But that case is based upon gender, you are conflating. In your world they would all be paying 98% above £80k so it would be irrelevant
Winter election II
- Thread starter gavreid
- Start date
- Status
russel
./_dazed_and_confused
Hmm, not really sure they are being rewarded for wealth creation though. If you look at what creates wealth it’s new ideas, a rough guide is patents, most people who are named on patents do not get massive salaries. If you look at Tim Berners-Lee who invented the World Wide Web and César Milstein who discovered monoclonal antibodies, neither were made rich by their discoveries, people usually get rich by rent seeking, not creating wealth. Look at the highest paid, very few of them have created wealth, they are very good however at convincing people they deserve to be wealthy usually by what amounts to little more than bribery of politicians.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
I’d like to offer Johnson an unremunerated position tending the pigs in a Name of The Rose type religious community, later on I’d kick him by the arse into the middle of them after theyd been starved for a fortnight.
Last edited:
russel
./_dazed_and_confused
What have you got against pigs?
I never said wealth creation but, OK, let's go with it. High end academic, say a Prof, will be generating income for university via research grants, will supervise PHDs, publish papers, attract students who will spend in local economy, graduates will go on to pay more tax over their lifetime & so it goes.
TheDecameron
Unicorns fart glitter.
One Johnson feeds a family of twelve for a week,donate now.
martin clark
pinko bodger
/- no it doesn't - unless you like gammon which is 90%+ gristle /
kendo
Prussian bot
Joe
pfm Member
The argument always has a whiff of envy to it .... it always seems to be more about bringing them down rather than raising others up.
And there are so very few of them and so very many of us that it would equate to the value of a bus ticket a year that you would get. And you would have no one managing your pension fund. Bring down capitalism and work till the day you die because there will be no pensions.
ks.234
Half way to Infinity
The argument about a better balance is precisely about raising others up, and if asking someone on £90k to pay an extra £40 a month to help redress the balance (which would be compensated for by free broadband anyway) is ‘bringing them down’ then their values are wrong.
Pensions pre date capitalism.
Joe
pfm Member
The wealthy on here ( and believe me, you are all very wealthy ) have a very very strange relationship with their position. You live in the 5th largest economy in the world and you post on a hifi forum and there you sit denouncing capitalism.
Find your position on this graph. What percentile of the worlds population are you in ? I will take a bet that you are close to the top 1% of the worlds population. The UK average salary is $47,500 .
And in terms of wealth ( assets and income )...To reach the top 1% worldwide in terms of wealth—not just income but all you own—you’d have to possess £600,000 in net worth.
I imagine that a lot of you are there already.
There are very few hedge fund fat cats. There are a very great number of you.... you are the problem not the fat cats. They are just an offence. The real problem is the vast size of the middle class and its appetite for more of every thing.Look on here...wine deals , whiskey deals, Black Friday deals , 'my new car'.
The problem is here my friends.We are the problem. Are you willing to live on $20 dollars a day ?
Find your position on this graph. What percentile of the worlds population are you in ? I will take a bet that you are close to the top 1% of the worlds population. The UK average salary is $47,500 .
And in terms of wealth ( assets and income )...To reach the top 1% worldwide in terms of wealth—not just income but all you own—you’d have to possess £600,000 in net worth.
I imagine that a lot of you are there already.
There are very few hedge fund fat cats. There are a very great number of you.... you are the problem not the fat cats. They are just an offence. The real problem is the vast size of the middle class and its appetite for more of every thing.Look on here...wine deals , whiskey deals, Black Friday deals , 'my new car'.
The problem is here my friends.We are the problem. Are you willing to live on $20 dollars a day ?
That is a very fair summation. In absolute terms I am lucky, I don't come from money but never went hungry. I have climbed the social ladder from working class to middle & I don't hate myself for doing so.The wealthy on here ( and believe me, you are all very wealthy ) have a very very strange relationship with their position. You live in the 5th largest economy in the world and you post on a hifi forum and there you sit denouncing capitalism.
Find your position on this graph. What percentile of the worlds population are you in ? I will take a bet that you are close to the top 1% of the worlds population. The UK average salary is $47,500 .
And in terms of wealth ( assets and income )...To reach the top 1% worldwide in terms of wealth—not just income but all you own—you’d have to possess £600,000 in net worth.
I imagine that a lot of you are there already.
There are very few hedge fund fat cats. There are a very great number of you.... you are the problem not the fat cats. They are just an offence. The real problem is the vast size of the middle class and its appetite for more of every thing.Look on here...wine deals , whiskey deals, Black Friday deals , 'my new car'.
The problem is here my friends.We are the problem. Are you willing to live on $20 dollars a day ?
Joe
pfm Member
I am the most fortunate person in the world ( well , my world )
Although I have never earned more that £14,000 a year I have lived like a king in comparison to most on this planet. I have never gone hungry. Never been without anything of importance to life. I have never had to go to war nor been in a war.
Privileged ? I should say. It's been an amazing ride and great fun to have been alive and to have lived in the UK through those times. ( for all its faults and foibles )
I just don't understand all the hatred that is displayed in some of the threads on here toward other people...pure nasty malice some of it.
I do understand fighting injustice but not in the vindictive ways displayed here sometimes.
The future looks bloody compared to the life I/we have lived through but it won't be solved by hanging a few hedge fund managers.
The future consists of one thing only....climate change. Moaning about wealth inequality in the UK is re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.
We have so very few years left to even attempt solutions for climate change that preoccupation about wage levels are a petty distraction beyond words. There will be no wages at all when the Worlds economies crash and burn because of climate change ( and they will ) .
Seanm
pfm Member
Joe you're all over the place here. No-one's talking about hanging hedge fund managers, unless I've missed something. Labour are talking about taxing them slightly more than they're taxed already so that people don't have to find a bin to sleep in after they've finished their shift, and so that we can...Tackle climate change! Read the manifesto. It opens with an account of the Green New Deal.
She's saying to the rough sleeper: "You know compared with people in other parts of the world you're actually very wealthy! And anyway the real issue's climate change!"
gassor
There may be more posts after this.
How credible are Labour's spending plans (which taken item by item are indeed laudable) when looked at in total? "Spending on a million council homes, increasing public sector pay, free broadband, green transformation etc amounts to £800bn, according to the manifesto. But this is before counting the cost of six major industry nationalisations, the four-day week and freezing the state pension age.*" Just to take the increasing of tax on those earning £80k would only net £6bn.
The rest would be found in increased Corporation Tax. "Alongside other corporation tax increases proposed, this would move the UK from raising an average share of national income in corporation tax to the highest in the G7. IFS" Prices would rise and wages would fall and the direction of travel for many businesses would only be one way.
The country cannot move to become Norway mk2 at the drop of a hat. McDonnell says the IFS are wrong without any reason I can see.
* Today's Scotsman
The rest would be found in increased Corporation Tax. "Alongside other corporation tax increases proposed, this would move the UK from raising an average share of national income in corporation tax to the highest in the G7. IFS" Prices would rise and wages would fall and the direction of travel for many businesses would only be one way.
The country cannot move to become Norway mk2 at the drop of a hat. McDonnell says the IFS are wrong without any reason I can see.
* Today's Scotsman
Seanm
pfm Member
The IFS are better respected by journalists than by economists: the charge is usually that they can't do macroeconomics. They certainly don't consider the political context of their calculations.
Here's Simon Wren-Lewis on the credibility of Labour's spending plans. SWL's politics are fairly left wing (although he's no Corbynite) but he is very much a mainstream economist.
https://mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2019/11/is-labours-economic-plan-credible.html
- Status