TAX: good or bad

 TAX: GOOD OR BAD FOR THE AVERAGE TAXPAYER?

Of course taxes lower our take-home pay; no question. But, equally obviously, taxes fund the many services that central government provides.  Are taxes, then, a good thing or a bad thing? And why did all the candidates for the post of Tory party leader promise to degrade further our public services?

The better-off pay more tax than the less-well-off, and, because of the 'progressive' tax system in the UK, the tax-rate is higher for the rich than for the poor. 

There must be an annual salary above which the paying of due taxes will render a citizen poorer (in that the benefits he enjoys cost less than the tax he pays), while below that annual salary the due taxes will amount to less than the benefits (roads, education, police, health).  What is that pivotal annual salary? And why do so many people think they are net contributors, when at least half the population are likely to be net beneficiaries?

Imagine a see-saw pivoted at the 'median' annual income, with the rich to the right side and the poor to the left side. It will balance, as that is the definition of the median (There are as many individuals earning more than the median as there are earning less.)

Now let them sit on the see-saw with their money; it will clearly tip to the right, because the rich have more money than the poor. In fact, if the incomes alone are weighed, the see-saw will balance at the ‘arithmetic mean’ income.

 (See Figure 1; data from ONS, Average household gross income, UK: financial year ending 2021. The “equivalised median” is said to be £37,900; the “equivalised mean” £48,700)  

Some of those people earning more than £48,700 per annum gross (or £37,000 after tax) might rationally think they would benefit from lower taxes (not-withstanding the consequently deteriorating services: congested bumpy roads, decaying infrastructure, sick population, etc..)

But I cannot think why anyone whose gross annual income is less than £48,700. would vote for lower taxes.  We should logically vote for increased taxes and improved services.

=======++++++===============++++++=======

 “The ‘equivalised’ disposable income is calculated in three steps: all monetary incomes received from any source by each member of a household are added up; these include income from work, investment and social benefits, plus any other household income; taxes and social contributions that have been paid, are deducted from this sum; in order to reflect differences in a household's size and composition, the total (net) household income is divided by the number of 'equivalent adults’, using a standard (equivalence) scale: the modified OECD scale; this scale gives a weight to all members of the household (and then adds these up to arrive at the equivalised household size): 1.0 to the first adult; 0.5 to the second and each subsequent person aged 14 and over; 0.3 to each child aged under 14. Finally, the resulting figure is called the equivalised disposable income and is attributed equally to each member of the household.”

Comments, please, to: cawstein@gmail.com

Time to Think

Time to think

Oh! How I love having time to think!  And how glad I am that I can still catch and entertain those ethereal, disembodied spirits that float into the mind, linger and vanish!   

My time has largely run its course, and I am slowing down. Not only do I get less done in a day than once I did; but time grows more treasured as it becomes more scarce. There is no part of my day more treasured than my "thinking time".

If I must make cuts I shall perhaps start with my tidying time, or dusting time. Practice time vanished a while ago, unnoticed, and perhaps wrapping presents will follow it. But I hope I shall always have time to think. 

I like to pause at the top of the stairs, to admire my daughter's framed butterflies, so carefully cut from old maps; memories trapped on paper; Helmeth Hill in the shape of a Swallowtail, Haddon Hill on another; Ratlinghope, Bodinnick Ferry, Glynn House, Trebarwith Strand. 

I love to stand on my terrace, straighten, by throwing back my shoulders, and look up beyond the roof tops, to see if I can spot any of swifts that have loyally returned to their  ancestral eaves. I fondly remember the screams of the returning swifts as they swooped in to their chattering young, nesting in the eaves some 3 feet from my boyhood bedroom in our generous old Shropshire house. 

I wonder if it is a dearth of flies that has reduced the number of these astonishing aerobats that complete their absurd journey from from Sub-Saharan Africa to Middle England. Or if it is head winds en route? Or have my neighbours pulled down their old stone houses, or poked out the nests from their eaves? What are insects doing up there, 100 metres above any possible source of food? Does the swift fly with its mouth open, accepting what comes, or does it actively swerve left and right to catch a tempting morsel? Would I see anything if I trained my grandchildren's telescope on that patch of sky?

The frequent glimpses of a tiny blue butterfly down at the bottom of my modest garden is less mysterious when I find that bird's foot trefoil is the food plant of the Common Blue, for I have a clump of it in flower down there. (Funny that nearly all of the dozen different Blues eat legumes; except for the Holly Blue (holly), and the Large Blue (thyme)). Ah! But I have masses of holly in that corner, besides the trefoil, and I might have been over-hasty in assuming my butterflies were Common Blues. (It is easier to tell holly from bird's foot than Holly Blue from Common Blue). I find [1] that I also have the food plant of the recently re-introduced Large Blue, for one of my herb boxes is over-flowing with Thymus serpyllum. The caterpillar of this intriguing butterfly has a trick of exuding 'honey' which tempts ants to carry it off to their nest, where it overwinters, feeding off ant grubs till it is ready to pupate and eventually emerge. That lifestyle is stunning in its improbability; but several related species do the same (Adonis Blue, Idas Blue, Alcon Blue).

Why do we not gradually fill up with trivalent Aluminium; as it binds tightly to protein? Does a spider get appreciably lighter when it abseils to the floor? Easy enough, I suppose, to measure the speed of swifts in flight 'in terms of its own body length'. Pigs, they say, are more intelligent than 3 year old human children. I wonder how that was measured. 

Reference: [1] David Carter (1982) Butterflies and Moths in Britain and Europe 

Please address comment to cawstein@gmail.com

Auto-regulation and its breakdown

Auto-regulation and its breakdown(s)

Regarding auto-regulation of cerebral blood-flow, there are several aspects to consider. The ones that occur to me off the top of my had are: the nature of the signal (perhaps cerebral [CO2] or [O2]), detection of the signal, release of the messenger, detection of the messenger by a target tissue, effect of messenger on target tissue (perhaps vascular dilation).

 

Putin's Point of view

Putin's Point of View

I recently discovered, more-or-less by accident, Putin's recent (July 2021) essay, on Ukraine-Russian relations; lengthy but honest and personal; his view of the relations that he thinks should subsist between Russia and Ukraine. I realised (by extrapolation) that there must be a very large number of people in the English-speaking world who do not yet know of this important document and I consequently felt a duty to point to it, and attempt to evaluate it as fairly as I am able. The Kremlin's official ENGLISH TEXT CAN BE FOUND HERE [1].

It is Putin's amplification of an off-the-cuff response to a question raised at his annual question-and-answer session.  Dated 12th July 2021, it clearly represents the thoughts building in his mind, that led eventually to the invasion of Ukraine on 24th February 2022.

My precis 

Mr. Putin used 2000 words traversing the history of Ukraine/Russia from AD 800 to the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, covering much the same ground as I covered in my recent posts [2-6], and I think Putin and I agree rather well. 

He uses another 2000 words to cover the Bolshevik period (1917-1990), and in this he is much better informed than I; but seems balanced and fair. In the Soviet Union  "borders between republics were never seen as state borders; they were nominal [borders] within a single country". He is not pro-Bolshevik; he admits the famines, and the social experimentation.

In the last 2000 words Mr. Putin covers developments since the break-up of the Soviet Union, and the formation of the present Ukrainian state. In 1990 Russia and Ukraine were "natural and complementary partners"; their trade was considerable and mutually beneficial. Even in 2013 the two countries were close allies, with: 

"hundreds of agreements and joint projects .... aimed at developing our economies, business and cultural ties, strengthening security, and solving common social and environmental problems. They brought tangible benefits to people – both in Russia and Ukraine. This is what we believed to be most important. And that is why we had a fruitful interaction with all, I emphasize, with all the leaders of Ukraine."[1] 

It all went wrong in February 2014, when it turned out that the people of northern Ukraine were far more enamoured of the European Union than was their more-pro-Russian government [7]. It seems (to  Putin) that 'the people' of Northern Ukraine have been seduced/fooled by the free-running, capitalist, West. 

"This is also a disguise for the takeover [by the West] of the rest of the Ukrainian economy and the exploitation of its natural resources. The sale of agricultural land is not far off, and it is obvious who will buy it up. From time to time, Ukraine is indeed given financial resources and loans, but under their [the capitalists] own conditions and pursuing their [the capitalists] own interests, with preferences and benefits for Western companies. By the way, who will pay these debts back? Apparently, it is assumed that this will have to be done not only by today's generation of Ukrainians but also by their children, grandchildren and probably great-grandchildren." 

In southern Ukraine, and along the border with Russia, there are (no doubt) more Russian-speakers, and more commercial links with Russia.  

"and hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are coming to us to work, and they find a welcome reception and support" [1].

Mr. Putin objects to the  government-imposed  hostility to Russia and to the Russian language; 

"And the most despicable thing is that the Russians in Ukraine are being forced not only to deny their roots, generations of their ancestors, but also to believe that Russia is their enemy." 

Comment

It seems to me that any arguments that support the right of Ukraine to free itself from Moscow, must also support the right of the Donets Coal Basin (Donbas) to be independent from Ukraine. Whoever governs the Donbas should do so with that in mind.

The southern and eastern sections of present-day Ukraine contains a Black Sea coastline, Zaporizhzhia's nuclear power plant, and the Donbas coal fields (though at fearsome depth). There is a lot at stake. For Ukraine to loose ¾ of its coast and all of its coal might render the state non-viable. It may seem to Kyiv to be worth fighting for, even if that south eastern region is Russian-speaking and hostile to Kyiv. 

There were right-wing paramilitary elements in the February 2014 rising, and there were pro-Russian paramilitary elements in the Donetsk and Luhansk [7]. There has been a lot of assistance/interference from Russia in the form of heavy weapons and advice, and maybe also personnel; and now also a lot of assistance/interference from The West to the government in Kyiv.

The Minsk Agreements of 2014 and 2015 [8] were serious attempts by third parties to de-escalate the violence in the Donbas Region between pro-Russian separatists and the Ukraine state. Such a de-escalation would require both of the warring parties to see benefits. In the event,  neither party seem sufficiently to want peace. On that point Putin seems correct.  

        It is not at all clear how strong the indigenous pro-Russian sentiment is, in the disputed areas. Pre-emptive, illegal, and un-monitored referendums are unconvincing and unhelpful. 

I believe the world would like to see a Minsk-type cease-fire and some well-monitored referendums.

References

[1] http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/66181

[2] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2023/03/kyiv-1.html 

[3] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2023/03/kiev-2.html 

[4] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2023/04/alexei-razumovsky.html 

[5] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2023/03/kyiv3.html 

[6] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2023/04/kyiv4.html 

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity 

[8] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2023/05/the-minsk-agreements.html 

Please address comment to cawstein@gmail.com

The Minsk Agreements

 The Minsk Agreements

(We, in the West, and certainly we in Britain, should know more about the Minsk Agreements. The Minsk Protocol (Minsk 1) of 5th September 2014 was barely heeded, and by January 2015 was dead. The revised Minsk Agreement (Minsk 2) of 12 February 2015 was signed by the combatants plus  Swiss and Russian diplomats. The Russian text is available at [1], and in English at [2] whence I have transcribed it below.)

Minsk 2

The full text of the agreement is as follows [2]:

1. Immediate and full ceasefire in particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine and its strict fulfilment as of 00:00 midnight EET on 15 February 2015.

2. Pull-out of all heavy weapons by both sides to equal distance with the aim of creation of a security zone on minimum 50 kilometres (31 mi) apart for artillery of 100mm calibre or more, and a security zone of 70 kilometres (43 mi) for multiple rocket launchers (MRLS) and 140 kilometres (87 mi) for MLRS Tornado-S, Uragan, Smerch, and Tochka U tactical missile systems:

* for Ukrainian troops, from actual line of contact; 
* for armed formations of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine, from the contact line in accordance with the Minsk Memorandum as of 19 September 2014

The pullout of the above-mentioned heavy weapons must start no later than the second day after the start of the ceasefire and finish within 14 days.

This process will be assisted by OSCE [3] with the support of the Trilateral Contact Group [3].

3. Effective monitoring and verification of ceasefire regime and pullout of heavy weapons by OSCE will be provided from the first day of pullout, using all necessary technical means such as satellites, drones, radio-location systems etc.

4. On the first day after the pullout a dialogue is to start on modalities of conducting local elections in accordance with the Ukrainian legislation and the Law of Ukraine "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," and also about the future of these districts based on the above-mentioned law.

Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document, a resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, indicating the territory which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts," based in the line set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of 19 September 2014.

5. Provide pardon and amnesty by way of enacting a law that forbids persecution and punishment of persons in relation to events that took place in particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts of Ukraine.

6. Provide release and exchange of all hostages and illegally held persons, based on the principle of "all for all". This process has to end – at the latest – on the fifth day after the pullout (of weapons).

7. Provide safe access, delivery, storage and distribution of humanitarian aid to the needy, based on an international mechanism.

8. Define the modalities of a full restoration of social and economic connections, including social transfers, such as payments of pensions and other payments (income and revenue, timely payment of communal bills, restoration of tax payments within the framework of Ukrainian legal field).

With this aim, Ukraine will restore management over the segment of its banking system in the districts affected by the conflict, and possibly, an international mechanism will be established to ease such transactions.

9. Restore control of the state border to the Ukrainian government in the whole conflict zone, which has to start on the first day after the local election and end after the full political regulation (local elections in particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts based on the law of Ukraine and Constitutional reform) by the end of 2015, on the condition of fulfilment of Point 11 – in consultations and in agreement with representatives of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts within the framework of the Trilateral Contact Group.

10. Pullout of all foreign armed formations, military equipment, and also mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine under OSCE supervision. Disarmament of all illegal groups.

11. Constitutional reform in Ukraine, with a new constitution to come into effect by the end of 2015, the key element of which is decentralisation (taking into account peculiarities of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, agreed with representatives of these districts), and also approval of permanent legislation on the special status of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in accordance with the measures spelt out in the attached footnote, by the end of 2015.

12. Based on the Law of Ukraine "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts", questions related to local elections will be discussed and agreed upon with representatives of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts in the framework of the Trilateral Contact Group. Elections will be held in accordance with relevant OSCE standards and monitored by OSCE/ODIHR.

13. Intensify the work of the Trilateral Contact Group including through the establishment of working groups on the implementation of relevant aspects of the Minsk agreements. They will reflect the composition of the Trilateral Contact Group. The document was signed by:

*Separatist's leaders Alexander Zakharchenko and Igor Plotnitsky.

*Swiss diplomat and OSCE representative Heidi Tagliavini. 

*Former president of Ukraine and Ukrainian representative Leonid Kuchma.

*Russian Ambassador to Ukraine and Russian representative Mikhail Zurabov.

REFERENCES

[1] https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/5/b/140221.pdf

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements.

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trilateral_Contact_Group_on_Ukraine

Kicking

Kicking

A man (in a green pullover) by the bus stop is watching his two children playing on the grass some twenty yards away; and I watch all three. My mind wanders.

"Robbie! No kicking!", and the slight, weary, lift in his voice suggests that this is not the first time he has said those words.

I look more carefully at the children; the boy, a sturdy four-year-old, the girl considerably taller and perhaps six. The check seems to work. "Skilfully done Mr. Man-in-green." 

My mind wanders again. What a lot a child has to learn, about bullying, about getting your way, about consequences and avoiding consequences. What a lot of civilising goes into parenting; the making of a citizen. I am reminded of the books and offprints on Freud, Psychology and World Order that Father left us; his legacy, our inheritance [1,2]. Is selfishness primary? Is aggressiveness? Is conscience inherent, or acquired as vestigial traces of early training from childhood or even infancy? Is 'God' indeed little more than 'our father in heaven' writ large?

Robbie might wonder what is wrong with kicking; his sister usually gives way. Of course, he may get a walloping from his dad, or smouldering resentment from his sister. He may conclude that, all-in-all, kicking is counter productive. Or he may conclude that it is best not done in public.

Britain spent 180 years 'kicking' weaker countries into submission, till 1956, when, with the French and Israelis, Britain thought it could recapture the Suez Canal from the Egyptians. By the end of November 1956 these allies found that they had won the war but had alienated all the world (except for Adenauer [3]). They withdrew, humiliated. In April 1975 the USA had to accept their humiliating retreat from Vietnam, and again in August 2021 their retreat (with their allies) from Afghanistan. 

Perhaps 2023 will see the humiliating retreat of Putin and his Wagner allies from Ukraine. But he need not be too embarrassed; we can see this as an integral part of growing up; we might even say "Join the club". Anyway, his wasn't a war. (It is amusing to note that, in 1956, Prime Minister Eden apparently said "We [are not] at war with Egypt now.[…] There has not been a declaration of war by us. We are in an armed conflict." [3]).

Reference:

[1] West, Ranyard (1942) "Conscience and Society", Methuen & Co., London.

[2] West, Ranyard (1945) "Psychology and World Order", Pelican, Harmondsworth, London.

[3]  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis 

 Please address comment to cawstein@gmail.com