Accessibility links

I was just reading an interesting article by Fraser Nelson on the Spectator blog. He argues that there is plenty of room to take benefits away from the wealthiest ten percent.

I was just reading an interesting article by Fraser Nelson on the Spectator blog. He argues that there is plenty of room to take benefits away from the wealthiest ten percent.

Given that Fraser Nelson is a strong advocate of lower-taxes (see for example here) his blog made me think; is there any important difference between raising taxes and reducing benefits?

If given the choice between loosing £20 per week in benefits and being taxed an extra £20 per week, would you think there was a difference? Is this even a real choice?

A completely unscientific straw poll in the office found that everyone did have a view, and it was quite evenly divided; some wanting to pay more tax, some wanting to lose their benefit.

What do you think?

Comments

Be the first to write a comment

Please login to post a comment or reply.

Don't have an account? Click here to register.