Presenting political argument on Twitter, and the "prestige economy"

[bwv812]

@nonfer

from the linked to article "The figures from the Centre for Economics and Business Research (CEBR)"ok, maybe accurate but not encompassing the ‘grey’ economy of london.

for example: “This compares to London, which pays tax equivalent to 45.2 per cent of GDP created in the capital.”

how is that possible, or even relevant? when the london micro economy does not rely on gross domestic product for income, then those numbers make sense. the rest is just garbage, spouting off percentages as collected by their ‘centre’.

Care to attempt a coherent argument? I have no idea what your principal objection is, other than that you dislike the source (even though you admit their information may be accurate). You are free to cite other sources that you deem more trustworthy.

What is this grey economy you’re talking about? What do you mean?

How would it be impossible for 42.5% of London-sourced GDP to be paid to the government in tax? And why would it be irrelevant that they pay the highest proportion of their GDP in tax? Are tax brackets and progressive taxes also irrelevant? What is the London micro economy you’re talking about and what is your objection/point?

@nonfer

The fact that London tax payers are supporting the resut of us has nothing at all to do with the fact that most of the investment in infrastructure, financial and other service industries and everything else is in London.

This consideration is taken into account in the comparison between region-specific revenues and region-specific expenditures. So while London contributes 45.2% of its GDP in taxes, it gets back only 35.9% of their GDP in spending. In net, they contribute 10% of their GDP towards subsidizing the rest of the country.