Friday 20 March 2009

More Indian bicycle marketing...

I explained this strategy at length here; in short, the three main UK parties have policies that are more or less identical. They differentiate themselves by either A) claiming that the underlying philosophy is somehow different or B) in a negative way, i.e. they accuse each other of wanting to do things which would appeal to the other parties voters and don't defend themselves against such accusations by the other parties (thus giving their own potential voters the hope that they would do it, even though clearly they wouldn't).

As to A), a wealthy client asked me about Labour's threatened five per cent income tax surcharge on higher earners a week or two ago, and whether this would be introduced if the Tories won the next election. I explained that they almost certainly would. I can now award myself a brownie point for this blinding insight...

Dave The Chameleon has now admitted that he would introduce the surcharge, but wait - instead of it being a Nulab 'bash the rich' exercise, he'd do it in order to "rescue the economy" and/or because "priority must go to debt reduction".

As it happens, it is highly questionable whether the measure would actually increase tax revenues, once you factor in how few high earners would have to move abroad to wipe out the gains. And I'm not a fan of tax breaks for pension contributions (either on an individual level or for society as a whole), but even I would be tempted if I were getting over fifty per cent effective tax relief (once you include income tax and both layers of National Insurance).

As to B), the BBC gives Nulab ample scope to indulge in this tactic here. Dave has a good crack at all the vastly overpaid and superfluous quangocrats (yeah, the Tories invented the quangocracy, pots, kettles), and ...

Chief Secretary to the Treasury Yvette Cooper said: "How can David Cameron talk about fairness when he is still committed to a tax cut for millionaires' estates, won't back our £1.2bn help for the unemployed to get back into work, and wants to cut Sure Start? David Cameron's plans for cuts in apprenticeships, housing and transport in the middle of a recession are economic madness that would cost us all more in the long run."

NB, "help" = money = subsidies = a higher tax bill on somebody else. I've no idea whether the Tories want to "cut apprenticeships" for example, but this gives potential Nulab voters the illusion that under a Nulab government there'd be more apprenticeships that under a Tory one (for which there is no evidence whatsoever), and as to the other "cuts" she accuses the Tories of wanting to make (there's no evidence that they would do this either), all this does is give potential Tory voters the forlorn hope that the Tories would in fact cut taxes - they quite clearly wouldn't, but doesn't the accusation at least give the gullible voter at least the overall impression that they would?

4 comments:

Lola said...

They are all trying to woo the, what, 200,000 voters that actually swing the election. It implies that these are all clueless chavs that no nuffink and fink that the guvment is going to help them.

Persoanlly I reckon that all the chief politicos are ina a pass the parcel game of buggins turn in power.

Dr Evil said...

Dave Cameroon is saying this as he hopes to cadge a few disafected Labourite votes via a 'bash the rich' scheme. This wheeze would at most raise £2 billion which is nothing compared to the £180 billion squandered and wasted on Quangoes. First job should be shutting virtually all of these down, plus stopping the money given by government departments to fake charities. Will he have the balls to do anything like this? I doubt it. As you say these toe rags are much of a muchness, unfortunately.

Andrew Zalotocky said...

You might find the ideas of political scientist Bruce Bueno de Mesquita of interest, in particular the selectorate and the distinction between rhetorical and heresthetic political campaigns. In his terminology, the major parties are all engaged in purely rhetorical campaigning while UKIP are herestheticians.

Mark Wadsworth said...

AZ, the Selectorate idea makes perfect sense, thanks, but I'll have to find time to listen to his heresthetics podcast (1 hr 7 mins!).