What you want to say – 31st of August 2016 August 31, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
1 comment so far
As always, following on Dr. X’s suggestion, it’s all yours, “announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose”, feel free.
That Apple tax verdict… August 30, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
What telling contortions we are seeing. Already, as noted here today by IEL, the LP is rowing in with any government appeal.
The Government will argue – and there is a basis for this – that rule changes in recent years have closed off some of the tax arrangements central to the Apple case.
However the damning verdict by the European Commission on how tax was applied in the Apple case left it with little option but to lodge an appeal, given the central importance of foreign direct investment to our economy. As Apple will also appeal, a lengthy legal process is inevitable.
Big US companies have used the interplay of European and US tax laws to pay very little tax on profits earned in European markets. Ireland’s tax system is only a part of this and, in fact, much of it is based on the peculiarities of US tax law.
Hmmm… it’s not me Ireland, it’s you US – eh?
And yet the IT has to admit:
There is no doubt that this needs to change and that the amounts paid by many of these companies has been indefensibly low. It remains to be seen, however, if the European courts support the Commission’s drive to address this problem via state aid rules.
Fintan O’Toole has a markedly better line here.
Not least the following:
At the very least, we should not be railroaded into lodging an appeal against the ruling that will define us, for the rest of the world, as the tax-avoider’s crazy little sidekick. We have some big thinking to do – and the cabinet’s job on Wednesday morning is to open up that process of deliberation, not to insist that any democratic decision that Apple does not like is unthinkable.
Taxing times… August 30, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
Well now. Reading Brian Keegan’s column on taxation in the SBP I was struck by his critique of David Cullinane, the SF TDs, recent comments that:
…it is blindingly obvious that with 68 per cent of all companies liable for corporation tax in 2015 “Subject to a tax rate of zero…the law is the loophole”.
Unlike speculation regarding the existence of little green men, the TD’s comments are a response to official figures obtained by him on foot of a parliamentary question. They merit some analysis. Why did more than two third of companies pay no corporation tax in 2014.
Before everything, fascinating that he feels the need to conduct this exercise, isn’t it?
Anyhow, away we go.
First up he argues that:
From a tax point of view it is usually cheaper to pay profits out as salaries and pay income tax, PRSI and USC on those salaries than leave accumulated profits in the company. No profit int he company no corporation tax gets paid.
It’s also necessary o think about what companies actually do… sometimes companies are used to put a structure on charitable activities and as such re expect from tax. Many companies, even if not charities, are so-called not for profit ventures… trade associations and the like run for the benefit of their members… the voluntary and semi-state sectors frequently operate through a company to meet legal or regulatory requirements… such companies don’t make profits and therefore they don’t pay corporation tax.
All very interesting. But one would like to know how many of each of these sub-categories there are. Unfortunately that not unimportant detail isn’t provided.
Still he continues by admitting to the fact that:
Then there are the controversial companies which are the target of most of the political and media comment, these would include companies which are Irish-resident but don’t have income which is charged to Irish corporation tax.
Interesting too how he shifts the spotlight away from Irish companies there.
Anyhow, praise of sorts for Cullinane:
To return to Cullinane’s comments, he did well to highlight the proportion of companies which re outside the corporation tax charge.
I don’t think though that it’s a loophole to make company profits chargeable to higher rates of income tax instead of lower rates of corporation tax. Tax loopholes arise when people pay less tax, not more.
And while he also admits too that there may be reason to look at charitable and voluntary sector businesses and where ‘Irish corporation tax starts and stops’ but… for there is a but…
By virtue of what so many of them do, many companies tend not to have profits with the tax charge, or pay them out so that those profits fall subject to income tax. That’s why two thirds of them don’t pay corporation tax.
It will be very educative to see where this discussion goes next. Good on Cullinane and his team for producing questions that elicit this sort of a response.
Political activism in the Facebook era… August 30, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
Michael Brennan wrote a piece on the rise of SF. And it was much as you’d expect. Matters getting more tricky, possible need to go into coalition with FF. Ten year strategy. And so on. But this was particularly interesting to me:
When SF was trying to build its support in the days of the Celtic Tiger, it was easy to get activists to turn up at branch meetings. It was their only outlet to vent their frustration at the political system.
But now, in the smartphone era, SF is finding it more difficult. ‘So many people think that having a rant on Facebook counts as activism. They feel satisfied and they are less likely to come to cumann meeting,’ said one senior party source.
I wonder is that true, whether of SF or of politically engaged people in general?
CLR Book Club – Week 1 August 30, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
It’s here, by popular demand. The CLR Book Club. But what are we to start reading?If we can gain a consensus below let’s give it a go. And is it a chapter a week, or what? I’ve never been a member of book club before so I don’t know. I’m going to post this thread up every Tuesday so we can use it to get things up and running, ideas, etc. Ivorthorne had some ideas, and Pasionario as well IIRC. I’ve one chapter of a book on right anarchism by Nozick which tries to engage with socialism and equality, and I’m sure there’s a heap of other ideas.
And just to say, can we have two books running concurrently or is that too much?
Train coming round the bend… August 29, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
Entertaining to see today a bit of a push back on the Corbyn/Virgin train story. Now, one can suggest that the original photo of Corbyn was perhaps over-egged by those around Corbyn, but… in the long run how much damage is it going to cause when one reads reports like this from the Guardian that Virgin breached its own guidelines:
The decision by Virgin Trains to release CCTV images of Jeremy Corbyn on one of its services after he complained on video about the journey being “completely ram-packed” was in breach of the company’s own policies, the Guardian can reveal.
The company handed images, which appeared to show the Labour leader walking past empty seats before sitting on the train’s floor, to the media earlier this week in a move that embarrassed Corbyn.
And, and this is important:
The party leader’s claim was derided, with accusations that he had lied about how busy the train really was.
However, leaked emails reveal that the managing director of Virgin Trains East Coast told staff that the controversy had highlighted how crowded services can be, and that finding seats could make customers anxious and stressed.
This could be a fortuitous escape. What it underlines though is the absolute necessity for not allowing any hostages to fortune and/or a media that is only straining at the leash to attack Corbyn. One can be sure they will be only too eager to put the tag of hypocrite around his neck. It’s essential to avoid that happening, not least because he comes across as measured and thoughtful and principled. Those aren’t insignificant virtues in this day and age.
The terrain on which the left should contest? August 29, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
I like Paul Mason and I tend to agree with much that he writes in this piece here on the Corbyn leadership issue, particularly on why Corbyn is in a vastly better position than Michael Foot was, and how the 2010s are not the 1980s. That said I would raise a question mark over two points. First he writes that:
By contrast, today neoliberal capitalism is busted, discredited and on life support. The whey-faced remnants of “old Toryism” may have crowded around the cabinet table, but their free-market philosophy has come apart. The fact that people are flooding into a left-led Labour party, not out of it, is evidence of a search for answers among broad sections of the population.
I’m not sure that’s as self-evident a proposition as it may seem to him from where he is positioned in the UK. Yet that is surprising in itself. The government of the UK is a Tory majority government currently riding high in the polls and likely to win the next election (and always was either with or without a Corbyn leadership, ‘dissident’ BLP MPs take note). The broad tropes of neo-liberalism remain in effect, the parties that supported them whether enthusiastically or unenthusiastically likewise. In our own state Fianna Fáil are likely to head the next government. That’s no breach with neo-liberalism. Germany, Spain, etc. The United States. The governments in all those states may or may not buy into unfettered neo-liberalism but they are broadly what once was termed ‘centre-right’ to right. Those opposing them appear more fragmented. And that’s because, well, they are.
Now this may all change. We’ll see. But I would be cautious about the potential for transformational change at this juncture and for quite some time to come. I’d even be cautious about the idea that populations have abandoned their willing or unwilling attachment to the nostrums of the centre right and right. Again, we’ll see. I hope Corbyn and others can shape out a space that was once ‘traditional’ Labour, left social democrat and pushing leftwards again. That is key. But the possibilities even in that context are limited. Britain didn’t opt in the 1940s or 50s or 60s to go left again. Why it would do that in the 2010s or 20s is not entirely clear to me.
The second point I think needs teasing out further is as follows:
The next most obvious difference is the absence of what we used to call the “industrial struggle”. It has been invigorating to see the Deliveroo drivers on wildcat strike, together with migrant hotel cleaners, train guards and junior doctors all in a single summer. But the leftism we carried with us into the Winter Gardens in 1980 had its origins in the syndicalism of ordinary workers in the 1970s. To the shop stewards I met in the years between Benn’s 1980 speech and the miners’ strike, Labour politics were a sideshow.
The unions had achieved control of many workplaces and – it seemed – could go on calling the shots. In the year Benn made his electrifying speech, the steelworkers’ union had just won a double-digit pay rise in an all-out strike. To the wider left, of shop stewards, feminists, black community activists, a group such as Militant – which had moulded its entire practice, and even its clothing to conform with the dreariness of internal Labour life – seemed irrelevant. Its claimed membership of 2,300 in 1981 – out of 348,000 – sounds about right.
Today, work is much less central to the left project, and for a variety of reasons. It is precarious, hard to organise. Also, the things the left wants to achieve have become more social, less industrial. There is, on the left, an implicit understanding of political philosopher Toni Negri’s claim: that the “factory” is now the whole of society, and the subject of change is everybody – especially the networked youth.
And yet that’s to ignore one major point about working lives. Most people still work in workplaces. The imbalances of power relationships persist in most of those workplaces. They have, indeed, hardly changed and in some marked instances worsened. Moreover this is the focus of peoples lives to a continuing extent. This is where people troop off of a morning and return of an evening. They spend most of their conscious hours there. That experience has not changed for the vast majority of people even if forms of work have for some.
The idea the left is withdrawing whether actually or just conceptually from engagement on that terrain concerns me deeply. Even the simple reality of unions organising, however well or poorly, is crucial in workplaces. Because unions, even the compromised vehicles that they often are, are a secondary focus of power and even on the most banal level necessary for those in workplaces to have in their corner, before we even reach the broader socio-political and economic goals that we seek.
He mentions the following,
I do not recall many of the miners and engineers who fought for Tony Benn as deputy leader in 1981 being existentially devastated when he narrowly lost. They knew this was just a warm-up for the decisive battle, which would happen in barricaded pit villages four years later. This generation, by contrast, understands that the most revolutionary thing you can do to neoliberalism is to put a party in government that dismantles it.
But the decisive battles are both the larger struggles and the smaller ones. It cannot be either or. The day to day grind of organising and pushing back in work places has to continue if only to offer the hint of an alternative to workers. After all, there’s a flip side to the idea that the workplace is less important. What has replaced it? It would seem to me an atomisation has replaced it. The domestic space – for obvious reasons – isn’t a substitute. Too many distractions. The hope that people will attend meetings, become active? That seems to me to be near enough utopian having been involved at the hard end of that myself across the last couple of decades.
And what of those who are in workplaces? Recently I was talking to someone whose partner works for a utility (not water). They’re at the domestic end of it, checking up on installations inn peoples houses. But they’re not employed by the utility directly but by a subcontractor. The work is tough, various detritus has to be moved in order to gain access to the installations. The targets set by the utility are near enough impossible to reach and the sub-contractor has terminated the contracts of a number of employees who made this point. Those working for the sub-contractor are non-unionised (and the sub-contractor is a wing of a non-Irish based company).
Add in precarious rental situations and low incomes and what we have is a perfect storm. People whose lives are constrained by lack of money, insecurity and jobs which demand too much of them.
There’s a decisive battle to be played out right there. And a left that isn’t in there attempting to improve the situation of those workers while simultaneously attempting to shift matters leftward on a broader level isn’t much of a left at all in my view.
That said he makes some very persuasive points in the piece – not least on the rule of law. Though this works both ways. I’ve often felt that the left underestimates the attachment of the working class to state and societal structures, and if anything that attachment is now even more deeply embedded. That may have unpredictable consequences.
Still, one last thought. Isn’t all this enormously anglocentric? There’s not a word about allies in Europe. How can there be? They’re being shut out. No word of Syriza, as was, or Podemos, or other alternatives or whatever. The English story, whatever about the British story, appears to be one which is curling around itself. Where it goes next is – naturally, for those of us on this island of considerable significance. But it may be of little consequence for Europe or further afield.
That hill British Labour is climbing… August 29, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
…just got a bit steeper so it would seem. As I keep saying, I’ve no illusions the next election would be won by the Tories, and neither should anyone – this is a long project, but sheesh, hard not to feel that the boundary changes likely to be implemented by the review of parliamentary boundaries which is out in the next month is likely to be deeply problematic for the party.
Up to 30 Labour seats could disappear altogether, says Lord Hayward, an analyst widely regarded as an expert on the boundary review, while the rest will see their composition altered in some form.
Although the changes will also affect the Conservatives, Hayward, a Tory peer, said his analysis of demographics in the UK concluded that Labour is over-represented.
Here’s an interesting twist on this.
The opposition party is also angry that the boundary changes are based on the number of people on the electoral register at the end of 2015, arguing that 2m extra people signed up in the run-up to the EU referendum this year. “Worryingly, under the Tories’ plan, not a single one of those 2 million extra people will be taken into account in the drawing up of the new constituency boundaries. This is simply wrong and runs the risk of further distorting the Boundary Review Process,” he added.
Some MPs argue it is unfair not to take into account people who live in constituencies but are not signed up to the electoral register.
In this state boundaries are dictated by population figures which seems only reasonable.
Left Archive: Vincent Doherty, Election candidate National H-Block/Armagh Committee, Leaflet, June 1981 August 29, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
add a comment
To download the above please click on the following link. HBLOCK
Many thanks to Jim Monaghan for forwarding this to the Archive.
This election leaflet for Vincent Doherty of People’s Democracy and a member of the National H-Block/Armagh Committee. At this point four hunger strikers had died and the fact of the forthcoming election allowed for an opportunity to make the case of the hunger strikers even more widely.
The support of Bernadette McAliskey is underlined by a quote from her in support of Doherty’s candidacy.
Left Archive: National H-Block/Armagh Committee, Leaflet, 1981 August 29, 2016Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
add a comment
To download the above please click on the following link. HBLOCK A5 1
Many thanks to Jim Monaghan for sending this to the Archive.
This document was issued by the National H-Block/Armagh Committee. It argues that British Renege on agreements and announces the commencement of a new hunger strike starting March 1st. It outlines the history of the previous hunger strike and the negotiations that led to this point. It also calls for significant support.