Tories

[Zorrro]

it only encourages the bastard.

 

So we should only encourage Labour-sympathising bloggers? Sorry, Will, but :censored: off.

 

Teets is right - the data are selective (they could've picked a different year or years; and they probably should've included tax credits).

 

And show me a blogger who doesn't use selective date.

[beag_teeets]

 

And show me a blogger who doesn't use selective date.

 

Perhaps this is why blogger's outputs need to be taken with a pinch of salt as opposed to other sources who are subject to more stringent fact checking before publication? Whilst the blogosphere is great for op-eds when it comes to facts I certainly wouldn't include it in my primary sources.

[leeslover]

I don't understand those tables at all and I really wish I hadn't clicked on that link - it only encourages the bastard. Teets is right - the data are selective (they could've picked a different year or years; and they probably should've included tax credits).

 

 

 

I don't understand that either.

Was pissed, should have been reduce the burden on the low earners. As Jim said, the raising of the threshold has a significant effect on the low paid. The cut in the top rate will if anything increase the tax take, so there is no change at the higher end. So obviously the finding are correct. Granted that other aspects of tax are relevant.

[Guest Scratch2000uk]

3/4 think they are bellends, nothing wrong with that data.

[Matt]

Eoin Clarke is a nobber, so is Harry Cole. See, balances itself out real good.