The rich - poor gap
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
The poor, well they are poor so what's the point in taxing them? They've got no spare money so they'd only claim more benefits.
That's the most fundamental point about taxes isn't it? It's about having a regime that's practical rather than fair.I'm not sure about some posters' question "Why are people bothered about what others have?". That's how the human brain works isn't it? We look around the world and learn from it. It's more of an issue now we have globalisation and good communications. People used to have such a limited view and some daft excuse could be made as to why the rich folk in the manor had so much - but now most of us in the world know far more. The mere fact that we're not half-staving and don't have scarlet fever is necessarily a big deal any more.
don4l said:
They pay all of this out of their "benefits".
BS, many working poor pay those taxes from meagre poverty wages.Most working poor actually work hard for their wages.
Working family credit is a subsidy for unviable business not a benefit.
don4l said:
Ozzie, are you a recepient of state benefits?
I'm not a recepient (sic) of state benefits, I'm higher rate tax payer. However I have working class family and friends and they mostly work a lot harder than most high earning 'professionals' I know.
Tell me when was the last time you worked a 56 hour split shifts on a zero hour contact at minimum wage ?
Randy Winkman said:
I'm not sure about some posters' question "Why are people bothered about what others have?". That's how the human brain works isn't it? We look around the world and learn from it.
One of the primary reasons it bothers me is because I’m involved in investing (though in a smaller way that some here no doubt). In a very wishy-washy holistic way I think that in many ways business is really the manifestation of social forces driving people to aspire towards an ever higher consumption of goods and services.At the end of the day economies work if people obtain money via employment to purchase products and services. If people are paid less I question if people will still feel as incentivised to participate as completely in the labour market. While people may continue to work they may simply not work full time or seek employment that doesn’t utilise their full potential as it's unrewarding. I view underutilisation and underdevelopment of human assets is a loss to the countries economy.
Obviously I’m not completely heartless either there are long-term social problem also being created by a vast wealth disparities. I just no longer see this as a competing interest between social and economic optimisation.
Martin4x4 said:
Tell me when was the last time you worked a 56 hour split shifts on a zero hour contact at minimum wage ?
There was no minimum wage or EU directive b
ks when I was working back to back 12-hour shifts for less than the equivalent (at the time) of the minimum wage. It was a while ago, so what?Quite a few doctors haven't had rabies but know how to avoid getting it, also how to advise and treat another person who's got it.
If people make bad life decisions they should pay for it not everyone else, lessons can be learned at any time and this country offers people every opportunity to better themselves if they can be bothered.
speedy_thrills said:
Randy Winkman said:
I'm not sure about some posters' question "Why are people bothered about what others have?". That's how the human brain works isn't it? We look around the world and learn from it.
One of the primary reasons it bothers me is because I’m involved in investing (though in a smaller way that some here no doubt). In a very wishy-washy holistic way I think that in many ways business is really the manifestation of social forces driving people to aspire towards an ever higher consumption of goods and services.k off out of it, taking their unhelpful base human instincts and excuses with them.If a person earns A and has X then there are obvious ways to earn B and have Y. Information is all over the place, from careers professionals/the internet/biographies/self-help books and so on. Nosing into other people's affairs on that basis can be a feeble excuse for malicious invasion of privacy.
turbobloke said:
If people make bad life decisions they should pay for it not everyone else
You mean like this?There are people in this country just as trapped in poverty and dangerous and life shortening work by people like you.
(Negative) Impact of working life patterns on life span
http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2007/04/22/rotating-shifts-shorten-lives/
Max Planck Research Group "Affect Across the Lifespan"
Martin4x4 said:
turbobloke said:
If people make bad life decisions they should pay for it not everyone else
You mean like this?Denis Healy said:
Don't be a silly billy.
Martin4x4 said:
There are people in this country just as trapped in poverty and dangerous and life shortening work by people like you.
By people like me, or as people like me? Can't make head nor tail of that: am I at risk from the life-threatening 12 hour back-to-back shifts I once worked? Or are you erroneously suggesting I somehow manage to trap people in poverty? Too many people are perfectly capable of trapping themselves in poverty without help from me. Over time I've volunteered to help quite a few young people with university entrancce type stuff and mentored new business start-ups, that doesn't sound like trapping in poverty but then you were after all only trying and and not succeeding in making some emotive angle relevant where it's totally irrelevant, same old.turbobloke said:
By people like me, or as people like me? Can't make head nor tail of that: am I at risk from the life-threatening 12 hour back-to-back shifts I once worked? Or are you erroneously suggesting I somehow manage to trap people in poverty? Too many people are perfectly capable of trapping themselves in poverty without help from me. Over time I've volunteered to help quite a few young people with university entrancce type stuff and mentored new business start-ups, that doesn't sound like trapping in poverty but then you were after all only trying and and not succeeding in making some emotive angle relevant where it's totally irrelevant, same old.
So what makes them worthy of your support? Wealthy parents who can offer some quid quo pro like helping to keep the rest of the plebs down I presume.You are responsible because you preach the continuation of a flawed and unscrupulous class model.
Edited by Martin4x4 on Monday 21st April 14:39
Martin4x4 said:
So what makes them worthy of your support? Wealth parents who can offer some quid quo pro like helping to keep the rest of the plebs down I presume.
You are responsibility because you preach the continuation of a flawed and unscrupulous class model.
When someone points out this is illiterate nonsense, are you going to claim dyslexia? You are responsibility because you preach the continuation of a flawed and unscrupulous class model.
turbobloke said:
Martin4x4 said:
Tell me when was the last time you worked a 56 hour split shifts on a zero hour contact at minimum wage ?
There was no minimum wage or EU directive bks when I was working back to back 12-hour shifts for less than the equivalent (at the time) of the minimum wage. It was a while ago, so what?Quite a few doctors haven't had rabies but know how to avoid getting it, also how to advise and treat another person who's got it.
If people make bad life decisions they should pay for it not everyone else, lessons can be learned at any time and this country offers people every opportunity to better themselves if they can be bothered.
Martin4x4 said:
turbobloke said:
By people like me, or as people like me? Can't make head nor tail of that: am I at risk from the life-threatening 12 hour back-to-back shifts I once worked? Or are you erroneously suggesting I somehow manage to trap people in poverty? Too many people are perfectly capable of trapping themselves in poverty without help from me. Over time I've volunteered to help quite a few young people with university entrancce type stuff and mentored new business start-ups, that doesn't sound like trapping in poverty but then you were after all only trying and and not succeeding in making some emotive angle relevant where it's totally irrelevant, same old.
So what makes them worthy of your support? Wealthy parents who can offer some quid quo pro like helping to keep the rest of the plebs down I presume.You are responsible because you preach the continuation of a flawed and unscrupulous class model.
Edited by Martin4x4 on Monday 21st April 14:39
WEHGuy said:
Martin4x4 said:
turbobloke said:
By people like me, or as people like me? Can't make head nor tail of that: am I at risk from the life-threatening 12 hour back-to-back shifts I once worked? Or are you erroneously suggesting I somehow manage to trap people in poverty? Too many people are perfectly capable of trapping themselves in poverty without help from me. Over time I've volunteered to help quite a few young people with university entrancce type stuff and mentored new business start-ups, that doesn't sound like trapping in poverty but then you were after all only trying and and not succeeding in making some emotive angle relevant where it's totally irrelevant, same old.
So what makes them worthy of your support? Wealthy parents who can offer some quid quo pro like helping to keep the rest of the plebs down I presume.You are responsible because you preach the continuation of a flawed and unscrupulous class model.
It's also fascinating to see Martin4x4's mindreading at work, revealing via psychic powers the claimed knowledge that pupils receiving help have wealthy parents, it's amazing and wrong in many instances. Class has nothing to do with what I think or what I type on PH. I've always been hardworking class and always will be and deal with people on the basis of their actions not their background. The anachronistic nonsense of class warfare failed Labour in the Crewe and Natwich by-election and has nothing to offer today.
The responsibility for preaching a flawed model is your (Martin4x4) problem not mine. I suppport the only viable means of helping people who genuinely can't help themselves which is firstly to help sustain those who can and do help them, these being successful businesses and taxpayers, particularly those on higher rates. It's these groups that pay the tax which provides benefits and other welfare provision.
I'd rather mentor a start-up or two and encourage high expectations via uni entrance than risk encountering emotionally incontinent and intellectually challenged Guardian readers wailing about investigative journalism in a food bank.
With (or without) help, start-up businesses can grow and provide jobs which pay for a bit of extra food that can be donated to a food bank. The socialist money tree doesn't exist and fine words in support of the poor are easy, but the socialist path to failure is well trodden and offers nothing but continued dependency as that's what the vote-buying rhetoric is all about.
Emotive carp from the deluded left only serves to increase poverty and wealth gaps while nearly bankrupting the country, as per Labour's failures in the 70s, 90s and 00s. Who'd be idiotic enough to want a third dose of that in a working lifetime.
davepoth said:
Inheritance tax was introduced to stop that from happening after wealth became increasingly concentrated in the 18th and 19th centuries.
No, inheritance tax wasn't introduced to make a more viable future economic system.As with all taxes, the reason for its introduction is that the government at the time decided it was a new way to produce additional revenue.
Rovinghawk said:
...
As with all taxes, the reason for its introduction is that the government at the time decided it was a new way to produce additional revenue.
100%.As with all taxes, the reason for its introduction is that the government at the time decided it was a new way to produce additional revenue.
I'm in 2 minds on IHT. Instinctively it feels wrong to me, but I can see the argument that says it's simply "income" for the new recipient of the wealth, irrespective of whether the original "owner" of it paid their taxes in accumulating it.
To be honest, it doesn't seem that difficult to avoid it, so on balance I think I'd err on the "leave it alone" side of life. There are other taxes I'd sooner see cut first.
turbobloke said:
There is indeed no point.
It's also fascinating to see Martin4x4's mindreading at work, revealing via psychic powers the claimed knowledge that pupils receiving help have wealthy parents, it's amazing and wrong in many instances. Class has nothing to do with what I think or what I type on PH. I've always been hardworking class and always will be and deal with people on the basis of their actions not their background. The anachronistic nonsense of class warfare failed Labour in the Crewe and Natwich by-election and has nothing to offer today.
The responsibility for preaching a flawed model is your (Martin4x4) problem not mine. I suppport the only viable means of helping people who genuinely can't help themselves which is firstly to help sustain those who can and do help them, these being successful businesses and taxpayers, particularly those on higher rates. It's these groups that pay the tax which provides benefits and other welfare provision.
I'd rather mentor a start-up or two and encourage high expectations via uni entrance than risk encountering emotionally incontinent and intellectually challenged Guardian readers wailing about investigative journalism in a food bank.
With (or without) help, start-up businesses can grow and provide jobs which pay for a bit of extra food that can be donated to a food bank. The socialist money tree doesn't exist and fine words in support of the poor are easy, but the socialist path to failure is well trodden and offers nothing but continued dependency as that's what the vote-buying rhetoric is all about.
Emotive carp from the deluded left only serves to increase poverty and wealth gaps while nearly bankrupting the country, as per Labour's failures in the 70s, 90s and 00s. Who'd be idiotic enough to want a third dose of that in a working lifetime.
What I find <i>fascinating</i> is your attempts to rationalise that Doublethink. I think underneath all your rhetoric there is a decent human being trying to get out.It's also fascinating to see Martin4x4's mindreading at work, revealing via psychic powers the claimed knowledge that pupils receiving help have wealthy parents, it's amazing and wrong in many instances. Class has nothing to do with what I think or what I type on PH. I've always been hardworking class and always will be and deal with people on the basis of their actions not their background. The anachronistic nonsense of class warfare failed Labour in the Crewe and Natwich by-election and has nothing to offer today.
The responsibility for preaching a flawed model is your (Martin4x4) problem not mine. I suppport the only viable means of helping people who genuinely can't help themselves which is firstly to help sustain those who can and do help them, these being successful businesses and taxpayers, particularly those on higher rates. It's these groups that pay the tax which provides benefits and other welfare provision.
I'd rather mentor a start-up or two and encourage high expectations via uni entrance than risk encountering emotionally incontinent and intellectually challenged Guardian readers wailing about investigative journalism in a food bank.
With (or without) help, start-up businesses can grow and provide jobs which pay for a bit of extra food that can be donated to a food bank. The socialist money tree doesn't exist and fine words in support of the poor are easy, but the socialist path to failure is well trodden and offers nothing but continued dependency as that's what the vote-buying rhetoric is all about.
Emotive carp from the deluded left only serves to increase poverty and wealth gaps while nearly bankrupting the country, as per Labour's failures in the 70s, 90s and 00s. Who'd be idiotic enough to want a third dose of that in a working lifetime.
Why not give him the chance.
Murph7355 said:
Rovinghawk said:
...
As with all taxes, the reason for its introduction is that the government at the time decided it was a new way to produce additional revenue.
100%.As with all taxes, the reason for its introduction is that the government at the time decided it was a new way to produce additional revenue.
I'm in 2 minds on IHT. Instinctively it feels wrong to me, but I can see the argument that says it's simply "income" for the new recipient of the wealth, irrespective of whether the original "owner" of it paid their taxes in accumulating it.
To be honest, it doesn't seem that difficult to avoid it, so on balance I think I'd err on the "leave it alone" side of life. There are other taxes I'd sooner see cut first.
I would scrap capital gains tax, inheritance tax, VAT, and introduce a single rate of income tax of around 25% at a threshold of 15K. The economy would take off, and the government would have a much simpler system to implement. This would also be combined with extensive welfare reforms.
Martin4x4 said:
turbobloke said:
There is indeed no point.
It's also fascinating to see Martin4x4's mindreading at work, revealing via psychic powers the claimed knowledge that pupils receiving help have wealthy parents, it's amazing and wrong in many instances. Class has nothing to do with what I think or what I type on PH. I've always been hardworking class and always will be and deal with people on the basis of their actions not their background. The anachronistic nonsense of class warfare failed Labour in the Crewe and Natwich by-election and has nothing to offer today.
The responsibility for preaching a flawed model is your (Martin4x4) problem not mine. I suppport the only viable means of helping people who genuinely can't help themselves which is firstly to help sustain those who can and do help them, these being successful businesses and taxpayers, particularly those on higher rates. It's these groups that pay the tax which provides benefits and other welfare provision.
I'd rather mentor a start-up or two and encourage high expectations via uni entrance than risk encountering emotionally incontinent and intellectually challenged Guardian readers wailing about investigative journalism in a food bank.
With (or without) help, start-up businesses can grow and provide jobs which pay for a bit of extra food that can be donated to a food bank. The socialist money tree doesn't exist and fine words in support of the poor are easy, but the socialist path to failure is well trodden and offers nothing but continued dependency as that's what the vote-buying rhetoric is all about.
Emotive carp from the deluded left only serves to increase poverty and wealth gaps while nearly bankrupting the country, as per Labour's failures in the 70s, 90s and 00s. Who'd be idiotic enough to want a third dose of that in a working lifetime.
What I find <i>fascinating</i> is your attempts to rationalise that Doublethink. I think underneath all your rhetoric there is a decent human being trying to get out.It's also fascinating to see Martin4x4's mindreading at work, revealing via psychic powers the claimed knowledge that pupils receiving help have wealthy parents, it's amazing and wrong in many instances. Class has nothing to do with what I think or what I type on PH. I've always been hardworking class and always will be and deal with people on the basis of their actions not their background. The anachronistic nonsense of class warfare failed Labour in the Crewe and Natwich by-election and has nothing to offer today.
The responsibility for preaching a flawed model is your (Martin4x4) problem not mine. I suppport the only viable means of helping people who genuinely can't help themselves which is firstly to help sustain those who can and do help them, these being successful businesses and taxpayers, particularly those on higher rates. It's these groups that pay the tax which provides benefits and other welfare provision.
I'd rather mentor a start-up or two and encourage high expectations via uni entrance than risk encountering emotionally incontinent and intellectually challenged Guardian readers wailing about investigative journalism in a food bank.
With (or without) help, start-up businesses can grow and provide jobs which pay for a bit of extra food that can be donated to a food bank. The socialist money tree doesn't exist and fine words in support of the poor are easy, but the socialist path to failure is well trodden and offers nothing but continued dependency as that's what the vote-buying rhetoric is all about.
Emotive carp from the deluded left only serves to increase poverty and wealth gaps while nearly bankrupting the country, as per Labour's failures in the 70s, 90s and 00s. Who'd be idiotic enough to want a third dose of that in a working lifetime.
Why not give him the chance.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff