Picked this up a few days ago during the local storm when there wasn’t much time or room on Slugger, but it’s a good take on Kelvin McKenzie’s supposed call for the south of England to kick the north of England out.
The Blighty blog at the Economist highlights what he really means:
Every example he offers of London and the south being attacked takes the form of taxes on the rich—stamp duty for example—which also apply in the north. Meanwhile, the subsidy he says that the north gets is in the form of public spending: welfare benefits or social housing for example, which also apply in the south. (Incidentally, London has far more social housing than elsewhere in Britain, so his attack on people with cable TV packages living in council housing is particularly absurd).
But then I suppose he couldn’t say that in a newspaper column. Even for Mr MacKenzie, a column entitled: “tax the rich less and hurt the poor more” might be considered a little too outrageous.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.