IT seems clear to me that during his time as an economic adviser to Labour Danny Blanchflower never looked at the back of anybody’s membership card.

Had he done so he would have read the following statement: “The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity in the hands of the many not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.” That is the kind of political party I belong to, not one which thinks the level of inequality existing throughout the UK is moral.

Mr Blanchflower’s claim that a maximum wage policy wouldn’t work (“Corbyn’s plan for maximum wage branded unworkable”, The Herald, January 11) suggests to me that he believes the current system for determining folk’s wages - courtesy of our prevailing free market economy - does work. But who exactly does it work for? Perhaps he should spend a month as an infantry soldier in a conflict zone and then look at his payslip, comparing the £2,580 gross figure shown with that which radio presenter Eddie Mair reads on his payslip, £35,800. That was Mr Mair’s monthly gross income, as disclosed by the BBC last May after John Whittingdale, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport had forced the publicly-owned broadcasting corporation to “come clean”.

I believe that Jeremy Corbyn’s call for there to be some kind of maximum wage in our society is welcome, in line with what Labour stands for, and is workable. After all the proverb “where there’s a will there’s a way” may be old but surely that doesn’t make it any the less valid today.

Korstiaan Allan,

7 Whitingford, Edinburgh.

PATRICK Harvie’s response to the Scottish Government proposal to borrow money to fund infrastructure projects (“ SNP to borrow up to £3bn for infrastructure”, The Herald, January 12) appears to be that the Government should instead raise the funds through increased taxation. Collectively we already pay more of our earnings in direct and indirect taxation than any other preceding generation. From the sidelines to me it would appear that other than us poor beggars on PAYE, our current system of taxation is woefully unfit for purpose, as any private individual or corporation that is paying taxes needs to sack their accountants and tax-advisors.

Rather than advocating screwing more money out of a general public which is already seeing its standard of living decline and is about to witness a sudden acceleration of that process as the effects of a 20 per cent-plus devaluation in the value of sterling result in inevitable spiralling inflation, perhaps it’s time for radical action.

Why have taxation in the first place? We meekly accept taxation as a fact of life yet in 1940 less than 20 per cent of the working population paid taxes. Historically how governments raised taxes, including income tax, has varied but the overall trend has been towards the general public carrying the greater burden, especially when VAT and indirect taxation are taken into account.

As regards infrastructure projects the key question is why the UK as a sovereign state has to borrow money from money-lenders to finance domestic projects that can be accomplished with materials and human resources already present in the UK. Why is our government not in control of our sovereign currency? Why does the nation have to beg from a third party? If sterling has any value it lies in the people of the UK and what we collectively do to create the environment we live in, so why are we forced to borrow from a corrupt banking system that simply manufactures money by creating debt?

The only thing that limits the fulfilment of our desire for infrastructure improvements and having a first-class NHS and other social services is a reluctance of our elected representatives to challenge the status quo. Why must we collectively accept the veto of some entity whose authority is greater than our own elected government? All our politicians including Mr Harvie need to reassess just whose side they are on and change things. If the Government bends the knee to another authority why should I kowtow to the Government?

David J Crawford,

Flat 3/3, 131 Shuna Street, Glasgow.

TABLOIDS owned by billionaires want you to hate the “wee doley doon the street wi’ a 42-inch telly an’ a brand new car, six bairns wi’ brand new claes”. I don’t. I say good luck to him and his family. They’re getting by in a system that is designed to keep people like them down. The poor in the UK are not meant to better themselves but to be mindful of their betters while getting by as wage slaves.

The tabloids scream “cheat”and point the finger at them, directing attention away from the real culprits - The bankers and multinationals with their obscene bonuses and all-too-compliant Westminster politicians doing their bidding, using public money to bail out failed banks and selling off public assets to their corporate pals and pocketing their dues. They maintain the myth that a country’s success is based on its earnings, not on the wellbeing of its population.

Mark Harper,

22 Fitzroy Street, Dysart, Fife.