Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's more philosophical, I would've thought. " Could a mod move this to the Philosophy Forum please? Thanks. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways?" Tricky question. Bill, of course, plans to spend 95% of his wealth on philanthropic causes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see why people should have their wealth limited, if they've earnt it then they fully deserve it, I'd like to think that the vast majority of people help those less fortunate than themselves to some degree but it certainly shouldn't be forced upon anyone." Have they really earnt it though? Had Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg worked harder than say, Pauline Cafferkey who caught Ebola in Sierra Leone? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see why people should have their wealth limited, if they've earnt it then they fully deserve it, I'd like to think that the vast majority of people help those less fortunate than themselves to some degree but it certainly shouldn't be forced upon anyone. Have they really earnt it though? Had Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg worked harder than say, Pauline Cafferkey who caught Ebola in Sierra Leone?" Earning doesn't always apply to how hard you work, striking upon an idea or spotting a gap in the market and making a fortune with little effort doesn't mean they don't deserve it. People who do charitable work, volunteers,or work as nurses etc don't do it to be rich, and they embark in their chosen field knowing this, they are driven by some passion and desire to give something and show compassion for others, perhaps they don't need to be rewarded in money for their efforts because they the satisfaction from what they do significantly enriches their lives. But forcing those who have come into money through whatever legitimate means to hand over their money is wrong in my opinion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off." No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people." And the rest? By not paying your workers as much as yourself. By having governments fund you. By being born into an already wealthy family and entering the highest tier of wealth by default. By over pricing your product. By creating a banking system that lends people money for things they cannot afford. Advertising. Manipulation of people for profit, usually by fear. By stealing from the tax payer and not giving it back, legally. The government still employs you. By forcing people to give up their land. Employing child slaves. By claiming things on expenses that aren't allowed and not having to pay that back. By selling things you've unfairly claimed for on expenses and got away with. Illegal and criminal activities. By using animals as a resource, their lives are less worthy. Running out of ideas, but let's not pretend everyone 'earned' their wealth at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
I have the love of my daughter and that is priceless | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. " And if we didn't have computer we wouldn't be discussing this now  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. " Weird that he was motivated in the first place... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm one of the richest people in the world
I have the love of my daughter and that is priceless "And most of all you have your Heath  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. And if we didn't have computer we wouldn't be discussing this now "We would. Maybe not on Windows. But we would. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. And if we didn't have computer we wouldn't be discussing this now "We could write each other letters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see why people should have their wealth limited, if they've earnt it then they fully deserve it, I'd like to think that the vast majority of people help those less fortunate than themselves to some degree but it certainly shouldn't be forced upon anyone." It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. Weird that he was motivated in the first place..." He had nothing to stifle his ambition such as a desire to limit his earning potential. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people. And the rest? By not paying your workers as much as yourself. By having governments fund you. By being born into an already wealthy family and entering the highest tier of wealth by default. By over pricing your product. By creating a banking system that lends people money for things they cannot afford. Advertising. Manipulation of people for profit, usually by fear. By stealing from the tax payer and not giving it back, legally. The government still employs you. By forcing people to give up their land. Employing child slaves. By claiming things on expenses that aren't allowed and not having to pay that back. By selling things you've unfairly claimed for on expenses and got away with. Illegal and criminal activities. By using animals as a resource, their lives are less worthy. Running out of ideas, but let's not pretend everyone 'earned' their wealth at all." No. By creating a product that lots of people want. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 xx | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm one of the richest people in the world
I have the love of my daughter and that is priceless
And most of all you have your Heath "That's true Money can't buy you that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. Weird that he was motivated in the first place... He had nothing to stifle his ambition such as a desire to limit his earning potential. " I don't believe money was ever his prime motivator. Certainly not billions. Nor with Steve Jobs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's more philosophical, I would've thought. I'd love to see more of an even wealth distribution and less poverty. " I agree! However - if we distributed all the world's wealth equally, pretty much every person in the UK (and all other western countries) would be significantly poorer! That's you and I, not just the millionaires, billionaires! Would we all really be prepared to do that? X | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. " Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's more philosophical, I would've thought. I'd love to see more of an even wealth distribution and less poverty. I agree! However - if we distributed all the world's wealth equally, pretty much every person in the UK (and all other western countries) would be significantly poorer! That's you and I, not just the millionaires, billionaires! Would we all really be prepared to do that? X" Is that measuring wealth by cash, assets, debts or potential? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. " No, it really isn't. Some people want to use their life to make money - fair play, they can enjoy that money and give back to society. Other people - nurses, let's say - choose a career that helps society more than themselves. They'll never get rich, but we need people to be nurses, or just to do the minimum wage jobs that keep our society functioning. So they give back less in tax. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see why people should have their wealth limited, if they've earnt it then they fully deserve it, I'd like to think that the vast majority of people help those less fortunate than themselves to some degree but it certainly shouldn't be forced upon anyone. It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. " That's all very well but a lot of people don't give a monkeys about companies tax affairs , I do by the way, hence the popularity of Amazin Sports Direct Uber These all have been flagged up as exploiting their workers and have dodgy tax records. But if someone can safe two bob on their taxi ride home they don't care how badly the driver is being exploited. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do you think that someone earning 100million a year should be on the same 45% as someone on £160k " Absolutely | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Do you think that someone earning 100million a year should be on the same 45% as someone on £160k " nope. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people. And the rest? By not paying your workers as much as yourself. By having governments fund you. By being born into an already wealthy family and entering the highest tier of wealth by default. By over pricing your product. By creating a banking system that lends people money for things they cannot afford. Advertising. Manipulation of people for profit, usually by fear. By stealing from the tax payer and not giving it back, legally. The government still employs you. By forcing people to give up their land. Employing child slaves. By claiming things on expenses that aren't allowed and not having to pay that back. By selling things you've unfairly claimed for on expenses and got away with. Illegal and criminal activities. By using animals as a resource, their lives are less worthy. Running out of ideas, but let's not pretend everyone 'earned' their wealth at all. No. By creating a product that lots of people want." By denying workers rights. By killing your workers if they strike. By over working your employees so you can employ less. By acting like menial work is not worth anything. By trading with countries where the people have no working rights. By thinking people have no value. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people. And the rest? By not paying your workers as much as yourself. By having governments fund you. By being born into an already wealthy family and entering the highest tier of wealth by default. By over pricing your product. By creating a banking system that lends people money for things they cannot afford. Advertising. Manipulation of people for profit, usually by fear. By stealing from the tax payer and not giving it back, legally. The government still employs you. By forcing people to give up their land. Employing child slaves. By claiming things on expenses that aren't allowed and not having to pay that back. By selling things you've unfairly claimed for on expenses and got away with. Illegal and criminal activities. By using animals as a resource, their lives are less worthy. Running out of ideas, but let's not pretend everyone 'earned' their wealth at all. No. By creating a product that lots of people want. By denying workers rights. By killing your workers if they strike. By over working your employees so you can employ less. By acting like menial work is not worth anything. By trading with countries where the people have no working rights. By thinking people have no value." To whom are you referring? There are other ways of making a fortune. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guessing people have a very low opinion of rich people on here lets all re distribute the wealth and start over !! what about the slightly wealthy working hard paying tax for those who live in Jeremy kyle streets up and down the country" not at all. i have a low opinion of hierarchy mostly. and support human rights. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guessing people have a very low opinion of rich people on here lets all re distribute the wealth and start over !! what about the slightly wealthy working hard paying tax for those who live in Jeremy kyle streets up and down the country" The rich people I know are very nice. By rich I mean many millions, so not in the billionaire league, but richer than most of us can comprehend. What I find weird is how so many middle class people who are comfortable, but not rich, will get very angry at a problem that in reality they will never have to face. The same people that keep voting them in office. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guessing people have a very low opinion of rich people on here " No, I think most people admire the rich. It's the poor that generally get demonised, as per your Jeremy Kyle comment right here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. No, it really isn't. Some people want to use their life to make money - fair play, they can enjoy that money and give back to society. Other people - nurses, let's say - choose a career that helps society more than themselves. They'll never get rich, but we need people to be nurses, or just to do the minimum wage jobs that keep our society functioning. So they give back less in tax. " We can all make choices in life, if you want riches you don't become a nurse. It's that simple really. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guessing people have a very low opinion of rich people on here No, I think most people admire the rich. It's the poor that generally get demonised, as per your Jeremy Kyle comment right here." If the people on that show represent 'poor people' it's hardly surprising. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. No, it really isn't. Some people want to use their life to make money - fair play, they can enjoy that money and give back to society. Other people - nurses, let's say - choose a career that helps society more than themselves. They'll never get rich, but we need people to be nurses, or just to do the minimum wage jobs that keep our society functioning. So they give back less in tax. We can all make choices in life, if you want riches you don't become a nurse. It's that simple really." So you advocate taking money from people who are trying to help others, and giving it to people who are trying to make money, and already have lots of it. Lovely. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Guessing people have a very low opinion of rich people on here No, I think most people admire the rich. It's the poor that generally get demonised, as per your Jeremy Kyle comment right here. If the people on that show represent 'poor people' it's hardly surprising." They don't. Next stupid comment? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. No, it really isn't. Some people want to use their life to make money - fair play, they can enjoy that money and give back to society. Other people - nurses, let's say - choose a career that helps society more than themselves. They'll never get rich, but we need people to be nurses, or just to do the minimum wage jobs that keep our society functioning. So they give back less in tax. We can all make choices in life, if you want riches you don't become a nurse. It's that simple really." How do you choose to become rich? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways?" Do you think people in the (developed) world earn too much? Do you think everyone should get the same amount? Not have any more in their accounts than the next person? Where would you stop the amount that someone can have? A pound or a dollar goes a lot further in some countries than others.... How would you stop that? Do you think it's unfair that some people have more than you? Or, indeed, that you have more than others? I don't know how you could stop people earning more than others. It may not sometimes seem particularly fair, but how would you stop it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. No, it really isn't. Some people want to use their life to make money - fair play, they can enjoy that money and give back to society. Other people - nurses, let's say - choose a career that helps society more than themselves. They'll never get rich, but we need people to be nurses, or just to do the minimum wage jobs that keep our society functioning. So they give back less in tax. We can all make choices in life, if you want riches you don't become a nurse. It's that simple really. How do you choose to become rich?" You work hard and are a good person and it happens! The reason people are poor is because they are bad and lazy.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. No, it really isn't. Some people want to use their life to make money - fair play, they can enjoy that money and give back to society. Other people - nurses, let's say - choose a career that helps society more than themselves. They'll never get rich, but we need people to be nurses, or just to do the minimum wage jobs that keep our society functioning. So they give back less in tax. We can all make choices in life, if you want riches you don't become a nurse. It's that simple really. How do you choose to become rich? You work hard and are a good person and it happens! The reason people are poor is because they are bad and lazy. "OK | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You only get that rich by ripping people off. No. You get that rich by having a product that people are willing to invest in. Lots of people. And the rest? By not paying your workers as much as yourself. By having governments fund you. By being born into an already wealthy family and entering the highest tier of wealth by default. By over pricing your product. By creating a banking system that lends people money for things they cannot afford. Advertising. Manipulation of people for profit, usually by fear. By stealing from the tax payer and not giving it back, legally. The government still employs you. By forcing people to give up their land. Employing child slaves. By claiming things on expenses that aren't allowed and not having to pay that back. By selling things you've unfairly claimed for on expenses and got away with. Illegal and criminal activities. By using animals as a resource, their lives are less worthy. Running out of ideas, but let's not pretend everyone 'earned' their wealth at all. No. By creating a product that lots of people want. By denying workers rights. By killing your workers if they strike. By over working your employees so you can employ less. By acting like menial work is not worth anything. By trading with countries where the people have no working rights. By thinking people have no value." Keep going I am writing my business plan and you are giving me some good ideas... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not about people having their wealth limited. It's about fixing systems that allow such gross inequality. That means paying workers fairly, paying the tax they owe, etc. Fairly? If it was fair there would be a flat tax rate. That's actual fairness. " That would be equal, not fair. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. " The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways? Do you think people in the (developed) world earn too much? Do you think everyone should get the same amount? Not have any more in their accounts than the next person? Where would you stop the amount that someone can have? A pound or a dollar goes a lot further in some countries than others.... How would you stop that? Do you think it's unfair that some people have more than you? Or, indeed, that you have more than others? I don't know how you could stop people earning more than others. It may not sometimes seem particularly fair, but how would you stop it? " Some do, but generally no, there are people who come from developing countries that also earn too much too. No and no. I don't know, perhaps $1,000,000,000. I don't think people need more than that do they? I wouldn't. It depends how much more and how much less, 8 people having as much as 3.4bn, yes that is too much. They are many ways, through taxation, through legislation, through social pressure, through international cooperation to name but a few. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. " I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this" You mean to executives that are responsible for thousands of staff working across the globe in some of the most dangerous parts of the world, that are answerable to numerous national governments and intergovernmental agencies (UN, EU etc.) and are responsible for tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of tax-payer money and/or donations, often delivering life saving and life changing projects? Those executives? Worth every penny. How much do you think they should get? How much do you think it costs for someone with the skill sets and experience to run an organisation like that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this You mean to executives that are responsible for thousands of staff working across the globe in some of the most dangerous parts of the world, that are answerable to numerous national governments and intergovernmental agencies (UN, EU etc.) and are responsible for tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of tax-payer money and/or donations, often delivering life saving and life changing projects? Those executives? Worth every penny. How much do you think they should get? How much do you think it costs for someone with the skill sets and experience to run an organisation like that? " More than the Prime Minister? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this You mean to executives that are responsible for thousands of staff working across the globe in some of the most dangerous parts of the world, that are answerable to numerous national governments and intergovernmental agencies (UN, EU etc.) and are responsible for tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of tax-payer money and/or donations, often delivering life saving and life changing projects? Those executives? Worth every penny. How much do you think they should get? How much do you think it costs for someone with the skill sets and experience to run an organisation like that? " I fully appreciate what they bring to the charity and have no real feeling one way or the other on what they earn, as mentioned before I don't really care what anyone else earns. But this is no different to the CEO of a multibillion pound company whose earnings are reflected by the profits of the company. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this You mean to executives that are responsible for thousands of staff working across the globe in some of the most dangerous parts of the world, that are answerable to numerous national governments and intergovernmental agencies (UN, EU etc.) and are responsible for tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of tax-payer money and/or donations, often delivering life saving and life changing projects? Those executives? Worth every penny. How much do you think they should get? How much do you think it costs for someone with the skill sets and experience to run an organisation like that? More than the Prime Minister? " The chief executive of Westminster council gets more than the PM. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I don't see why people should have their wealth limited, if they've earnt it then they fully deserve it, I'd like to think that the vast majority of people help those less fortunate than themselves to some degree but it certainly shouldn't be forced upon anyone." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"it's be awesome if we had a science and philosophy forums." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways?" Ha ha,how can you legislate against extreme whealth they have more power then the governments of most of the world put together.Without whealthy people there would be even more poverty. Yes it is perverse and unfair but that is life. These people would laugh in Corbyn's face and remove all whealth from this nation and we would all be in poverty power is perverse but real | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. And if we didn't have computer we wouldn't be discussing this now "And if Tim Berners-Lee and his colleagues hadn't given the world the World Wide Web in return for **no money** we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It would take Oxfam 150 years to earn what these fellas give to charities in just one year. Limit Mr Gates wealth then he has no desire to make computers then thousands of people are jobless. And if we didn't have computer we wouldn't be discussing this now
And if Tim Berners-Lee and his colleagues hadn't given the world the World Wide Web in return for **no money** we probably wouldn't be having this discussion."Very true | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways? Do you think people in the (developed) world earn too much? Do you think everyone should get the same amount? Not have any more in their accounts than the next person? Where would you stop the amount that someone can have? A pound or a dollar goes a lot further in some countries than others.... How would you stop that? Do you think it's unfair that some people have more than you? Or, indeed, that you have more than others? I don't know how you could stop people earning more than others. It may not sometimes seem particularly fair, but how would you stop it? Some do, but generally no, there are people who come from developing countries that also earn too much too. No and no. I don't know, perhaps $1,000,000,000. I don't think people need more than that do they? I wouldn't. It depends how much more and how much less, 8 people having as much as 3.4bn, yes that is too much. They are many ways, through taxation, through legislation, through social pressure, through international cooperation to name but a few." So once I get to a Billion, what's the incentive for me to carry on? Would you be happy with all those billionaires just closing their businesses and putting all their employees out of work? Businessmen are, in the main, driven by making money and personal wealth. Take that away antitheses no point in them continuing with their businesses...... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways? Do you think people in the (developed) world earn too much? Do you think everyone should get the same amount? Not have any more in their accounts than the next person? Where would you stop the amount that someone can have? A pound or a dollar goes a lot further in some countries than others.... How would you stop that? Do you think it's unfair that some people have more than you? Or, indeed, that you have more than others? I don't know how you could stop people earning more than others. It may not sometimes seem particularly fair, but how would you stop it? Some do, but generally no, there are people who come from developing countries that also earn too much too. No and no. I don't know, perhaps $1,000,000,000. I don't think people need more than that do they? I wouldn't. It depends how much more and how much less, 8 people having as much as 3.4bn, yes that is too much. They are many ways, through taxation, through legislation, through social pressure, through international cooperation to name but a few. So once I get to a Billion, what's the incentive for me to carry on? Would you be happy with all those billionaires just closing their businesses and putting all their employees out of work? Businessmen are, in the main, driven by making money and personal wealth. Take that away antitheses no point in them continuing with their businesses......" Just done a quick search and those eight people's companies directly employ about 1.2Million people. Let alone indirectly employed in sub-contractors, suppliers etc. So lets say a total of 3 million jobs. The average person has to earn for about 5 months to pay all their tax. Say the average wage of those employees is 25K. That's about 10k in total tax revenue per person. That's 30 Billion in tax. But then you have to pay those 3 Million unemployment benefit . plus they won't be spending their hard earned, so even more people and businesses will lose out. Its very difficult. ...the money that some individuals have is obscene, but is there really anything that could be done about it? Not sure that there is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this You mean to executives that are responsible for thousands of staff working across the globe in some of the most dangerous parts of the world, that are answerable to numerous national governments and intergovernmental agencies (UN, EU etc.) and are responsible for tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of tax-payer money and/or donations, often delivering life saving and life changing projects? Those executives? Worth every penny. How much do you think they should get? How much do you think it costs for someone with the skill sets and experience to run an organisation like that? " It doesn't only stop there, many get a house or flat with the job, intrest free loans or mortgages. Many of these charities spend upwards of 70p in the £ on running costs. In essence they are no better than a lot of the companies they complain about. Look at the pay of their professional fund raisers...The so called chuggers and the call centre workers... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But lots of these poor countries have had money flooding in through charities but it's their corrupt governments that stop the money getting where it is most needed, surely that's what should be tackled instead inventing systems to limit someone's potential wealth. Aside from looking at poor countries where people are suffering I couldn't give a rats arse how much someone earns, my priority is how I can provide for my family, and family enriches my life more than adding a zero or two to my salary. The governments are corrupt, but not with charity money, there are plenty of checks and balances and rules and conditions on what that money can be spent on. I wouldn't like to say that's entirely true but hope it is now the case. How do you feel about charities that pay six figure salaries, lots of instances of this You mean to executives that are responsible for thousands of staff working across the globe in some of the most dangerous parts of the world, that are answerable to numerous national governments and intergovernmental agencies (UN, EU etc.) and are responsible for tens of millions, or hundreds of millions of tax-payer money and/or donations, often delivering life saving and life changing projects? Those executives? Worth every penny. How much do you think they should get? How much do you think it costs for someone with the skill sets and experience to run an organisation like that? It doesn't only stop there, many get a house or flat with the job, intrest free loans or mortgages. Many of these charities spend upwards of 70p in the £ on running costs. In essence they are no better than a lot of the companies they complain about. Look at the pay of their professional fund raisers...The so called chuggers and the call centre workers..." Heads of charities don't gets flats or houses or mortgage payments or loans. Why do you think they do? Only and extremely poorly run charity would spend anywhere near 70% on running costs. Well run charities will spend between 25-30% on running costs. Covering staff pay, rent, utilities, fundraising, marketing, communications etc etc etc. If you are supporting charities spending 70%+ on running costs I suggest you look at other charities with similar aims but better management. Most charities will have this kind of data on their websites, but you can see the accounts of all UK registered charities on the Charities Commission website. Professional fundraisers such as chuggers and call centre workers are not charity workers, they work for private companies who are commissioned by numerous charities to carry out fundraising activiesion behalf of the charity. If you want to support a charity, don't sign up with a chugger, contact the charity directly and support them that way, you will get more bang for your charitable buck. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
"Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money? 
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money?
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money?"It these people had to start these companies  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money?
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money?
It these people had to start these companies "I dont think anyone is proposing time travel to go back and stop them from starting the company. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Some billions are doing great work for humanity. Elon musk for example.The Bill gates foundation.Many become philanthropists.Investing in science that benefits humanity. " *Thats billionaires. Not billions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
". Your making the classic mistake of believing only Steve jobs or bill gates could have done what they did.... The truth is they were just the first or had slightly better luck than the hundreds just behind them on the ladder!. That's the whole point of capitalism... No one person or company is indispensable. The nature of it is, there is and always should be 1000s clawing at getting into their shoes. . Next we'll take your assumption that nobody does anything unless there's unlimited wealth in it for them??. . Firstly it's quite obviously nonsense, there's rungs you climb, I'm quite sure that when bill gates was working out of his garage the thought of being taxed alot on earning 150 million dollars a year never ever stopped him from doing what he did... If you don't belive me read his autobiography neither him or his good friend warren buffet were particularly motivated by aquirring masses. Secondly belive it or not there are people still dedicated to doing stuff that aren't obsessed with being a billionaire... Like Jonas Salk who studied hard and worked hard on finding a polio vaccine and then when he did, gave it away for free and went back to his middle class job in the university.... So yeah your not in a wheel chair or dead because somebody did stuff that wasn't motivated by multi billions. . There's nothing wrong in wanting a comfortable life from your hard work, most peoples argument is multi billionaires are way beyond having a comfortable life?... . There is mounting evidence to conclude that having such wealth accruing at the top is not doing the current system we use any good, bill gates is giving lots and lots of his money away but alas he can't give it away fast enough as his wealth keeps increasing?? Something has to happen in that system for that to occur. And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money?
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money?"Wait a minute! At least two of the people on the list of eight only take $1 a year.... Larry Ellison and Mark Zuckerburg. Plus, Trump is only going to take $1 a year as POTUS. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
.
Your making the classic mistake of believing only Steve jobs or bill gates could have done what they did.... The truth is they were just the first or had slightly better luck than the hundreds just behind them on the ladder!.
That's the whole point of capitalism... No one person or company is indispensable.
The nature of it is, there is and always should be 1000s clawing at getting into their shoes.
.
Next we'll take your assumption that nobody does anything unless there's unlimited wealth in it for them??.
.
Firstly it's quite obviously nonsense, there's rungs you climb, I'm quite sure that when bill gates was working out of his garage the thought of being taxed alot on earning 150 million dollars a year never ever stopped him from doing what he did... If you don't belive me read his autobiography neither him or his good friend warren buffet were particularly motivated by aquirring masses.
Secondly belive it or not there are people still dedicated to doing stuff that aren't obsessed with being a billionaire... Like Jonas Salk who studied hard and worked hard on finding a polio vaccine and then when he did, gave it away for free and went back to his middle class job in the university.... So yeah your not in a wheel chair or dead because somebody did stuff that wasn't motivated by multi billions.
.
There's nothing wrong in wanting a comfortable life from your hard work, most peoples argument is multi billionaires are way beyond having a comfortable life?...
.
There is mounting evidence to conclude that having such wealth accruing at the top is not doing the current system we use any good, bill gates is giving lots and lots of his money away but alas he can't give it away fast enough as his wealth keeps increasing?? Something has to happen in that system for that to occur.
And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy"Its bills money.Its technocracy.Hes investing in science and gifted people.More meritocratic. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
.
Your making the classic mistake of believing only Steve jobs or bill gates could have done what they did.... The truth is they were just the first or had slightly better luck than the hundreds just behind them on the ladder!.
That's the whole point of capitalism... No one person or company is indispensable.
The nature of it is, there is and always should be 1000s clawing at getting into their shoes.
.
Next we'll take your assumption that nobody does anything unless there's unlimited wealth in it for them??.
.
Firstly it's quite obviously nonsense, there's rungs you climb, I'm quite sure that when bill gates was working out of his garage the thought of being taxed alot on earning 150 million dollars a year never ever stopped him from doing what he did... If you don't belive me read his autobiography neither him or his good friend warren buffet were particularly motivated by aquirring masses.
Secondly belive it or not there are people still dedicated to doing stuff that aren't obsessed with being a billionaire... Like Jonas Salk who studied hard and worked hard on finding a polio vaccine and then when he did, gave it away for free and went back to his middle class job in the university.... So yeah your not in a wheel chair or dead because somebody did stuff that wasn't motivated by multi billions.
.
There's nothing wrong in wanting a comfortable life from your hard work, most peoples argument is multi billionaires are way beyond having a comfortable life?...
.
There is mounting evidence to conclude that having such wealth accruing at the top is not doing the current system we use any good, bill gates is giving lots and lots of his money away but alas he can't give it away fast enough as his wealth keeps increasing?? Something has to happen in that system for that to occur.
And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy"Errr.......Its his money. With your pay packet you decide whether you go to Waitrose or M&S why can't Bill do the same ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Donald trump is right the more money you have the more successful you are, good for him hes worked hard for it. There will always be poor people in this world thats the way life is nobody ever said lifes fair did they, and im not jealous of peoples wealth i admire them." Fuck the poor what have they ever achieved. Just a drain on society.Soon with automation the billionaires asn say fuck the working class.They wont be needed in this brave new world. Mo money mo Money. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy Errr.......Its his money. With your pay packet you decide whether you go to Waitrose or M&S why can't Bill do the same ?" . You seem to be ignorant of what the other billionaires are doing with their money?. That's my point about plutocracies. Of course I can take my 80 quid down to waitrose like you say but I'm unlikely to influence anything with my small amount and frankly if billionaires just spent their money in shops I really couldn't give a fuck. However they don't, they spend hundreds and hundreds of millions on think tanks, political fundraisers, actually funding parties like ukip.... That does effect my life and nearly everybody else so it clearly is different | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy Errr.......Its his money. With your pay packet you decide whether you go to Waitrose or M&S why can't Bill do the same ?. You seem to be ignorant of what the other billionaires are doing with their money?. That's my point about plutocracies. Of course I can take my 80 quid down to waitrose like you say but I'm unlikely to influence anything with my small amount and frankly if billionaires just spent their money in shops I really couldn't give a fuck. However they don't, they spend hundreds and hundreds of millions on think tanks, political fundraisers, actually funding parties like ukip.... That does effect my life and nearly everybody else so it clearly is different" The population is collectively suffering from Stockholm syndrome. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy Errr.......Its his money. With your pay packet you decide whether you go to Waitrose or M&S why can't Bill do the same ?. You seem to be ignorant of what the other billionaires are doing with their money?. That's my point about plutocracies. Of course I can take my 80 quid down to waitrose like you say but I'm unlikely to influence anything with my small amount and frankly if billionaires just spent their money in shops I really couldn't give a fuck. However they don't, they spend hundreds and hundreds of millions on think tanks, political fundraisers, actually funding parties like ukip.... That does effect my life and nearly everybody else so it clearly is different" So not only do you want to restrict his wealth you want to limit where he can put his wealth ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" And my other point is, I've got nothing against bill gates but why should he decide what subjects get billions of help and what don't?, that's called a plutocracy Errr.......Its his money. With your pay packet you decide whether you go to Waitrose or M&S why can't Bill do the same ?. You seem to be ignorant of what the other billionaires are doing with their money?. That's my point about plutocracies. Of course I can take my 80 quid down to waitrose like you say but I'm unlikely to influence anything with my small amount and frankly if billionaires just spent their money in shops I really couldn't give a fuck. However they don't, they spend hundreds and hundreds of millions on think tanks, political fundraisers, actually funding parties like ukip.... That does effect my life and nearly everybody else so it clearly is different So not only do you want to restrict his wealth you want to limit where he can put his wealth ? " . No just restricting it will do fine for me, if he wants to put his last 400 million into the fossil fuel think tank lobby of say... The heartland institute that's fine... He won't though. Instead they put hundreds of millions that they have spare and can afford to lose into things like the heartland institute, they then hire and fund bullshit propaganda against many many things from directly influencing Congress to backing people like bush or just putting out fake nonsense on climate change! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To those that advocate wealth redistribution... If you have a household income over £25k you are in the wealthiest 1% of the global population, living in one of the wealthiest countries. As beneficiary of inequality, demanding equality is like a turkey demanding Christmas! Corbyn is a tool, maybe a sponge hammer. In a globalised world you can not cap wages or you drive those that have the skills to generate wealth out to do so for other countries. I have no time for the politics of jealousy, it is simple a tool to divert attention from real issues. That said I would cap footballers income to £30k, we shouldn't worry too much of the all leave." . Wealth redistribution already exists I'm just advocating reversing it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"To those that advocate wealth redistribution... If you have a household income over £25k you are in the wealthiest 1% of the global population, living in one of the wealthiest countries. As beneficiary of inequality, demanding equality is like a turkey demanding Christmas! Corbyn is a tool, maybe a sponge hammer. In a globalised world you can not cap wages or you drive those that have the skills to generate wealth out to do so for other countries. I have no time for the politics of jealousy, it is simple a tool to divert attention from real issues. That said I would cap footballers income to £30k, we shouldn't worry too much of the all leave." is that £30k day or a week.Their would be blood in the streets if we lost our footballing stars. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought £25,000 put you in the top 10%..." A net 25,000, there or thereabouts, puts you in the top 1% in the world. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You may have heard about the new Oxfam report about wealth inequality, the richest 8 people in the world (all men) own as much as the poorest half of the world's population, 3.4bn people. Does anyone think that that can be morally justifiable? Should such excesses be celebrated like Trump does with his cabinet of billionaires? He thinks the more money you have, the more successful you are. Should these excesses be legislated against such as Corbyn suggested? Or should pressure be placed upon these people in different ways?" I undertook great projects: I built houses for myself and planted vineyards. I made gardens and parks and planted all kinds of fruit trees in them. I made reservoirs to water groves of flourishing trees. I bought male and female slaves and had other slaves who were born in my house. I also owned more herds and flocks than anyone in Jerusalem before me. I amassed silver and gold for myself, and the treasure of kings and provinces. I acquired male and female singers, and a harem[a] as well—the delights of a man’s heart. I became greater by far than anyone in Jerusalem before me. In all this my wisdom stayed with me To the person who pleases him, God gives wisdom, knowledge and happiness, but to the sinner he gives the task of gathering and storing up wealth to hand it over to the one who pleases God. This too is meaningless, a chasing after the wind. He who has most toys, still dies | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money?
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money?
Wait a minute!
At least two of the people on the list of eight only take $1 a year.... Larry Ellison and Mark Zuckerburg.
Plus, Trump is only going to take $1 a year as POTUS. "So doesn’t that then prove the point that once they have a certain amount of money, they don’t need or want anymore? So therefore shouldn't it be capped in someway? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money?
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money?
Wait a minute!
At least two of the people on the list of eight only take $1 a year.... Larry Ellison and Mark Zuckerburg.
Plus, Trump is only going to take $1 a year as POTUS.
So doesn’t that then prove the point that once they have a certain amount of money, they don’t need or want anymore? So therefore shouldn't it be capped in someway? "Why? Don't they pay tax still? In the US you still have to do your taxes when you're abroad. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought £25,000 put you in the top 10%... A net 25,000, there or thereabouts, puts you in the top 1% in the world." At school I was always in the bottom few %, now I am in the world's top 1%... That proved them wrong.... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Thats the things about the super rich they employ 1,000's of people. Take them out of the equation and you have 1,000's without a job
Like it or not there will allways be ultra sucessful people in this world.
Take a look behind the sceans and see just how much of thier wealth they actually give away.
Charities education ect.
Why do people think that any action against the man at the top would always equal no jobs for the people who work at the companies that earned them their money?
Bill Gates doesn't still run Microsoft, nothing would happen to the company if something was done about his personal wealth.
Look at Steve jobs, he was only paid 1$ a year to run Apple, do you think that the sole motivation for people like that is money?
Wait a minute!
At least two of the people on the list of eight only take $1 a year.... Larry Ellison and Mark Zuckerburg.
Plus, Trump is only going to take $1 a year as POTUS.
So doesn’t that then prove the point that once they have a certain amount of money, they don’t need or want anymore? So therefore shouldn't it be capped in someway? "You do know they earn more net when they take a dollar salary, don't you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the whole worlds wealth was equally shared out. . Within a decade those top 8 wealthiest people would be back in the top 8 . . . I'll wager Trumps personal bank account on that. " There is a lot of rubbish said on this forum, but this really takes the biscuit. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the whole worlds wealth was equally shared out. . Within a decade those top 8 wealthiest people would be back in the top 8 . . . I'll wager Trumps personal bank account on that. There is a lot of rubbish said on this forum, but this really takes the biscuit." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the whole worlds wealth was equally shared out. . Within a decade those top 8 wealthiest people would be back in the top 8 . . . I'll wager Trumps personal bank account on that. There is a lot of rubbish said on this forum, but this really takes the biscuit. "and? . . do I tell you how to clean toilets? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the whole worlds wealth was equally shared out. . Within a decade those top 8 wealthiest people would be back in the top 8 . . . I'll wager Trumps personal bank account on that. There is a lot of rubbish said on this forum, but this really takes the biscuit.
and? . . do I tell you how to clean toilets? "No, why would you? If all wealth was shared out equally, you really believe that in 10 years it would end up in the hands of 7 white guys and 1 south American guy? No women? No Asian people? No black people? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mark zuckenberg is suing hundreds of native Hawaiian's to get them off his 700 acre beach front property because he wants more PRIVACY... Yes 700 acres just doesn't give you any place to hide these days. Under Hawaiian law, native Hawaiian's have a right to settle on parts which several hundred did but that's not good enough for that billionaire philanthropist that brought that wonderful life enriching Facebook to the masses, his company evades taxs, he evades taxs, he throws out hundreds of native of the land they've been on forever..... And apparently... He's the good billionaire "Do you have any links or write ups on this and which island and location on island | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mark zuckenberg is suing hundreds of native Hawaiian's to get them off his 700 acre beach front property because he wants more PRIVACY... Yes 700 acres just doesn't give you any place to hide these days. Under Hawaiian law, native Hawaiian's have a right to settle on parts which several hundred did but that's not good enough for that billionaire philanthropist that brought that wonderful life enriching Facebook to the masses, his company evades taxs, he evades taxs, he throws out hundreds of native of the land they've been on forever..... And apparently... He's the good billionaire
Do you have any links or write ups on this and which island and location on island". I think I read it on the Hawaiian star paper and the island was Kauai | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not what you know, it's who you know. . . money gives you power, which I personally find abhorrent, but it's a fact. . . the present top money people would, in my opinion, be able to amass their fortunes back. . . " . Really can you name any billionaires that have gone bankrupt and ten years later have recouped all their money?. Jordan beloft springs to mind, the financial genius of the wolf of wall Street film, he's currently hundreds of millions in debt and touring around giving inspirational speeches for a living | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the whole worlds wealth was equally shared out. . Within a decade those top 8 wealthiest people would be back in the top 8 . . . I'll wager Trumps personal bank account on that. There is a lot of rubbish said on this forum, but this really takes the biscuit.
and? . . do I tell you how to clean toilets? "Well you're full of shit, so yes,why not | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's not what you know, it's who you know. . . money gives you power, which I personally find abhorrent, but it's a fact. . . the present top money people would, in my opinion, be able to amass their fortunes back. . . " Which ignores the fact that some on that list got there by what they know. Or what they enabled others to know. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mark zuckenberg is suing hundreds of native Hawaiian's to get them off his 700 acre beach front property because he wants more PRIVACY... Yes 700 acres just doesn't give you any place to hide these days. Under Hawaiian law, native Hawaiian's have a right to settle on parts which several hundred did but that's not good enough for that billionaire philanthropist that brought that wonderful life enriching Facebook to the masses, his company evades taxs, he evades taxs, he throws out hundreds of native of the land they've been on forever..... And apparently... He's the good billionaire
Do you have any links or write ups on this and which island and location on island.
I think I read it on the Hawaiian star paper and the island was Kauai"I visit Oahu December each year, the homeless figures have really shot up over past 10 years when you drive the 93 from Makakilo right up to Makaha the amount of homeless families making tent homes on the beach is unbelievable, so much poverty amongst an island with so many rich tourists homeless & begging go hand in hand all around Waikiki too | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I visit Oahu December each year, the homeless figures have really shot up over past 10 years when you drive the 93 from Makakilo right up to Makaha the amount of homeless families making tent homes on the beach is unbelievable, so much poverty amongst an island with so many rich tourists homeless & begging go hand in hand all around Waikiki too " . I've always wanted to visit the islands and maybe Pitcairn as well, I find island life and it's differences quite fascinating | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I visit Oahu December each year, the homeless figures have really shot up over past 10 years when you drive the 93 from Makakilo right up to Makaha the amount of homeless families making tent homes on the beach is unbelievable, so much poverty amongst an island with so many rich tourists homeless & begging go hand in hand all around Waikiki too . I've always wanted to visit the islands and maybe Pitcairn as well, I find island life and it's differences quite fascinating" hop over island visit flights are cheap once you are out there, I tend to stick with Oahu for the surf & friends made over the years, but each and every island is unique and worth a visit | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the whole worlds wealth was equally shared out. . Within a decade those top 8 wealthiest people would be back in the top 8 . . . I'll wager Trumps personal bank account on that. There is a lot of rubbish said on this forum, but this really takes the biscuit.
and? . . do I tell you how to clean toilets?
Well you're full of shit, so yes,why not "oh lighten up you KNOB | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"oh lighten up you KNOB"
Good one fuckwit
It is cunts like you that have led to this forum becoming the shitpit it now is.
There were always half-brained twats that hung about with nothing to offer beyond your sort of dribble. But that used to be balanced by people with opinions worth reading.
It was also balanced by moderators who kept the place going without personal bias.
Today it's become a place bereft of debate beyond 'BBW Appreciation 356'. Any attempt at debate is thrown into the politics forum and people are left to be as personally abusive as they wish.
So I'm happy to say goodbye. And I'm happy to say 'fuck you'.
Afterall it's the best chance you have of getting a fuck on here
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"oh lighten up you KNOB
Good one fuckwit
It is cunts like you that have led to this forum becoming the shitpit it now is.
There were always half-brained twats that hung about with nothing to offer beyond your sort of dribble. But that used to be balanced by people with opinions worth reading.
It was also balanced by moderators who kept the place going without personal bias.
Today it's become a place bereft of debate beyond 'BBW Appreciation 356'. Any attempt at debate is thrown into the politics forum and people are left to be as personally abusive as they wish.
So I'm happy to say goodbye. And I'm happy to say 'fuck you'.
Afterall it's the best chance you have of getting a fuck on here
"now now children | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Mark zuckenberg is suing hundreds of native Hawaiian's to get them off his 700 acre beach front property because he wants more PRIVACY... Yes 700 acres just doesn't give you any place to hide these days. Under Hawaiian law, native Hawaiian's have a right to settle on parts which several hundred did but that's not good enough for that billionaire philanthropist that brought that wonderful life enriching Facebook to the masses, his company evades taxs, he evades taxs, he throws out hundreds of native of the land they've been on forever..... And apparently... He's the good billionaire
Do you have any links or write ups on this and which island and location on island.
I think I read it on the Hawaiian star paper and the island was Kauai
I visit Oahu December each year, the homeless figures have really shot up over past 10 years
when you drive the 93 from Makakilo right up to Makaha the amount of homeless families making tent homes on the beach is unbelievable, so much poverty amongst an island with so many rich tourists
homeless & begging go hand in hand all around Waikiki too ". He's dropped his action now it's received bad publicity  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
