What is “Politics of envy”?

[Nickgnome]

TeamD said:

Nickgnome said:

TeamD said:

Roman Rhodes said:

TeamD said:

Roman Rhodes said:

otolith said:

Roman Rhodes said:

You use an argument "in order that the less well off benefit" which is explicitly excluded from consideration by "regardless of what it brings in". Simple maths. Currently you (rich) pay in £3 and I (poor) pay in £2. £5 paid in. Change that to you pay in £4 and I pay in £1. £5 paid in but I am better off.

You still don't get it. If it doesn't raise any more money, you're not getting £4 from me. Or maybe you are, but Fred has said "screw this" and gone part time. It's not raising any more money. You still have to pay £3.

It's not a question of "Should the rich pay more and the poor pay less so that the overall tax take is the same". That's a scenario you have invented in your own head. It's the scenario relevant to the preceding question.

You have changed my mind, though, I am now willing to consider the possibility that the Labour voters questioned were a bit thick and didn't understand it either.

I'm simply giving you a motivation as to why someone could agree that it was right to tax the rich more even if the total amount of tax raised didn't increase. You first sentence simply illustrates that you are incapable of understanding a simple proposition - I'm not "getting £4 from" you or anyone else - the tax pot is, I've never paid £3, I was paying £2 into the tax pot and now I'm paying £1 into the tax pot because you're paying more. Fred is irrelevant as I've said before.

You believe the people responding 'Yes' to the question are motivated solely by spite, envy and jealously. I'm simply saying that that doesn't have to be the case. You clearly don't agree! Rather a shame that you live with such bitter feelings towards your fellow man but it takes all sorts.

At which point the person that wants to work harder to have a better life becomes a slave to the bone idle who can't be bothered.

At which point you have neatly summarised the position of the many on this thread - lower earners are lower earners because they are "bone idle". Nice!

And your point is?

Why should it be my fault if people can't or won't get off of their arse and earn a living?

Are you of the opinion that the services you receive through life from birth to death are only those that you can personally pay for?

Much of it was paid for by my parents in early life, subsequently, I have to pay my own way, Yes.

So you take no public services at all?

I doubt that.

Your parents would have received tax breaks for being married and been in receipt of family allowance. Health and Dental care free as is education excepting if you were put through prep and public school. Free Uni fees?

Roads, railways etc etc the list is endless.

You must have amassed a few £M to ensure you will be completely self sufficient in old age.

No children of your own?

[anonymous-user]

TeamD said:

Roman Rhodes said:

TeamD said:

Roman Rhodes said:

otolith said:

Roman Rhodes said:

You use an argument "in order that the less well off benefit" which is explicitly excluded from consideration by "regardless of what it brings in". Simple maths. Currently you (rich) pay in £3 and I (poor) pay in £2. £5 paid in. Change that to you pay in £4 and I pay in £1. £5 paid in but I am better off.

You still don't get it. If it doesn't raise any more money, you're not getting £4 from me. Or maybe you are, but Fred has said "screw this" and gone part time. It's not raising any more money. You still have to pay £3.

It's not a question of "Should the rich pay more and the poor pay less so that the overall tax take is the same". That's a scenario you have invented in your own head. It's the scenario relevant to the preceding question.

You have changed my mind, though, I am now willing to consider the possibility that the Labour voters questioned were a bit thick and didn't understand it either.

I'm simply giving you a motivation as to why someone could agree that it was right to tax the rich more even if the total amount of tax raised didn't increase. You first sentence simply illustrates that you are incapable of understanding a simple proposition - I'm not "getting £4 from" you or anyone else - the tax pot is, I've never paid £3, I was paying £2 into the tax pot and now I'm paying £1 into the tax pot because you're paying more. Fred is irrelevant as I've said before.

You believe the people responding 'Yes' to the question are motivated solely by spite, envy and jealously. I'm simply saying that that doesn't have to be the case. You clearly don't agree! Rather a shame that you live with such bitter feelings towards your fellow man but it takes all sorts.

At which point the person that wants to work harder to have a better life becomes a slave to the bone idle who can't be bothered.

At which point you have neatly summarised the position of the many on this thread - lower earners are lower earners because they are "bone idle". Nice!

And your point is?

Why should it be my fault if people can't or won't get off of their arse and earn a living?

No-one said it is your fault, but it is you making the claim that low earners are only low earners because they are bone idle. It seems a rather sweeping opinion designed to portray you as some kind of victim. Is it safe to assume you are a high earner?

[TeamD]

Nickgnome said:

So you take no public services at all?

I doubt that.

Your parents would have received tax breaks for being married and been in receipt of family allowance. Health and Dental care free as is education excepting if you were put through prep and public school. Free Uni fees?

Roads, railways etc etc the list is endless.

You must have amassed a few £M to ensure you will be completely self sufficient in old age.

No children of your own?

The public services that I am charged for you mean?

None of this crap that you list is actually free you know?

[R Mutt]

What about the politics of guilt? I was told off for too loudly exclaiming my surprise at hearing my friend's two cleaners 'in front of her Lefty friends.' Said friends had spent the even bemoaning education cuts and effect on their own pay so is the guilt/ shame a by-product of others envy?