Captain Obvious alert.

Twenty high-profile economists have urged the government to drop the top 50p tax rate, which they say is doing “lasting damage” to the UK economy.

In a letter to the Financial Times, they say it should be axed “at the earliest opportunity” to boost growth.

What, it comes as a shock that the government taking over 60p on the pound (when you take income tax and national insurance) encourages people to make sure that as many of their pounds as possible stay away from the government?

It’s bad enough that people have to work Monday, Tuesday and a bit of Wednesday entirely for the benefit of the state; making them work the first hour of Thursday as well isn’t going to make people come here, is it?

1. It has a defined and measurable aim (end an occupation, remove x from power, stop a genocide, etc);
2. It has broad agreement on that aim;
3. It ends within a reasonable timeframe, to whit a decade or two.

Of course, these are just my own signs, but I think that they make a certain amount of sense. Now, let’s have a look at the War on Drugs against that, shall we?

1. The aim is to try and stop the production, import and use of illegal drugs. Except that not all states agree on what is an illegal drug or how seriously they take the issue.
2. Vast swathes of most countries use illegal drugs to some extent, and many leaders of countries have admitted to using said drugs during the time of the War on Drugs.
3. It’s been going for decades and use is only ever going up.

Time to cut losses and stop fighting silly fights that criminalise people for enjoying themselves in ways that only cause harm because a part of it has been made illegal, do you think?

Looking at the number of candidates for each post, I don’t think that Northern Ireland’s MLAs are too hard done by. The fact that their salaries haven’t increased in ten years clearly isn’t stopping people queuing to job the assembly.

So, among their many downsides ( there being too many of them, the tribalism, the comedy inept behavior of many), the fact that they cost less than most parliamentarians was a benefit.

Seems like that single plus point will soon go. How disappointingly predictable.

In Norn Iron, the home energy market is pretty much closed. Electricity can come from one supplier, and mains gas can come from one supplier. To counter this monopoly, there has long been a fairly strong regulatory framework surrounding these two suppliers that put limits on how much their prices can rise. This is, probably, the best compromise that can happen just now; obviously a better one would be to bring in competition but that probably won’t happen for a while.

However, in bottled gas and home heating oil, there is considerable variation. Dozens of suppliers can be contacted and they’ll give you a price that will generally be quite competitive and will vary according to both the local market and the fluctuations in the international oil market. This means that it tends to match the oil price movements much more closely; rising when it rises and falling quite quickly when it falls. This is unlike the gas prices, which tend to rise more slowly and less steeply, but fall much more slowly.

It’s a good thing. But some people don’t get it.

The NI Consumer Council has called for the heating oil industry to be regulated as the price of 900 litres rose to £550.

John French from the council said regulating the industry should be a key priority for a new NI assembly.

“It is estimated that with rising fuel prices, the recent cold winters and the current economic climate, fuel poverty levels have risen above 50%,” he said.

Gas and electricity customers already benefit from a regulatory framework.

Mr French said that oil customers should too.

Fine, dude. You want to design a regulatory framework that can regulate dozens of firms and do it without costing a bomb. You design something that passes on the lows and mitigates the highs. And then please buy me a nice piece of beachfront property in Nevada.

The guy then ends on:

“Regulation of the home heating oil industry could provide consumers with transparency and reassurance that the price they are being asked to pay is fair,” he said.

Which annoys me; the home heating oil market is the only place I’ve seen where it is pretty transparent. Yes, the prices change daily, but with a single phone call a person can find out exactly how much 900 litres of oil will cost; try that in the beautifully regulated gas or electricity market.

In short: it works, don’t break it.

I’ve always meant to go and visit the Public Records Office. There are a few things I’d like to look up. And if I’m honest, the idea of all that information being stored in perpetuity would appeal to me even if there wasn’t anything in particular that I wanted to know.

Several years ago, PRONI decided to move from its old location (on Balmoral Avenue, surrounded by houses and no parking) to the Titanic Quarter (surrounded by wasteland and flats that nobody can afford). And the spec for the building seemed to be very long term oriented – lots and lots of protection for the documents and lots and lots of improvements in how said documents are both stored and accessed. Fit for decades, it would be.

Unless the dreaded climate change occurs, of course, and sea levels rise a bit. Not even that big a bit; if they rise 5 metres then the whole area is underwater, and all those documents will be done for. The old location could have waited until the sea rose 20 metres, after all.

It’s almost as if someone was told that they had to go to a new development area because it needed some more life in it, without any thought as to why it might be a bad idea…

—
This assumes that you believe that the sea levels will rise; personally I’m not that sure that they will. But the government keep trying to scare us into believing that they will, so why aren’t they taking such things into account?

“Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pound ought and six, result misery.”

These words by Dickens have been trotted out by many over the last hundred and fifty years to show the common sense of living within your means. Most people tend to recognise the wisdom of them and do their best to make sure that they don’t end up in the red all their lives.

Not so government. No, they think entirely differently. Not only do most Western countries seem to be entirely content to run with a permanent debt but they’re more than happy to add to it every damn year. And then crow about only adding to it by an unimaginable amount, as opposed to by an incredible unimaginable amount.

The government appears to be gaining control of the public finances and could benefit from an £8bn windfall this year due to higher tax revenue and lower spending, a report suggests.

The Ernst & Young Item Club forecast public borrowing for the year to the end of March to be lower than expected.
…
The club said it expected public sector borrowing for the financial year to come in at £140.2bn, compared with the £148.5bn forecast by the Office of Budget Responsibility.

Yes, it’s a movement in the right direction. But clearly if you’re borrowing £140,200,000,000 you’re still spending far too much relative to your income. Time to avoid celebrating and balance the damn books…

I understand the point of recycling. I really do. Some things can be taken, broken down, and reused, and for a profit. It’s a brilliant idea. You could opt in if you wanted to, either to minimise your wastage or to save Gaia. Or because you liked the sound it made when you started an avalanche inside the bottle bin¹.

Of course, government being government, that’s not where it stopped. Now you are forced into recycling, and you’re often forced into sorting it, and the list of things to be recycled includes many things that aren’t profitable to recycle.

I must say, where we’re living it isn’t to bad. You get a small refuse bin and a large general recycling bin. Yes, the order is the wrong way round but we have simple needs and we have a large enough driveway to store both. Back in Belfast, it was slightly more complicated: three bins, and only a very small yard to store them in. Honestly, when the local spides set fire to the garden recycling bin, I wasn’t exactly disappointed – there was now room in the yard to turn around.

But it could still be worse: Newcastle apparently has nine separate containers, which is just mental. I can’t even think of nine different classes of recycling, let alone where to store nine containers.

One quote I particularly dislike:

Trevor Nicoll, head of recycling and fleet services at Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council, said the local authority had launched an improved recycling and waste service and saved £500,000.

“Residents choose to what extent they recycle, if at all, but they have embraced it as rates have shot up from 27% to 50%,” he said.

They have embraced it? I’m sure they have, but dude is forgetting to mention the sticks hanging over people: the bin wardens with little red tags and the prospect of non-compliant bins hanging round for an extra week stinking the place up. Which just makes a community feel that much more friendly, don’t it…

I have a lot of time for people who do things that aren’t safe but just get on with it.The fact that what they’re doing for fun has a risk attached isn’t going to stop them; in a way, I do something similar with helicoptering. But the attitude is pretty well displayed in this guy:

A climber who survived a 1,000ft (305m) fall from a mountain peak says he is planning to return to the hills soon.

Adam Potter, 36, from Glasgow, plummeted down the near-vertical eastern slope of Sgurr Choinnich Mor near Ben Nevis after losing his footing.
…
Asked if would go back to the mountains soon, he replied: “Yes, hopefully very soon. I was hoping to go again next weekend but I think that will be cancelled. But maybe in a few weeks – I’ll see how the injuries go.

“It was just a little slip which led to a lot more slips… but I could slip on the doorstep at home,” he added.

Well said; yes, he could fall and injure himself again, but he could do so at work too. And lets be honest, who would have the best story to tell in the broken-leg ward of the local hospital?

Fresh on from yesterdays education of the UK by the stupider side of the Irish state, today we have another example.

A Dublin restaurant has had to pull rare and medium-rare burgers from its menu after it was threatened with legal action.

Jo’burger in Rathmines has been warned by the Irish Health Service Executive (HSE) to serve only well-done burgers or prove they can serve undercooked meat without the risk of contamination like E.coli.

That’s a shame, isn’t it? Not being allowed to provide what the customer wants without proving that it’s free of risk of contamination. Which, I’m guessing, requires the filling out of dozens of forms, one or two inspections of each step of the journey from being born to being grilled, and no discernible reduction in risk but makes the bureaucracy happy…

Or your could let people make up their own mind, and accept the risk of illness that goes with undercooking meat. It’s called ‘informed consent’, and it’s a wonderful way to live. And even better, doesn’t require the filling out of any forms at all!

It’s very strange, this coalition government. Under the last lot, I’d often hear a headline and get mildly irked by it; but by the time I’d finished reading their actual proposal I’d be livid. With the current lot, I read the headline and get pissed off, but by the time I’ve finished reading the proposal I’m not as annoyed. Welfare reform? Something needs doing and most of what has been said seems to fall into the category of ‘least-worst’. Student financing? If the status quo isn’t sustainable, then the ConLib proposals are better than most I’ve heard. NHS reform? Who the feck knows; when the government actually firm up their proposals we’ll get to decide if they’re good or not.

The same almost happened today again, with this story.

Minimum alcohol price levels planned by coalition
Plans for a minimum price for alcohol in England and Wales are to be announced by ministers.

Shops and bars will be prevented from selling drinks for less than the tax they pay on them.

The minimum pricing would work out at 38p for a can of weak lager and £10.71 for a litre bottle of vodka.

I am very strongly against the idea of minimum pricing for alcohol; I think that it’s ridiculous, puritanical and petty for the state to suggest that the vast majority should be chivvied into a form of behaviour because a very small section of society act contrary to society’s norms. But reading the detail, wherein the suggestion is only that drink can’t be sold for a price lower than the tax due on it, seems almost sensible. And if you can judge the quality of a man by the quality of his enemies, perhaps you can do the same for government policy. Look who’s against it and what they say:

• The nannying arm of the BMA: “It’s not minimum pricing, it’s not really going to make that much difference,” said a spokeswoman. “What we’re calling for is tough action.”
• Alcohol Concern¹: “Duty is so low in the UK that it will still be possible to sell very cheap alcohol and be within the law². The government needs to look again at a minimum price per unit of alcohol. That is the only evidence-based approach that will end cheap discounts once and for all.”
• Drinkaware: “As supply and price are not the only factors driving alcohol misuse, it is imperative that we challenge people’s relationship with alcohol as well,”

If all those lot are against this, then I’d naturally align with those supporting the proposal.

As it is, I’d prefer to leave well alone. But if something has to be done – and clearly it does not – then the above is the least worst option I’ve seen.

—
¹ – Alcohol Concern being a perfect fake charity.

² – he is, of course, having a laugh. Duty is not low, and it hasn’t been low in my lifetime.