What are your unpopular opinions?

[Integroo]

RacerMDR said:

Integroo said:

What is it with people assuming that high earnings equal hard work, and low earnings equal lazy and feckless?

Police officers should earn 100k and not be taxed? Then everyone would want to be police officers. What makes a police officer more deserving than the person who does back breaking ten hour days picking berries that you put on your quinoa every morning? Or should he work harder and earn 240k too?

I didn't say that, if you're referring to me?

Hard work, smarter work, whatever way you want to say it. Some people (very few in my experience) are given a leg up to a good salary. I don't mean a nurse doing a 12 hour shift isn't working hard. I mean, if that same nurse had wanted to earn six figure salary she probably should have chosen something that wasn't nursing........... as it's no secret that the services don't get six figure salary. (They should in my opinion). Yes everyone would want to be a policeman, isn't that a good thing? Isn't it better to have a highly skilled, highly educated police force?

I think anyone in any service is more deserving than the back breaking berry pickers. They are putting themselves in harms way, and dealing with the dregs of society. fk me they'd have to pay me 200k to be a policeman. I think they do an amazing job - and should absolutely get paid for it. Same as Armed Services, fireman, nurses.

Unfortunately they don't directly increase anyone else wealth, and thus don't command that salary , hence me saying they shouldn't be taxed to make up in some way.

I specifically chose what I do now, to make money. I knew I wouldn't enjoy it - but I actively made that decision. Chose the subjects, worked hard as fk, gave up loads of things other people don't in order to do it.

I would much rather have been a fireman, or a geologist or a helicopter instructor or a fking zoo keeper. Pretty much anything.

I didn't for the reasons above. That's what I mean by Harder/Smarter

What about the kid that was born into poverty in a slum in North England. Should he have pulled up his socks, worked a bit harder, and went off and become a doctor? Did he have the same chances in life as the daughter of two dentists brought up in a leafy London suburb, attended an expensive private school, tutored for exams, achieved top grades and went off to Oxford to become a lawyer? Then her parents buy her a nice flat in London, then when they pass away she inherits their wealth, and her kids grow up with the same great lifestyle? He is now a panel beater in Newcastle, and he enjoys his life, but it's a struggle because he doesn't earn an awful lot. Should he struggle to put food on the table and pay his rent, despite working 50 hours a week, whilst people like you buy BMW M3s and Porsches and complain about putting back into a society that has given you so much?

Also, it is self-evident that it is not a choice between work hard and get lots of money, and not work hard and do something you enjoy. I'm sure the chap from my example would have rather been a skydiving instructor rather than a panel beater, but life isn't as straight-forward as you make out.

Selfish people hold selfish views.

[Integroo]

Alex said:

Integroo said:

So, those with the broadest shoulders beyond basic living expenses, should bear the biggest burden to support our society.

No they shouldn't.

Integroo said:

Plus, progressive taxes serve a function in promoting income equality, amongst other things. They are distributive of wealth, which is a good thing.

No it isn't.

You can hold that view, that is your right. It is a selfish view, however.

[jimPH]

RacerMDR said:

jimPH said:

I haven't met a dog i'd like to sleep with. I guess you have then.

You don't have to like someone to sleep with them do you? st - I've been doing it wrong.

Seeing as the girls you sleep with probably don't like you either. Ask them not to shave, it might be closer to your preference.

[RacerMDR]

TameRacingDriver said:

Yep, I see this phrase used time and time again on here, and it's fking annoying - probably one of the only thing that really gets my goat that I read on here in fact. For the vast majority of people in this country, or in any country, working harder does not result in more money.

It *might* improve your prospects of getting more money, but the phrase implies that a 6-figure salary is within reach for anyone and everyone, as long as they "work hard enough". Well it is utter bks, otherwise everyone would be doing it.

I also resent the idea that earning a bigger salary makes someone a better person, as often seems to be implied. In a large number of cases, I'd say quite the opposite, quite a lot of well off people appear to be s. That's not to say that you don't get low paid s, but the law of averages kick in, and there's a MUCH bigger pool to choose from.

I agree earning more money doesn't make a person better, or indeed more intelligent. Most of the most intelligent people I know don't earn much at all.

However, why do you think a 6 figure salary isn't within reach of anyone (ok, not anyone but lets assume you don't have a mental deficiency)? I find that quite depressing. There is no magic potion. A little research and a lot of hard work and it can be done.

Assuming you were born in the UK obviously and intend to work here.

I had careers advisors laugh at me at school. I went to a st school. My parents were skint. They started with nothing and have most of it left.

Luckily my parents were amazing - and what they lacked in cash was directly opposite to what they made up in love and encouragement. I was very lucky there.

[TameRacingDriver]

RacerMDR said:

However, why do you think a 6 figure salary isn't within reach of anyone (ok, not anyone but lets assume you don't have a mental deficiency)? I find that quite depressing. There is no magic potion. A little research and a lot of hard work and it can be done.

Because it simply isn't possible for everyone, as I say, if it was, there'd be a lot more very rich people (either that, or in fact less rich people as the currency would be devalued if everyone was doing it, but that's another discussion).

According to this, entry into the top 1% of earners in the UK starts at £99K. One out of every hundred people. What I am taking away from this, is it takes a lot more than hard work to be one of the lucky 1% of the population who can earn more than £100K.

I am fairly certain in fact that there will be a lot more than 1% of the population who aim for this and never quite get there, which is at odds with your statement that anyone but the mentally retarded could earn this, simply by working harder?

[TameRacingDriver]

Nanook said:

Just because someone came from an impoverished background, and had less chances than others, doesn't mean they cannot work hard and improve their life.

Not everyone can work hard and earn those 6-fig salaries we hear so much about on here? Why not?

What's stopping you? You don't have the required skills or knowledge? So go acquire them.

But that'll be hard? Well fk yeah it will. If it was easy, everyone would do it. Just because it's hard though, doesn't mean everyone can't do it.

1. Of course, nobody has actually said that hard work doesn't improve your prospects.

2. Because not everyone has the intellect, drive or being lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time.

3. Just acquire the skills? Just like that? What about the poor folks who TRY and acquire the skills, repeatedly, but they aren't quite talented enough to pass the exams?

4. No it doesn't mean everyone can't do it, but it does mean a very large proportion can't. As you said yourself, if it was easy everyone would do it, but there's more than just hard work involved - and I suspect you know that.

[Vocal Minority]

Nanook said:

Integroo said:

What about the kid that was born into poverty in a slum in North England. Should he have pulled up his socks, worked a bit harder, and went off and become a doctor? Did he have the same chances in life as the daughter of two dentists brought up in a leafy London suburb, attended an expensive private school, tutored for exams, achieved top grades and went off to Oxford to become a lawyer? Then her parents buy her a nice flat in London, then when they pass away she inherits their wealth, and her kids grow up with the same great lifestyle? He is now a panel beater in Newcastle, and he enjoys his life, but it's a struggle because he doesn't earn an awful lot. Should he struggle to put food on the table and pay his rent, despite working 50 hours a week, whilst people like you buy BMW M3s and Porsches and complain about putting back into a society that has given you so much?

Also, it is self-evident that it is not a choice between work hard and get lots of money, and not work hard and do something you enjoy. I'm sure the chap from my example would have rather been a skydiving instructor rather than a panel beater, but life isn't as straight-forward as you make out.

Selfish people hold selfish views.

Just because someone came from an impoverished background, and had less chances than others, doesn't mean they cannot work hard and improve their life.

Not everyone can work hard and earn those 6-fig salaries we hear so much about on here? Why not?

What's stopping you? You don't have the required skills or knowledge? So go acquire them.

But that'll be hard? Well fk yeah it will. If it was easy, everyone would do it. Just because it's hard though, doesn't mean everyone can't do it.

The idea that financial success is wholly governed by how hard you work is bull.

There you go - that's an unpopular opinion.

[TameRacingDriver]

Nanook said:

Why? You state it's not possible. Why is it not possible?

Could you give one good reason please?

I can give you plenty of reasons:-

Not clever / talented enough

Poor upbringing

Poor energy levels

Illnesses (mental or physical)

Poor life choices earlier in life

Where are these millions of £100K jobs waiting for these people who aren't trying hard enough?

[Vocal Minority]

RacerMDR said:

I Luckily my parents were amazing - and what they lacked in cash was directly opposite to what they made up in love and encouragement. I was very lucky there.

Well said. I am profoundly grateful to my parents - and also man enough to admit that it was an advantage in life that many do not have access to - and one that makes a difference.

[TameRacingDriver]

Vocal Minority said:

RacerMDR said:

I Luckily my parents were amazing - and what they lacked in cash was directly opposite to what they made up in love and encouragement. I was very lucky there.

Well said. I am profoundly grateful to my parents - and also man enough to admit that it was an advantage in life that many do not have access to - and one that makes a difference.

I like comments like this. It demonstrates a humbleness, and the fact that despite your successes in life, you are grounded enough to realise that not everyone is afforded the same opportunities in life.

[kingston12]

TameRacingDriver said:

Where are these millions of £100K jobs waiting for these people who aren't trying hard enough?

That's the part that I don't understand. I am quite prepared to accept that working harder could drive up a lot of people's earnings, but to get to over £100k is pushing it, or £100k wouldn't be so much higher than the average salary.

[Jaroon]

jimPH said:

singlecoil said:

StevieBee said:

grumbledoak said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

Just another re-hash of Marx. In case you didn't learn anything from previous attempts, the Socialists will say anything to gain power, and it never turns out how they promised. There will be no point at which we all become "one glorious whole" as beings, no matter how homogenous our skin colour gets. And if - or when - a one world political structure is forced upon us it is likely to be hell on earth with no escape, much as the USSR was for decades, only spherical.

I'll have to try and find a reference to the theory.

As I recall, the concept is nothing to do with an evening out of skin colour but the rapid rise in cognitive excellence and genetic strength that mixed-race offspring tend to attain. People get smarter to levels and in numbers that mean a political structure is not required because individuals accumulate the ability to self govern.

So earth becomes one country - other worlds become the new countries - humans begin to breed with aliens -and on it goes.

But its only a theory and not mine but one that seems to have a smattering of logic IMO.

But it's based on a theory that isn't necessarily correct. One could only expect mixed race offspring to do better if they were the product of two populations too small to be sufficiently diverse. But all the races have large populations so there is plenty of genetic diversity within each one.

It doesn't quite work like that either due to dominance. For instance, my wife is black, 1st generation Nigerian, both our daughters are white with blue eyes. To the point where people ask who/where's the mother.

My cousin's father is half cast, but she is also white, you wouldn't be able to tell, she doesn't even tan that well.

Obviously, for the most part, children take characteristics from both, but depending on who they end up with, the genes tend to get rediluted. For instance, a half cast friend from uni married a white girl, so their children are dominantly white, though one has dark eyes and hair, the other is blonde.

I doubt we'd all end up the same colour.

Your wife is black and you use the term half cast? My unpopular opinion is is violence is often the quickest and surest way to educate.

I'm hardly PC but if you used this term around my kids I'd give you 5 seconds to correct yourself then probably knock your teeth out anyway, yes I am a badass.

[TameRacingDriver]

kingston12 said:

That's the part that I don't understand. I am quite prepared to accept that working harder could drive up a lot of people's earnings, but to get to over £100k is pushing it, or £100k wouldn't be so much higher than the average salary.

Indeed, which if anything must be one of the main reasons why not everyone can get said jobs, because those jobs don't exist in the first place.

I don't understand those who refuse to admit that their wealth in life is down to more than just hard work, but also talent, and more than a decent sprinkling of good luck. After all, they aren't the top 1% of earners in the country for nothing.

It's a bit like saying the Sloth could have a supermodel girlfriend if only he tried a bit harder

[TameRacingDriver]

Nanook said:

Other than that, none of those are valid. If you want something, work for it, make it happen, because no-one else will do it for you.

And most of the time, I'm a fking idiot. So if I can do it, so can anyone.

Why are they not valid? I'll ask again, where are these millions of £100K jobs waiting for people who need to just work harder to get them? There are lots of people with dreams, believe it or not, most people have dreams and aspirations. You seem to completely reject the possibility that in fact there are probably millions who have tried, and failed, to achieve their dreams, and not through lack of hard work.

You are clearly just as stubborn in your views as I am so that's a bit rich saying that.

Finally, you very clearly are NOT an idiot. If you were, you wouldn't be earning £100K+ a year. Idiots do NOT get to earn that much just by hard work, end of discussion. With huge amounts of luck, possibly.

[RacerMDR]

Integroo said:

What about the kid that was born into poverty in a slum in North England. Should he have pulled up his socks, worked a bit harder, and went off and become a doctor? Did he have the same chances in life as the daughter of two dentists brought up in a leafy London suburb, attended an expensive private school, tutored for exams, achieved top grades and went off to Oxford to become a lawyer? Then her parents buy her a nice flat in London, then when they pass away she inherits their wealth, and her kids grow up with the same great lifestyle? He is now a panel beater in Newcastle, and he enjoys his life, but it's a struggle because he doesn't earn an awful lot. Should he struggle to put food on the table and pay his rent, despite working 50 hours a week, whilst people like you buy BMW M3s and Porsches and complain about putting back into a society that has given you so much?

Also, it is self-evident that it is not a choice between work hard and get lots of money, and not work hard and do something you enjoy. I'm sure the chap from my example would have rather been a skydiving instructor rather than a panel beater, but life isn't as straight-forward as you make out.

Selfish people hold selfish views.

oh dear.

I was born in the North East of England, to a parents with no money. I think SLUM is a bit of an odd term, as there aren't really any in England are there? However - think terraced house in ruined ex pit village and interest rates so bad that fathers are killing themselves. Parents don't own a car - run 2 miles to school to avoid getting beaten up everyday.

The rest of your post is just bullst and bitter excuses I'm afraid.

Society has given me absolutely fking nothing pal. I've worked for every inch. If I'm selfish it's because I know how hard it was, and I'm not prepared to finance things I don't agree with.

I have no problem with putting back into society to what can make a difference. What I won't do is finance more than is fair to a load of people that failed and want a medal for trying.

Life is as simple as I make out I'm afraid.

[jimPH]

Jaroon said:

jimPH said:

singlecoil said:

StevieBee said:

grumbledoak said:

StevieBee said:

Linked to a post someone made a few pages back regarding the Hybrid Vigour being the beneficial outcome of inter-racial breeding, there are several theories that the breeding across races will become increasingly profound to a point where there will be a common skin colour. The evolutionary outcome of this is an abundance of super-smart people that recognise the abstract notion of politics, borders and the like, removing such hindrances to human progression.

These theories suggest that a critical mass will be arrived at where the entire human species will work together as a single mass and not as individuals or individual groups. At this point, the rise in scientific endeavour and discovery will become exponential and unlimited to levels that we are unable to currently comprehend.

Obviously only a theory and one that's unlikely to be proven any time soon......but I rather like the idea.

Just another re-hash of Marx. In case you didn't learn anything from previous attempts, the Socialists will say anything to gain power, and it never turns out how they promised. There will be no point at which we all become "one glorious whole" as beings, no matter how homogenous our skin colour gets. And if - or when - a one world political structure is forced upon us it is likely to be hell on earth with no escape, much as the USSR was for decades, only spherical.

I'll have to try and find a reference to the theory.

As I recall, the concept is nothing to do with an evening out of skin colour but the rapid rise in cognitive excellence and genetic strength that mixed-race offspring tend to attain. People get smarter to levels and in numbers that mean a political structure is not required because individuals accumulate the ability to self govern.

So earth becomes one country - other worlds become the new countries - humans begin to breed with aliens -and on it goes.

But its only a theory and not mine but one that seems to have a smattering of logic IMO.

But it's based on a theory that isn't necessarily correct. One could only expect mixed race offspring to do better if they were the product of two populations too small to be sufficiently diverse. But all the races have large populations so there is plenty of genetic diversity within each one.

It doesn't quite work like that either due to dominance. For instance, my wife is black, 1st generation Nigerian, both our daughters are white with blue eyes. To the point where people ask who/where's the mother.

My cousin's father is half cast, but she is also white, you wouldn't be able to tell, she doesn't even tan that well.

Obviously, for the most part, children take characteristics from both, but depending on who they end up with, the genes tend to get rediluted. For instance, a half cast friend from uni married a white girl, so their children are dominantly white, though one has dark eyes and hair, the other is blonde.

I doubt we'd all end up the same colour.

Your wife is black and you use the term half cast? My unpopular opinion is is violence is often the quickest and surest way to educate.

I'm hardly PC but if you used this term around my kids I'd give you 5 seconds to correct yourself then probably knock your teeth out anyway, yes I am a badass.

My wife uses it. Infact everyone here (Africa) uses it. What do I know being an oyibo.

Edited by jimPH on Wednesday 24th January 17:37

[Nik da Greek]

I've got some unpopular opinions, only some of which seem relevant in the context of this thread...

I'm a half-caste and whether I care if I'm called it or not depends largely on who is addressing me and why.

All dogs should be cleansed with fire and the remains used as nitrogenous fertilizer. Do something useful with the hateful mobile st factories

There's more to life than money. Like not being an insufferable cock. I earn more than both my parents ever did, but then maybe I am an insufferable cock...



Hmmm. So at least one of those is probably a popular opinion then

[Jaroon]

jimPH said:

My wife uses it. Infact everyone here (Africa) uses it. What do I know being an oyibo.

Edited by jimPH on Wednesday 24th January 17:37

Well I guess that's fair enough in Africa and as the next poster says context is everything. I've used the term half caste years ago, a black friend of mine asked me not to and explained why. Personally, and this is me I do believe it has undertones/overtones? of superiority and a derogatory sub text and I'd react to anyone using it around my children in the UK.

[GroundEffect]

Nanook said:

Chocolate coated pretzels are amazing.

A savoury snack covered in chocolate shouldn't be this tasty. It should appear in the council thread.

But they're fecking amazing.

Agreed. So it's not so unpopular

Mine: Football is ste.

[Integroo]

RacerMDR said:

oh dear.

I was born in the North East of England, to a parents with no money. I think SLUM is a bit of an odd term, as there aren't really any in England are there? However - think terraced house in ruined ex pit village and interest rates so bad that fathers are killing themselves. Parents don't own a car - run 2 miles to school to avoid getting beaten up everyday.

The rest of your post is just bullst and bitter excuses I'm afraid.

Society has given me absolutely fking nothing pal. I've worked for every inch. If I'm selfish it's because I know how hard it was, and I'm not prepared to finance things I don't agree with.

I have no problem with putting back into society to what can make a difference. What I won't do is finance more than is fair to a load of people that failed and want a medal for trying.

Life is as simple as I make out I'm afraid.

Congratulations. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder as to any suggestion that where you are is due to anything other than yourself.

You said your business turned over 100k last year. Why didn't it turnover 200k, or 500k? Did you not work hard enough? Maybe you should have worked harder, and you could have afforded a Lamborghini rather than a M3. I don't know what your company does, but if it hits hard times, are you therefore a failure that should have worked harder?

I'm not jealous. I grew up in a family that was far from poor but certainly not rich - my Dad started his life as a miner. I was the first generation of my family to go to University and I am now a professional, earning a decent wage. Did I get here through hard work? Sure. Do I assume that it was the only thing that got me here? Of course not.

Selfish and lacking empathy. Not qualities I admire.
Maybe you should move to America. Your views would fit in better over there.