If the BBC is inviting the demented and mendacious PCS union shill Richard "I don't understand the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion" Murphy of the Tax Justice Network to be their @BBCExtraGuest on Twitter this week, I'd like them to invite someone appropriately far to the economic right next week; say, Madsen Pirie of the ASI. Sound fair? What are the chances?
Richie's self-importance knows no bounds:
Paid your TV licence, Richard, like the rest of the UK. Of more concern: what did the Twitterverse do to get you bloviating on QT?
Here we go...#bbcqt What did I do to get this panel?— Richard Murphy (@BBCExtraGuest) March 7, 2013
I don't object to Murphy spouting his opinions - after all, this is the Internet, and opinions are like arseholes. It's his complete refusal to engage in any sensible debate in his blog comments and dismissal of any dissent while he blurts out complete non-sequiturs. See his article on RR paying no tax in the UK and his comments:
Verth: Surely all RR was referring to was the fact they make their sales through overseas companies and hence pay tax there not in the UK. That's not spinning in my view. It seems to me you're the one doing the spinning by implying/suggesting that they have said they should be taxed on a sales destination basis, which I don't think is what they said at all.""I don't want it to be true, so it isn't." No attempt at actual argument or deploying facts, numbers etc. For a chartered accountant you'd think he'd have a stronger attachment to facts. He's also an "economist", presumably in the same way that Polly Toynbee is an "economist" - he talks about economics and usually gets it wrong. Economics may be in his university degree title, but he shows no evidence of actually having read any of the literature.
Richard Murphy: But if 51% of all employees are in UK it's very likely all profit is made at point of sale In fact that's an absurd claim which has little or no foundation
Back to his QT twittering:
You see what I mean. "4 times as effective". Investment by whom? In what? Investment by the Government? That well-known multiplier of money? If it's 4x as effective, why isn't every Government investing 1bn instead of cutting 4bn? Is he even listening to himself? The man has no shame.
Melanie Phillips does not understand economic multipliers - invest is 4 times more effective as econ boost than tax cuts #bbcqt— Richard Murphy (@BBCExtraGuest) March 7, 2013
Of equal shamelessness:
£95bn is about £1400 for every man, woman and child in the UK. Since tax paid ultimately comes from people (workers, shareholders and company owners) Richard Murphy is claiming that every family of wife, husband and 2 children will have to find an extra £5600 per year in tax - or find someone else to pay it for them - in order to fill that "tax gap". Good luck with that, Richard. Corporation tax in 2008/2009 was £51bn so you'd have to nearly triple the corporate tax take to fill the "tax gap". I can't believe that the UK Revenue is leaving £90bn on the table. This fails even the laughter test.
The deficit is £120 bn. The tax gap is £95bn plus £20 plus bn unpaid tax at anty time. Do you see a possible connection? #bbcqt— BBC Extra Guest (@BBCExtraGuest) March 7, 2013