Nathan

Well the model's output was accurate to the cutoff in the data it was trained with which seems fine to me

Difference is image generation. Gemini would likely do fine with text too.

Is this an argument are no other extremely wealthy Brits in Dubai, Monaco, etc or that they’ve all already left and there’s none left?

The Dysons and Storonsky generally don’t, right? I think it’s worth having a solution to the fact that we are fundamentally uncompetitive for our own wealthy to stay because we have a capital gains tax and eg. Dubai doesn’t.

We probably don’t mind if we’re causing a massive admin and financial headache to people we’re not going to see again, though.

I feel like it's hard to avoid the fact that sentiment got worse specifically when net migration hit all time highs of ~900k

No, I have the intellectual humility to accept the consensus of academic economists on the topics they study when they contradict my priors. I am muting this thread now.

if you had reading comprehension skills you'd get to the section of that page where it says there are no examples of perfectly inelastic goods

projection

Lol this is so pointless.

alright you can continue in your ignorance now 'm going to stop arguing with random folks online for today

Well yes because you would have to find £200bn of revenue elsewhere which will inevitably involve raising taxes massively on poor people because you can tax incomes above £50k to 100% and it wouldn't be enough.

Where you suggested that VAT should fight poverty

well since you're proposing getting rid of almost £200bn of revenue

I would like you to point me to a place where I've pointed to a broad based VAT as a method to reduce poverty.

you did, not me!

just get rid of taxation entirely while you're at it why don't you

I said that VAT should be broad based and proposed a way that ensures making it so doesn't hurt poorer people more than it does now in any measurable way, what's wrong with this?

good thing to do if our definition of regressive doesn't measure lifetime welfare

what where did I claim it was a poverty reduction method? I said it was less distortionary and reduces tax complexity.

VAT is particularly regressive if its incidence is assessed relative to income, but much less so when it is
assessed relative to consumption, which is regarded as a better indicator of lifetime welfare (Caspersen and
Metcalf, 1994; Warren, Harding and Lloyd, 2005; Carlson and Patrick, 1989)

using the VAT itself to do this through narrowing the base and adding in exemptions is distortionary.

because we know which people are poor and we can redistribute money to them! how is this hard to understand!

It suggests "a single-rate , broad-base, VAT" with inequality solved through other means (in that paper's case, technology that redistributes tax paid at point of sale).

I have read them, you clearly haven't

This is a child's understanding of VAT.

I have no idea which specific problem you're euphemistically referring to with this

Those papers explain in detail but tldr: you can simply cut headline VAT to ensure poor people pay the same amounts as what they do now.

guess we should pull that "solve the economic problems" lever that we've just not been pulling because we're all stupid

I think the police prevent crime