have you done the maths on your change? Given the income distribution be surprised if it increased the take, net.
Nope. Want to have Scandi services? Scandi taxes. That's on everyone, actually fairly, vs. Polanski's populist promises.
November 19, 2025 at 1:00 PM
Thresholds haven't increased for anyone.
Have you done the maths on your change? Given the income distribution be surprised if it increased the take, net.
Nope. Want to have Scandi services? Scandi taxes. That's on everyone, actually fairly, vs. Polanski's populist promises.
Have you done the maths on your change? Given the income distribution be surprised if it increased the take, net.
Nope. Want to have Scandi services? Scandi taxes. That's on everyone, actually fairly, vs. Polanski's populist promises.
Personal allowance was increased by Sunak. And no one who earns over 120k has *any* personal allowance.
November 19, 2025 at 12:53 PM
Personal allowance was increased by Sunak. And no one who earns over 120k has *any* personal allowance.
Okay. Take everything from James Dyson. Literally everything, because he overprices his vacuums and they always break. Put him on the street.
That pays for the NHS for six weeks.
What's your next trick? You're going to run out of billionaires pretty quick.
That pays for the NHS for six weeks.
What's your next trick? You're going to run out of billionaires pretty quick.
November 19, 2025 at 12:51 PM
Okay. Take everything from James Dyson. Literally everything, because he overprices his vacuums and they always break. Put him on the street.
That pays for the NHS for six weeks.
What's your next trick? You're going to run out of billionaires pretty quick.
That pays for the NHS for six weeks.
What's your next trick? You're going to run out of billionaires pretty quick.
A broad based tax rise.
At least basic rate back to where Brown cut it (20%-22%) and that would put us more in line with the EU. Everyone pays it, everyone gets better services, really hard to avoid.
At least basic rate back to where Brown cut it (20%-22%) and that would put us more in line with the EU. Everyone pays it, everyone gets better services, really hard to avoid.
November 19, 2025 at 12:49 PM
A broad based tax rise.
At least basic rate back to where Brown cut it (20%-22%) and that would put us more in line with the EU. Everyone pays it, everyone gets better services, really hard to avoid.
At least basic rate back to where Brown cut it (20%-22%) and that would put us more in line with the EU. Everyone pays it, everyone gets better services, really hard to avoid.
And yet here you are, defending populism.
November 19, 2025 at 12:01 PM
And yet here you are, defending populism.
Forgive me if I'm not convinced by your sixth form nihilism.
That politics has got far less serious in the past 20 years or so seems so obvious as to be banal and this video by the Greens is just the latest expression of that.
That politics has got far less serious in the past 20 years or so seems so obvious as to be banal and this video by the Greens is just the latest expression of that.
November 19, 2025 at 11:30 AM
Forgive me if I'm not convinced by your sixth form nihilism.
That politics has got far less serious in the past 20 years or so seems so obvious as to be banal and this video by the Greens is just the latest expression of that.
That politics has got far less serious in the past 20 years or so seems so obvious as to be banal and this video by the Greens is just the latest expression of that.
Hardly.
Don't think you can accuse Thatcher of that, for all her failings.
Early 2000s we had a net surplus.
Cameron was elected specifically on the promise of austerity.
And even if you were right, this video would still be risible.
Don't think you can accuse Thatcher of that, for all her failings.
Early 2000s we had a net surplus.
Cameron was elected specifically on the promise of austerity.
And even if you were right, this video would still be risible.
November 19, 2025 at 11:19 AM
Hardly.
Don't think you can accuse Thatcher of that, for all her failings.
Early 2000s we had a net surplus.
Cameron was elected specifically on the promise of austerity.
And even if you were right, this video would still be risible.
Don't think you can accuse Thatcher of that, for all her failings.
Early 2000s we had a net surplus.
Cameron was elected specifically on the promise of austerity.
And even if you were right, this video would still be risible.