What's happening to money?

[Anna B]

How about you answer or address the previous points raised about drug companies first then Anna before going off on another tangent where you will refuse to answer, complain you haven't got access to the information, and know nothing but still postulate that somethings wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence?

 

I've already tried. You willfully refuse to understand.

 

The gap between rich and poor is huge and getting wider.

 

How about a few facts and figures from yourself to disprove it.

 

---------- Post added 06-06-2015 at 22:43 ----------

 

Oh, and according to tonight's news, David Cameron at the G7 has called for a clean up of corruption in both government and business.

 

Always one for jumping on a passing bandwagon is our David, but it does prove corruption is happening and is a problem,and I for one don't trust any figures until I see them broken down and verified, (which never seems to happen - that's the problem...)

Edited June 7, 2015 by Anna B

[Obelix]

I've already tried.

 

No you haven't. You made a series of statements that are unquantifiable and the reasons for them is obvious when a little logic and understanding is applied.

 

You willfully refuse to understand.

 

That's your speciality I'm afraid not mine.

 

The gap between rich and poor is huge and getting wider.

 

Proof please - and not just handwaving "oh look around isn't it obvious it's awful isnt it" excuses.

 

How about a few facts and figures from yourself to disprove it.

 

You've made the assertions Anna - it's up to you to prove them not for me to disprove them. Must we go through this *again* due to your wilful refusal to understand burden of proof?

Oh, and according to tonight's news, David Cameron at the G7 has called for a clean up of corruption in both government and business.

 

Always one for jumping on a passing bandwagon is our David, but it does prove corruption is happening

 

Wow in other news bears do their business in the woods - I don't think anyone here has though there was no corruption in the world....

[cgksheff]

........

And I don't thinlk I've heard any teachers in the public sector asking for six figure salaries.

 

The phrase was 'public servants in every sector.

If the sector is 'Education', you will find plenty of head teachers on more than£100k, and then you only need to poke your head round the door at DfE to find a lot more.

[Anna B]

No you haven't. You made a series of statements that are unquantifiable and the reasons for them is obvious when a little logic and understanding is applied.

 

 

 

That's your speciality I'm afraid not mine.

 

 

 

Proof please - and not just handwaving "oh look around isn't it obvious it's awful isnt it" excuses.

 

 

 

You've made the assertions Anna - it's up to you to prove them not for me to disprove them. Must we go through this *again* due to your wilful refusal to understand burden of proof?

 

 

Wow in other news bears do their business in the woods - I don't think anyone here has though there was no corruption in the world....

 

As usual, you're just arguing for the sake of it.

 

'The gap between rich and poor is getting wider' and you need proof?

Really?

Do you not read the financial pages? Have you not heard this quoted on the news? Political programmes etc. The Ratio between those on average wage and the chief execs etc has gone from 8:1 to about 20:1

Look it up. You won't have to look very far. I really can't be bothered trying to supply 'proof' of everything even well known facts just to satisfy someone who obviously goes round with his head in a bucket.

 

And I love the way you dismiss David Cameron's admission of government and corporate corruption so lightly, - says it all really....

 

---------- Post added 07-06-2015 at 13:34 ----------

 

Try reading this: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk-most-unequal-country-in-the-west-1329614.html for starters.

 

'UK most unequal country in the west'

 

'Huge gap between rich and poor in Britain is same as in Nigeria and worse than Ethiopia, a UN report reveals.'

[Obelix]

As usual, you're just arguing for the sake of it.

 

That would be you again I'm afraid Anna.

 

I'm still waitng for you to address the substantive points made about the drug companies. The only one arguing and introducting new topics for the sake of it is you - you've come up with stuff about drug companies, and then private schooling, and then corruption and are flitting about all over the place.

 

Are you going to answer the points about drug companies?

 

Have a look here for some proper substantive data about inequality - which is FALLING despite your incessant comments to the contrary.

 

Reading the papers and posting vague stories about it and saying it should be clear to anyone doesn 't cut the mustard. You need hard evidence.

 

http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/about-inequality/scale-and-trends

 

There's your evidence.

 

An interesting point. The bottom 60% of people are paying no tax - they take home more than their income after benefits, tax credits etc are paid for.

 

They are supported by the top 40% of people. Without that large split in income you wouldnt be able to tax the top end to support the bottom end as much. We would all be more equal and have a much more equal share of much less. Something to think on.

Edited June 7, 2015 by Obelix

[Anna B]

So you haven't even bothered to read the evidence even when it's presented to you.

 

There's none so blind..... etc

 

It's a complete waste of time bothering with you. So I won't bother anymore.

[Obelix]

So you haven't even bothered to read the evidence even when it's presented to you.

 

There's none so blind..... etc

 

It's a complete waste of time bothering with you. So I won't bother anymore.

 

I posted you a counter example to your assertions Anna. I did read the stuff you posted - and then you feel fit to misrepresent that? You posted 2 newspaper article. That's all. It talked about a report, that it failed to reference. That's called political grandstanding.

 

I posted details of the methodology, the data sources used and proper references. So you can look up the data yourself. That's called economics and science.

 

Did you read mine?

 

You asked further up the thread for "How about a few facts and figures from yourself to disprove it."

 

I've provided them - and you are spitting the dummy out now I have?

 

Wow....

Edited June 7, 2015 by Obelix

[sgtkate]

 

A school doesn't just have a £20k price tag without a specific reason.

Mugs don't just pay a £20k price tag unless they believe there to be a good reason.

 

Actually, mugs do pay for something just because it has a high price tag. Remember Von Dutch? That was simply a licensing company. It was not a designer, there were no design students or catwalk models going on. People simply paid EXTORTIONATE amounts of money to put the word Von Dutch on something. It was in effect a social experiment. If we produce some absolutely tat, but give it a price tag of £200 for a cap you would buy for £5 simply because it has Von Dutch on it, then you pretty much prove how the wealthy live. Seemed a great success to me given all the tatty Von Dutch hats there were around.

[L00b]

Actually, mugs do pay for something just because it has a high price tag. Remember Von Dutch? That was simply a licensing company. It was not a designer, there were no design students or catwalk models going on. People simply paid EXTORTIONATE amounts of money to put the word Von Dutch on something. It was in effect a social experiment. If we produce some absolutely tat, but give it a price tag of £200 for a cap you would buy for £5 simply because it has Von Dutch on it, then you pretty much prove how the wealthy live. Seemed a great success to me given all the tatty Von Dutch hats there were around.

I may well be wrong....but I believe people (with such means as to afford £20k p.a. on private education) put a little more thought into selecting their offspring's school than selecting a clothing brand, never mind chav-targeting designer clothing