Ha ha, well and truly triggered 
Yep, scuba kit would be on the list too, as would fancy coffee equipment, iPhones and several other things I enjoy.
The point is that if you can afford a Ā£1000 amp, you can probably afford a Ā£1250 amp or you make do with the Ā£1000 version. If you can afford a Ā£10,000 amp, you can certainly afford a Ā£12,500 amp. If youāre buying Ā£100,000 pieces of HiFi you donāt even look at the price so they can pay much more.
If youāre struggling with Ā£30 shoes and deciding whether to replace your own or your kidsā, VAT has no place in that argument.
Iām famously poor at maths but these two number sets donāt seem right to me. Are you proposing 50% VAT or something else?
stop being an arse, im making a point that if you can spend that much, you can prob spend a bit more or do without, ive not got my calculator out to do the sums
How about removing VAT on everything below a grand and then throwing a ten percent stamp duty on any land or property sale over a million.
This matters. Itās almost certainly the case that discretional spending is less closely watched by the people undertaking it but your proposal- this one remember;
Makes it cost half as much again. And yeah, I think that people would 1) notice that increase and 2) buy a lot less of it with commensurate effect on the companies and the people they employ.
You proposed it, you justify it. Donāt get the hump because I have questions about the consequences.
its not half as much again, its twice as much VAT - so your 1000 net item that currently gets 200 VAT would get 500 VAT - so a 300 increase on a 1200 item - i make that a 25% increase
You are Diane Abbott and I claim my Ā£5
1 Like
Heās 28 until heās 29 and thatās a fact.
If you place additional VAT on any item in the bundle of goods that underlies the Consumer Price Index you will by definition raise the CPI. Of course increasing the level of the CPI is what we call inflation, but donāt let that stop you.
Using Fiscal Policy to address inflation is typically ineffective and quite often counter-productive. Personally, the correct economic policy response in the face of transitory energy price increases from abroad is to do nothing. That will be politically very difficult given the current goings on though.
transitory is a very flexible term
No it is not. It has a very clear and precise meaning in economics. You might do well to read an introductory economics textbook rather than posting ill-informed nonsense (although this is the place for ill-informed nonsense).
In actuality, it is not whether the shock is actually permanent or transitory that matters, but whether the shock is expected to be permanent or transitory, but lets not go thereā¦
1 Like
Well since nobody (except Vlad perhaps) knows how long this price hike will last, perhaps responding on the basis of it being transitory is ill advised (as per your second email)
Economics may be very precise but it appears to be extremely inaccurate.
I bit.
I googled.
I failed, in fact the first article said precisely the opposite What Does Bernanke Mean by āTransitoryā?
Iām happy to read up so what would you suggest (given that there will be many many books on economics and Iām patently incapable of knowing which are reliable or not)
A book like Begg, Fischer and Dornbusch covers the basics of the economics of inflation (and the trade-offs involved) pretty well. I think there is a downloadable PDF here:(PDF) ELEVENTH EDITION economics | Jonathan Wachob - Academia.edu
1 Like
Or you could read up on MMT 
I fart in the general direction of your PFM inspired trolling. 
1 Like
Is this available in TikTok, 800 tweet thread or WhatsApp message? The current Westminster intake might actually read it then.
1 Like
1200 pagesā¦ i wont have read it by this eve. It is well written for an economics book though based on the first 70 or so pages.
Read it soon as most of the theories in it are transitory.