Titanic99 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 Let me know when your political blinkers fall off, so we can resume discussing economics - I don't do 'both at once', it's meaningless No political blinkers from me, just a simple desire to express my disgust at the policies of reducing the income for the poorest and increasing the disposable income of the wealthiest. It's wrong and most people can see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanic99 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 The arguments put forward in this thread (and in fact all over this forum) is that the rich are getting richer - and most arguments are based around despite a recession the rich are getting richer through bonuses/greed bankers etc. You can look at the 50% rate and see if it reached its target. The HMRC splits up all the bands into numbers of people. The number of people in that bracket is only about 105,000. If the target isn't being met then either: the rich aren't getting richer - blowing most arguments on the forum; or the rich aren't paying the higher rate through avoidance - which is evidence that the rate is detrimental to tax revenues. Well the 350000 people earning over £150000 are getting richer following the change in taxation policy, whereas those dependent on Benefit are getting poorer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titanic99 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 And if they did and the top 10% left, taking away 1/2 of the income tax revenue, what would happen then? You going to make up the difference? I've worked for over 30 years and have yet to come across someone who is/was indispensible. If these people left then there would be plenty more prepared to do the same work as them for slightly less income. if I had the ability I'd quite happily replace Carols tevez for half the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms Macbeth Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I've worked for over 30 years and have yet to come across someone who is/was indispensible. If these people left then there would be plenty more prepared to do the same work as them for slightly less income. if I had the ability I'd quite happily replace Carols tevez for half the money. I think the point about the really rich is they aren't employed in the normal way. Many are entrepreneurs, sports people or in entertainment. A surprising number of the richest people in the UK aren't there because of inheritance. And so many of the richest didn't start out here, but have moved here bringing at least some of their spending power with them. Makes interesting reading: http://www.richest-people.co.uk/the-top-100/ Click on the trends to see the rich sports people etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxmaximus Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 To be fair the current government's record on debt reduction is pretty poor. I think the opposite is true, the people on the lowest wages are the people the rich depend on. They cook our meals, haul our trash, connect our calls, drive our ambulances, and guard us while we sleep. I don't think cutting benefits is always the answer, it may lead to more people turning to crime, stealing to feed their addictions or simply to get by. All paid for by the tax the rich pay, if the rich people leave there won't be enough tax to pay for these things. I pay tax, I’m not poor, I don’t pay anywhere near enough to cover the cost of the services that are provided for me, it’s the tax that the rich pay that covers most of the cost. If the rich should relocate to another country as many people want, then unemployment will increase, tax will drop and the poor will be significantly worse off. I know, it sucks that some people have loads of cash whilst other don’t, but that’s life and without the greedy people at the top we would all be worse off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I've worked for over 30 years and have yet to come across someone who is/was indispensible. If these people left then there would be plenty more prepared to do the same work as them for slightly less income. if I had the ability I'd quite happily replace Carols tevez for half the money. Sorry but that's plain nonsense. *Why* do you think they get paid the most? It's because they are the best at what they do by and large. If you get rid of them the odds are very good you will not be able to replace them, not in anything like the time needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 I think the point about the really rich is they aren't employed in the normal way. Many are entrepreneurs, sports people or in entertainment. A surprising number of the richest people in the UK aren't there because of inheritance. And so many of the richest didn't start out here, but have moved here bringing at least some of their spending power with them. Makes interesting reading: http://www.richest-people.co.uk/the-top-100/ Click on the trends to see the rich sports people etc. That's the reality, but many on here refuse to believe it. They far prefer to imagine anybody with money to be born to the landed gentry, with ancestors who benefitted from serfdom - that way their jealous hatred is - in their eyes - justified. The truth is that most wealthy people are where they are through talent and/or hard work. The lazy and feckless don't like to acknowledge that you can do well if you put your back into it, so they ignore reality. There are people who need the welfare system and should be entitled to its support, but for each of those there are 4 or 5 people whose benefits should be cut until they accept a menial low-paid job rather than choose a life of sponging and watching afternoon tv. The welfare state is the biggest chunk of Britain's spending budget, and a small percentage cut in that area would put the country back on track. I'm all for cutting benefits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Tamudo Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 They far prefer to imagine anybody with money to be born to the landed gentry, with ancestors who benefitted from serfdom - that way their jealous hatred is - in their eyes - justified. I can't think what gives us plebs that idea. http://tompride.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/cameron-bullingdon-club.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 That's the reality, but many on here refuse to believe it. They far prefer to imagine anybody with money to be born to the landed gentry, with ancestors who benefitted from serfdom - that way their jealous hatred is - in their eyes - justified. The truth is that most wealthy people are where they are through talent and/or hard work. The lazy and feckless don't like to acknowledge that you can do well if you put your back into it, so they ignore reality. There are people who need the welfare system and should be entitled to its support, but for each of those there are 4 or 5 people whose benefits should be cut until they accept a menial low-paid job rather than choose a life of sponging and watching afternoon tv. The welfare state is the biggest chunk of Britain's spending budget, and a small percentage cut in that area would put the country back on track. I'm all for cutting benefits. In your broad sweeping attack, there is no mention of the fact that a lot of poor people work their arses off in 2 or more jobs to make ends meet. Millions of the lowest paid are on in work benefits of some sort, or housing benefit top ups as their employers don't pay them what is considered a living wage (many of these employers are large employers too who could well afford a living wage). You forget to mention that wealth and privilidge of begets wealth and priviledge, so thejobs in the professions like the media, fashion and finance often go to people with family connections (i.e. it's not 'what you know but who you know'). Another reason why social mobility has ground to a halt in this country. Fair enough there are idlers, and they get a huge amount of media attention, but the working poor don't, the undeserving rich don't, companies that rely on taxpayers largesse don't. And don't assume that people are merely jealous of the rich when they point out inconvenient truths you don't like. It's about fair play - that you don't understand or acknowledge this says more about you than it does those who oppose your political views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tradescanthia Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 It’s the rich that provide almost everything the poor need, so looking after the rich benefits to the poor. Give this guy a full frontal lobotomy.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.