Thread by @uk_domain_names

Why do people satisfy themselves with simple partial truths?

For example, the narrative that a house that was worth £250,000 15 years ago but is now worth £400,000 means £150,000 of unearned profit? 1/2

But the owner of that property could easily have paid MUCH more than £250,000 when you add up their buying and selling fees, deposit, and all their mortgage payments. Especially when you factor in the lost opportunity cost of not having that same money to spend on other things.

You never hear that part of the narrative though, do you? People who bemoan the unfairness of unearned property wealth tend to treat houses as if they were things bought by a magic bag of gold in a single lump sum, like a lottery winner cashing in. Nuance is nowhere to be found.

Or consider the fuel duty freeze. More than £40 billion in potential Treasury revenue has been sacrificed over the last decade because of an unwillingness to raise fuel duty.

This is defended with the argument that a rise would hurt poor people.

That's true, for a certain value of true.

But it ignores several crucial facts:
- car ownership rates are much lower among the low-income demographic
- poorer people drive less than 1/5th the annual mileage of the richest 20%

On the other hand, austerity rips poor people worst.

So that same £40 billion put towards lessening the effects of austerity cuts over the last ten years would have helped the least well off far more than an increase in fuel duty would have hurt them.

The real truth is: a fuel duty freeze is a vote winner for the Tory demographic.