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 |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. " I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? " Just think about what you have just said there. And lets clear another thing up, it does not take rich people with money to make a successful business, it takes customers who can afford to buy the products. The more wealth those at the top hoard the less there is circulating amongst the rest of the population to buy stuff to support the businesses making stuff. You like so many have been conned and your so enthralled to the con you refuse to believe anyone that you are being conned. by the way I know this Nigerian prince, if you send me your credit card details (full name on the card, expiry date, 16 digit number on the front and the 3 didgit number on the back) I'll pass it on to him and he will give you a million... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. " They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You can't ban billionaires. You don't have to like them, but seizing someone's wealth and assets after they have earned it is just theft. The tax system has many areas where it should be adjusted to make it harder to accrue vast amounts of money in the first place, but you can't just suddenly turn round and decide you're taking it all back. Unless you want to implement full on communism." Nothing was said about "seizing" anyone's wealth and assets. Of you read what was written, the statement was about income tax and inherence tax. How has that become the implementation of full on Communism. I think you are responding to something not written here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've told you before _asyuk. I will no longer attempt to engage in debate with you. It is pointless." Bless  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?" Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot .  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot . "Should the rich at least pay the same as everyone else? If they did, there would be a much reduced need for higher tax rates. If you are rich you won't notice it, it's just a case of not wanting to contribute more. You would be happier with your lot of you paid no tax and retained all of the benefits of public spending that you have now wouldn't you? Shall we have a referendum and get it done?  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot .
Should the rich at least pay the same as everyone else?
If they did, there would be a much reduced need for higher tax rates.
If you are rich you won't notice it, it's just a case of not wanting to contribute more.
You would be happier with your lot of you paid no tax and retained all of the benefits of public spending that you have now wouldn't you?
Shall we have a referendum and get it done? "There are a lot of people paying no tax and enjoying the benefits of public spending mate i dont get your point.There are also a lot of billionaires who give away 1/2 their wealth they cant all be as bad as some like to make out.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. " The trouble is that much of their money is not earned but is withheld from the people in a way that's as bad as kicking people's doors down. By cheating their fellow citizens out of taxes, they reduce the capital that keeps society healthy, impacting state infrastructure and services. It results in a much less healthy society,most people denied longevity, subjected to environmental standards that are inferior, denied opportunities of living more meaningful lives, as examples of how restraints upon state budgets affect the masses. Take UK Capital Gains tax, as a relevant example. Highly wealthy people use this ad a vehicle to pay lower tax rates than someone at the lowest income levels. Aside from £billions that corporations and millionaires squirrel away, typically offshore, they are wealth accumulators, with much of this wealth belonging to the majority of citizens. They are enabled by systems that treat them favorably, from the political infrastructure to the media, where they hold enormous power to retain a status quo that penalizes the millions who work to build fortunes for them, yet disproportionately ensures those towards the bottom of income scales carry much of the cost to help them engorge upon the rich pickings that they see as rightfully their own. Whilst these wealth inequalities have been cultured, atrocious damages have been incurred, upon our environment, that billions must endure. Millions of people also forced to struggle with a life that is closer to mere existence than that which would have been fulfilling of their potential. Those who starve others are worse than local gangs causing affray. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
, you can't hide on your yachts in the med forever. Must be a horrible life hoarding all that money in Monaco and the Bahamas. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot .
Should the rich at least pay the same as everyone else?
If they did, there would be a much reduced need for higher tax rates.
If you are rich you won't notice it, it's just a case of not wanting to contribute more.
You would be happier with your lot of you paid no tax and retained all of the benefits of public spending that you have now wouldn't you?
Shall we have a referendum and get it done? There are a lot of people paying no tax and enjoying the benefits of public spending mate i dont get your point.There are also a lot of billionaires who give away 1/2 their wealth they cant all be as bad as some like to make out. "So the rich shouldn't have to pay at least as much of a proportion of their income and tax as everyone else? The poor paying no tax and receiving public goods justifies the rich doing the same? Would you really notice paying a few hundred or a few thousand pounds more in tax? Do you really not get that progressive taxation is key to stable society? Can't be that wealthy if you would so you are unlikely to be targeted right? So you think that massive wealth inequality is better for society? Would you rather pay no tax? You'd be better off, right? The fact that some billionaires five some of their wealth away in a manner that they choose does not justify others contributing at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Everything the OP has posted is spot on. I agree 100%. I don't have the exact figures or quotes on me but i read somwhere that our production has increased over 1000% since 1970s. Thanks to technology and we was promised back then that today we would all prosper by this increase in wealth and production and have a 3 day working week. Well lets look at today? Many people cant get by and need to work two jobs and working 6 days a week and over 60 hours just to get by. These billionaires have hot richer of the backs of the public who put in just as much hard work if not more then these people who just sit back and watch thier bank balance increase by millions each year." *got | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? Just think about what you have just said there. And lets clear another thing up, it does not take rich people with money to make a successful business, it takes customers who can afford to buy the products. The more wealth those at the top hoard the less there is circulating amongst the rest of the population to buy stuff to support the businesses making stuff. You like so many have been conned and your so enthralled to the con you refuse to believe anyone that you are being conned. by the way I know this Nigerian prince, if you send me your credit card details (full name on the card, expiry date, 16 digit number on the front and the 3 didgit number on the back) I'll pass it on to him and he will give you a million..." Why do you pathetically try to belittle me just because I don't agree with you Will? You strike me as one hell of a bitter individual. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money." Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot .
Should the rich at least pay the same as everyone else?
If they did, there would be a much reduced need for higher tax rates.
If you are rich you won't notice it, it's just a case of not wanting to contribute more.
You would be happier with your lot of you paid no tax and retained all of the benefits of public spending that you have now wouldn't you?
Shall we have a referendum and get it done? There are a lot of people paying no tax and enjoying the benefits of public spending mate i dont get your point.There are also a lot of billionaires who give away 1/2 their wealth they cant all be as bad as some like to make out.
So the rich shouldn't have to pay at least as much of a proportion of their income and tax as everyone else?
The poor paying no tax and receiving public goods justifies the rich doing the same?
Would you really notice paying a few hundred or a few thousand pounds more in tax?
Do you really not get that progressive taxation is key to stable society? Can't be that wealthy if you would so you are unlikely to be targeted right?
So you think that massive wealth inequality is better for society? Would you rather pay no tax? You'd be better off, right?
The fact that some billionaires five some of their wealth away in a manner that they choose does not justify others contributing at all."We have a progressive tax system up to £12,500 no tax £12,501 to £50,000 20% £50,001 to £150,00 40% and over that 45%.Every year they try to raise the lower threshold which is good but i dont get why people believe because someone has worked hard taken risks and got on in life they should be penalized. You would probably change your tune if you was paying 45%. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot .
Should the rich at least pay the same as everyone else?
If they did, there would be a much reduced need for higher tax rates.
If you are rich you won't notice it, it's just a case of not wanting to contribute more.
You would be happier with your lot of you paid no tax and retained all of the benefits of public spending that you have now wouldn't you?
Shall we have a referendum and get it done? There are a lot of people paying no tax and enjoying the benefits of public spending mate i dont get your point.There are also a lot of billionaires who give away 1/2 their wealth they cant all be as bad as some like to make out.
So the rich shouldn't have to pay at least as much of a proportion of their income and tax as everyone else?
The poor paying no tax and receiving public goods justifies the rich doing the same?
Would you really notice paying a few hundred or a few thousand pounds more in tax?
Do you really not get that progressive taxation is key to stable society? Can't be that wealthy if you would so you are unlikely to be targeted right?
So you think that massive wealth inequality is better for society? Would you rather pay no tax? You'd be better off, right?
The fact that some billionaires five some of their wealth away in a manner that they choose does not justify others contributing at all.We have a progressive tax system up to £12,500 no tax £12,501 to £50,000 20% £50,001 to £150,00 40% and over that 45%.Every year they try to raise the lower threshold which is good but i dont get why people believe because someone has worked hard taken risks and got on in life they should be penalized. You would probably change your tune if you was paying 45%. "Their get out answer is that they didn't earn it to start with | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? Just think about what you have just said there. And lets clear another thing up, it does not take rich people with money to make a successful business, it takes customers who can afford to buy the products. The more wealth those at the top hoard the less there is circulating amongst the rest of the population to buy stuff to support the businesses making stuff. You like so many have been conned and your so enthralled to the con you refuse to believe anyone that you are being conned. by the way I know this Nigerian prince, if you send me your credit card details (full name on the card, expiry date, 16 digit number on the front and the 3 didgit number on the back) I'll pass it on to him and he will give you a million... Why do you pathetically try to belittle me just because I don't agree with you Will? You strike me as one hell of a bitter individual. " Now now boys....don’t get personal! I actually enjoy reading both your posts because you both think about what you have posted and have a positive view of humanity unlike some of the more relentless posters on here. Shake hands and embrace your differences lads | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? Just think about what you have just said there. And lets clear another thing up, it does not take rich people with money to make a successful business, it takes customers who can afford to buy the products. The more wealth those at the top hoard the less there is circulating amongst the rest of the population to buy stuff to support the businesses making stuff. You like so many have been conned and your so enthralled to the con you refuse to believe anyone that you are being conned. by the way I know this Nigerian prince, if you send me your credit card details (full name on the card, expiry date, 16 digit number on the front and the 3 didgit number on the back) I'll pass it on to him and he will give you a million... Why do you pathetically try to belittle me just because I don't agree with you Will? You strike me as one hell of a bitter individual. Now now boys....don’t get personal! I actually enjoy reading both your posts because you both think about what you have posted and have a positive view of humanity unlike some of the more relentless posters on here. Shake hands and embrace your differences lads "I harbor no ill will... to Will | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? Just think about what you have just said there. And lets clear another thing up, it does not take rich people with money to make a successful business, it takes customers who can afford to buy the products. The more wealth those at the top hoard the less there is circulating amongst the rest of the population to buy stuff to support the businesses making stuff. You like so many have been conned and your so enthralled to the con you refuse to believe anyone that you are being conned. by the way I know this Nigerian prince, if you send me your credit card details (full name on the card, expiry date, 16 digit number on the front and the 3 didgit number on the back) I'll pass it on to him and he will give you a million... Why do you pathetically try to belittle me just because I don't agree with you Will? You strike me as one hell of a bitter individual. Now now boys....don’t get personal! I actually enjoy reading both your posts because you both think about what you have posted and have a positive view of humanity unlike some of the more relentless posters on here. Shake hands and embrace your differences lads "Well said Mr Jones.Peace and positivity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity. "& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year "Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. "I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet. "Hand delivered on my push bike .I recycle cards sent to me . Keep it local... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet.
Hand delivered on my push bike .I recycle cards sent to me .
Keep it local... "ffs thanks bob for putting that in me head you on a pushbike last of the summer wine springs to mind lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet.
Hand delivered on my push bike .I recycle cards sent to me .
Keep it local... "sort of defeats the idea of sending cards bob if you can wish them merry xmas in person. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet.
Hand delivered on my push bike .I recycle cards sent to me .
Keep it local... ffs thanks bob for putting that in me head you on a pushbike last of the summer wine springs to mind lol"I expect someone to tell me a push bike isn’t carbon neutral as it’s got rubber tyres or something about it kills the planet.If I was a proper green i should walk until my feet bleed.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet.
Hand delivered on my push bike .I recycle cards sent to me .
Keep it local... sort of defeats the idea of sending cards bob if you can wish them merry xmas in person."I send cards to all my neighbours and I see them every week.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Peace and positivity.
& carbon neutrality to all
I may use both of them instead of Merry Christmas and a happy new year
Brilliant ! that’s going on my recycled Christmas cards.. I cant believe you are sending xmas cards stop think of the planet.
Hand delivered on my push bike .I recycle cards sent to me .
Keep it local... sort of defeats the idea of sending cards bob if you can wish them merry xmas in person.
I send cards to all my neighbours and I see them every week.."very neighborly make sure you dont give them the one they gave you last year though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go." Who creats wealth and jobs?You do talk crap | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. " Exactly. It’s jealousy with people like this. Always is. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly "Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less? Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. I'm not against people with money, I'm against a system where hoarding money is rewarded. Maybe you haven't noticed but everything is being computerised and automated, if the system is not changed soon we will have a situation where billions will be living a subsistence life if not starving and 1 or 2 will live like gods. Now I don't know about you but having read a little history I don't think that is the world we want to be passing on to our grand or great grand children, do you? Or have you swallowed the guff the bilderberg group pump out of you too can be a merchant price if only you work hard enough?Do you really believe that, how much in your perfect little world should anyone have?Yes i do believe that if you work hard enough you can get what you want in fact that is what i have done and quiet happy with my lot .
Should the rich at least pay the same as everyone else?
If they did, there would be a much reduced need for higher tax rates.
If you are rich you won't notice it, it's just a case of not wanting to contribute more.
You would be happier with your lot of you paid no tax and retained all of the benefits of public spending that you have now wouldn't you?
Shall we have a referendum and get it done? There are a lot of people paying no tax and enjoying the benefits of public spending mate i dont get your point.There are also a lot of billionaires who give away 1/2 their wealth they cant all be as bad as some like to make out.
So the rich shouldn't have to pay at least as much of a proportion of their income and tax as everyone else?
The poor paying no tax and receiving public goods justifies the rich doing the same?
Would you really notice paying a few hundred or a few thousand pounds more in tax?
Do you really not get that progressive taxation is key to stable society? Can't be that wealthy if you would so you are unlikely to be targeted right?
So you think that massive wealth inequality is better for society? Would you rather pay no tax? You'd be better off, right?
The fact that some billionaires five some of their wealth away in a manner that they choose does not justify others contributing at all.We have a progressive tax system up to £12,500 no tax £12,501 to £50,000 20% £50,001 to £150,00 40% and over that 45%.Every year they try to raise the lower threshold which is good but i dont get why people believe because someone has worked hard taken risks and got on in life they should be penalized. You would probably change your tune if you was paying 45%. "What risks has someone who has inherited their wealth taken? What about someone who draws a salary and get share options and bonuses from a company that goes bankrupt and puts thousands out of a job with a couple of weeks redundancy pay? You have no idea what tax band I'm in so you? Being unable to grasp that some people may have been brought up to give a crap clearly is alien to you, although arrogance clearly is not. You were quite polite and reasonable once but I guess that you aren't used to people questioning your pronouncements on account of being so successful and wealthy
Thank you for the run-down on income tax rates.
Would you car to take us through capital gains tax and inheritance too? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Taxation, yes billionaires should pay the highest rate of Tax and loopholes should be closed for Tax avoidance but again that's government that need to act on this. " The OP hasn't said anything different. You seem to be having a different argument  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.Who creats wealth and jobs?You do talk crap" You think that it's only rich people that do this? Really? Small businesses don't exist? Companies aren't started by poor people taking out loans or with help from their families. You don't think much of most of the population do you? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.Who creats wealth and jobs?You do talk crap You think that it's only rich people that do this? Really? Small businesses don't exist? Companies aren't started by poor people taking out loans or with help from their families. You don't think much of most of the population do you?" Make your mind up one minute you're questioning me on what risks have people taken to get where they are and here you are two posts down talking about people from poorer backgrounds making something of their selves, are you corbyn in disguise? because i cant for the life of me i cant see where you stand. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Taxation, yes billionaires should pay the highest rate of Tax and loopholes should be closed for Tax avoidance but again that's government that need to act on this. The OP hasn't said anything different. You seem to be having a different argument "I was replying to YOU when YOU asked if billionaires should pay the same tax as the rest of us. The OP was ranting about billionaires in general so I replied originally about that and the whole topic is because of government laws and policies so that's why I said basically if you don't like it then vote for a party that wants to change it. I'm sure you thought you we're being really clever with your daft posts twisting what's been said and mocking roll eyes but you made yourself look at bit dim to be honest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused "Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets. If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more. Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand "Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.Who creats wealth and jobs?You do talk crap You think that it's only rich people that do this? Really? Small businesses don't exist? Companies aren't started by poor people taking out loans or with help from their families. You don't think much of most of the population do you?Make your mind up one minute you're questioning me on what risks have people taken to get where they are and here you are two posts down talking about people from poorer backgrounds making something of their selves, are you corbyn in disguise? because i cant for the life of me i cant see where you stand. "You were bleating about entrepreneurs not getting enough for taking risks. Hence the question about capital gains tax which is how most company owners pay themselves. 38.1% at the higher rate. Entrepreneurs tax relief at 10% If you're rich do you think you should pay at least the same proportion as everyone else? It's an easy yes or no. The other question which o responded to was "who creates jobs?". The answer is that people who are not wealthy create jobs as well but don't seem to need as many tax incentives to do so. You seem to understand less and less. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Taxation, yes billionaires should pay the highest rate of Tax and loopholes should be closed for Tax avoidance but again that's government that need to act on this. The OP hasn't said anything different. You seem to be having a different argument
I was replying to YOU when YOU asked if billionaires should pay the same tax as the rest of us.
The OP was ranting about billionaires in general so I replied originally about that and the whole topic is because of government laws and policies so that's why I said basically if you don't like it then vote for a party that wants to change it.
I'm sure you thought you we're being really clever with your daft posts twisting what's been said and mocking roll eyes but you made yourself look at bit dim to be honest. "You did respond to my question, but the point was that the OP did not actually suggest anything different to progressive taxation being applied does it? You also agree with the rich having to pay their contribution. Do you disagree that as income inequinequalities increase the potential for societal unrest also increases? I don't think that you do because you are one of the few people that applies logic on here. The point is that I think that very few people, including you, could fundamentally disagree with the OP other than in its tone, which is not even that angry. I was not twisting anything. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies?"Who said anything about "hitting them hard"? Where was that suggested? How about hiring them as hard as those who are not wealthy? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies?"They are more likely to leave because of Brexit than a labour government | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go." not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies?
Who said anything about "hitting them hard"?
Where was that suggested?
How about hiring them as hard as those who are not wealthy?"so 45% is not as hard as 20% or nothing in your world? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I know it's not a billion, but if I won 150 Million on the lottery say, should I be taxed the following year on my windfall or on the revenue I earn from it. I mean at end of day I'll never spend it all will I so why let me keep the 150 million LOL ? or............... Should the lottery be capped ?" You probably should, but the lottery is set up such that the winnings are tax free. It's a dispensation to encourage money in. Under other circumstances a windfall like this would be takes as capital gains. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies?
Who said anything about "hitting them hard"?
Where was that suggested?
How about hiring them as hard as those who are not wealthy?so 45% is not as hard as 20% or nothing in your world?"What are you talking about? Are those paying 45% fleeing the country? Are those paying themselves in dividends at a lower rate? A lower rate than employed people? Are those who are "entrepreneurs" paying 10% on qualifying assets? What are you trying to justify? That rich people should not contribute more? They should just suck the money out of the economy and accumulate wealth that they cannot hope to spend? You still haven't answered if the rich should pay at least the same proportion of their qealth and income as everyone else. I assume from your silence that you consider that they shouldn't because they are "more equal" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made." So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies?
Who said anything about "hitting them hard"?
Where was that suggested?
How about hiring them as hard as those who are not wealthy?so 45% is not as hard as 20% or nothing in your world?
What are you talking about?
Are those paying 45% fleeing the country?
Are those paying themselves in dividends at a lower rate? A lower rate than employed people?
Are those who are "entrepreneurs" paying 10% on qualifying assets?
What are you trying to justify? That rich people should not contribute more? They should just suck the money out of the economy and accumulate wealth that they cannot hope to spend?
You still haven't answered if the rich should pay at least the same proportion of their qealth and income as everyone else.
I assume from your silence that you consider that they shouldn't because they are "more equal" "No i do not understand what you mean by the same proportion? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why are you so against people with money? They haven't stole it, they haven't gone round council estates kicking down the doors of the poor and robbing their penny jars. They've made their money, yeah they may have gained it through inheritance, so what? It takes people with money to build businesses that get people a job, yeah many business owners could pay the staff more but I do think you're a bit obsessed. They haven't "made it". It's unearned wealth. The money is not spent in the economy, it just accumulates. There were and are no happy, stable countries where income inequality is high. The rich fear the poor and put up walls and pay security or another enemy has to be found as a distraction. A minority or some external threat. The wealthy do not set up many businesses with their capital. They trade. Property or stocks. Again minimal benefit to the economy that most people live in. To cap it all they do not even pay the same tax rate that "normal" people do. At the very least you must want them to pay the same proportion as the rest of us and not get special treatment because they can afford to hide their money. Most of you're complaining is down to Government policy so vote accordingly
Do you expect or want the rich to pay at least the same proportion of their income in income tax and wealth or should they pay less?
Thank you for explaining about how elections work. I was terribly confused
Everyone should pay whatever tax rates the current Government sets.
If people are not happy about that then they need to vote in a government that's willing to tax billionaires even more.
Sorry it was so difficult for you to understand Not hard to understand at all and totally agree with you for once but dont be surprised if you hit them to hard they all just up and leave.Have labour not learnt anything from past policies?
Who said anything about "hitting them hard"?
Where was that suggested?
How about hiring them as hard as those who are not wealthy?so 45% is not as hard as 20% or nothing in your world?
What are you talking about?
Are those paying 45% fleeing the country?
Are those paying themselves in dividends at a lower rate? A lower rate than employed people?
Are those who are "entrepreneurs" paying 10% on qualifying assets?
What are you trying to justify? That rich people should not contribute more? They should just suck the money out of the economy and accumulate wealth that they cannot hope to spend?
You still haven't answered if the rich should pay at least the same proportion of their qealth and income as everyone else.
I assume from your silence that you consider that they shouldn't because they are "more equal" No i do not understand what you mean by the same proportion?"The same proportion, is the same fraction is the same percentage. Billionaires, in general, pay a smaller proportion of their income and wealth in tax than others. Is that okay with you? Still struggling to understand? https://metro.co.uk/2019/01/31/billionaires-davos-told-pay-taxes-stop-preaching-philanthropy-8417989/ https://fullfact.org/economy/do-you-pay-higher-tax-rate-millionaire/ https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-billionaires-low-tax-rate-working-class-cost-a9148746.html https://www.theguardian.com/money/2019/mar/09/actually-the-rich-pay-lots-of-tax-but-on-income-not-their-wealth https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/a-third-of-british-billionaires-have-moved-to-a-tax-haven-zk6q53rtd | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made." You are confusing the number of billionaires with the amount of wealth they control. 50 people control over 50% of the worlds wealth, nearly 80% of the worlds wealth is inherited. Neither of these 2 statements are in conflict with your assertion that 56% of billionaires are self made. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? "Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem."Our Queen is A billionaire, In exchange for having all that lovely money she and her immediate family, The Civil List get quite good salaries for doing these things they call royal duties. Is that what we should say to all those Billionaires in the world. Look peeps you've got far to much money already. What if we as a world population all club together, pay you a few million a year for sitting on your arse on a yacht in the Med and we'll do a load of good with your dosh. How does that sound ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem."It's almost as though it would be good to have some kind of international cooperation and agreement about economic policy, so that it would be more difficult for the ultra-ultra-rich to suck money out of one country and hide it in another. I suppose it would be very difficult to get agreement across all the world, but at least some nearby countries could group together. I guess it would be some sort of "union", countries cooperating for their mutual benefit. We could start with a few countries of Europe, and slowly expand by allowing neighbouring countries to join. It needs a name though, how about "The Union of Europe"? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
It's almost as though it would be good to have some kind of international cooperation and agreement about economic policy, so that it would be more difficult for the ultra-ultra-rich to suck money out of one country and hide it in another. I suppose it would be very difficult to get agreement across all the world, but at least some nearby countries could group together. I guess it would be some sort of "union", countries cooperating for their mutual benefit. We could start with a few countries of Europe, and slowly expand by allowing neighbouring countries to join. It needs a name though, how about "The Union of Europe"?"Thats a good idea try google tax havens in europe 8 out of the top 10 are in the eu. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"so we are moving away from income tax to wealth tax now? not really looked into that and not clear on the rules but will do a bit of research and get back to you i may agree with you i just dont know the facts yet.Glad we can agree that the wealthy pay a bigger percentage as income tax though." Both were under discussion from the OP. Nice work dodging again
They don't pay a bigger percentage of they are entrepreneurs or paying themselves in dividends | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem."No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die. That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it? It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?"so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more. "I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity. This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more. Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours"
"I think this starts to get to the heart of it. On one side of the political spectrum you have people who are more and more self-interested (the further out you get), and believe everyone should look out for themselves with no assistance from the state. At the other you have people who believe the state should look out for everyone, with no personal wealth. I guess most of us are somewhere in the middle, either a little one way or the other. Acknowledging that there are people that society need to look out for, and that there are people that ought to contribute to that aid. All we need do is agree the levels... Personally I fall into the 40% bracket, and it's painful to see my commission payments nearly halved. But then I have to recognise, actually I could "scrape by" if even as much as 80% was taken out of it. So yes I could afford more, and I would be willing for it to be taken, especially if I felt was going to the Services that need it, and not being sucked back out into the pockets of investors in health care companies etc. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" "Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone. "...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it? Far more efficient. There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself. The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking. I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people. Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures. Good job patriot | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot "nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing."What home-spun BS. Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher? It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably. Your position is very, very clear | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear "Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox. "Why was it so hard for you to say that? "Yes, the rich have no more right to pay less tax than anyone else". Would you say that they should also pay a bit more because quite frankly it will not change their lives one jot? If so, what are you so angry about? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox.
Why was it so hard for you to say that? "Yes, the rich have no more right to pay less tax than anyone else".
Would you say that they should also pay a bit more because quite frankly it will not change their lives one jot?
If so, what are you so angry about?"Im not angry whatever makes you think that? i just dont have a hangup about people who have more than me.If people are avoiding tax then take them to court im all for that but im not for penalizing people just because they are successful. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox.
Why was it so hard for you to say that? "Yes, the rich have no more right to pay less tax than anyone else".
Would you say that they should also pay a bit more because quite frankly it will not change their lives one jot?
If so, what are you so angry about?Im not angry whatever makes you think that? i just dont have a hangup about people who have more than me.If people are avoiding tax then take them to court im all for that but im not for penalizing people just because they are successful. "Your insistence that people with money are somehow being victimised. Nobody proposed that anyone should be penalised for being successful. The point of a progressive wealth tax is for the rich to contribute relatively a bit more to maintain a nice, stable country to live in where everyone can be, more or less, content and well and safe whatever their circumstances. The point of a wealth tax is to reduce money being accumulated by a few people who have more than they and their families can ever hope to spend. To get it out into the economy to be used. That does make sense doesn't it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox.
Why was it so hard for you to say that? "Yes, the rich have no more right to pay less tax than anyone else".
Would you say that they should also pay a bit more because quite frankly it will not change their lives one jot?
If so, what are you so angry about?Im not angry whatever makes you think that? i just dont have a hangup about people who have more than me.If people are avoiding tax then take them to court im all for that but im not for penalizing people just because they are successful.
Your insistence that people with money are somehow being victimised.
Nobody proposed that anyone should be penalised for being successful.
The point of a progressive wealth tax is for the rich to contribute relatively a bit more to maintain a nice, stable country to live in where everyone can be, more or less, content and well and safe whatever their circumstances.
The point of a wealth tax is to reduce money being accumulated by a few people who have more than they and their families can ever hope to spend. To get it out into the economy to be used.
That does make sense doesn't it?"I think people should be able to do what they want with their money and the title should billionaires be banned suggests penalising them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox.
Why was it so hard for you to say that? "Yes, the rich have no more right to pay less tax than anyone else".
Would you say that they should also pay a bit more because quite frankly it will not change their lives one jot?
If so, what are you so angry about?Im not angry whatever makes you think that? i just dont have a hangup about people who have more than me.If people are avoiding tax then take them to court im all for that but im not for penalizing people just because they are successful.
Your insistence that people with money are somehow being victimised.
Nobody proposed that anyone should be penalised for being successful.
The point of a progressive wealth tax is for the rich to contribute relatively a bit more to maintain a nice, stable country to live in where everyone can be, more or less, content and well and safe whatever their circumstances.
The point of a wealth tax is to reduce money being accumulated by a few people who have more than they and their families can ever hope to spend. To get it out into the economy to be used.
That does make sense doesn't it?I think people should be able to do what they want with their money and the title should billionaires be banned suggests penalising them."The actual title is a load of bollox from a lad that makes a point of misunderstanding articles he reads in the sun and then posts in the lounge about it. The suggestion that billionaires should be banned came from his misunderstanding of a misleading article in the sun. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Anyone heard the one about how billionaires and multinational corporations are job creators? Anyone heard the one that says if you cut taxes for the rich the poor benefit? Anyone notice that its the rich and multinationals that OWN the places that pump out the first 2 lies. Most billionaires got their money by inheriting it. Over the last 40 or so years the top 100 in the world have increased their share of world wealth from around 50% to pushing 80%. If an equitable system of redistribution is not reintroduced soon then there is no doubt in my mind an inequitable solution to inequality of wealth will be found. And if history teaches us anything it is the inequitable solutions to inequality are violent and usually end with the wealthy elites being exterminated. Personally I feel a return to a progressive income based tax system with a similarly progressive wealth based inheritance tax system is preferable to a more revolutionary of dealing with wealth inequality. Or maybe Trump's Republicans and de Pfeffel's Tories have the right idea and lower taxes for the rich combined with less benefits for the poor and a continual squeezing of the middle is the way to go.not quiet true mate 55.8% are self made. So what percentage will that become once they die? How many of that is through nepotism and corruption? Does "self-made" extend to Chinese Communist party billionaires and Russian Oligarchs? Once they die? christ mate you back on your referendum crap that its all old people and they will be dead soon. .As for wealth tax its seems to me to be a global problem and you have 2 choices put it up and drive people away or try to encourage more to stay to get more out of them.But while there are places in the world that they can move to taxing more will not solve the problem.
No. All wealth will become inherited unless they manage to lose or spend it all before they die.
That's the root of the problem. You still don't get it?
It seems to be a global problem? How insightful
Have Dyson and Jim Ratcliffe moved because they can't make ends meet? Poor loves
So your solution is to drop taxes so that they stay and pay no tax? What a great win for the UK
Whi has said anything about taxing them more?so your not working to give your kids and grandkids a better life when you are dead then you dont want them to inherit anything? i suggest you listen to the labour party if you dont know who is going to tax them more.
I am. I am paying a reasonable level of tax so that they grow up in a reasonably egalitarian society where there are not huge imbalances of wealth and power and opportunity.
This will ensure their safety and prosperity far better than a few thousand pounds more.
Way to go thinking like someone who loves their country and wants it to prosper
You eventually get to the truth of these things and it's just about your tribe. In the end it's only the smallest unit that you care about as you are unable to see that you can gain more overall by giving up a little of what is "yours" Total rubbish im nowhere near the tribe we are discussing its about the race to the top or race to the bottom.Here is a novel idea why not reward the rich for helping the less well off instead of punishing them "because they are rich".How about if you rent out a home for example lets say at the same rent of a similar property let by the council you dont pay tax on the money you make and if you can prove you have done that for say 20 years you dont pay capital gains when you sell it.Now people get a place to live at a fair rent and landlords have an incentive its a direct benefit for everyone.
...or how about you pay your tax and the government builds a council house which can be rented out to whoever needs it?
Far more efficient.
There's no race anywhere. It's acknowledging that you are where you are because you were educated and grew up in a safe and healthy environment as much as anything you have accomplished yourself.
The arrogance to believe that luck played no part in where you find yourself today is breathtaking.
I get it though. You'd prefer the rich to be even more privileged than they are today because they deserve it. They make all good things happen. Those in a worse situation just have to suck it up and deserve what they get because they are basically a bit rubbish at being people.
Their kids deserve it too because their parents are failures.
Good job patriot nothing to do with luck mate i grew up on a council estate along with a lot of my mates we had the desire to better ourselves while some preferred to work for 6 months and then go on the dole for a while as they could get their tax back and in those days get earnings related.Its funny the harder i worked the luckier i got.As i tell my kids and grandchildren you can do anything you want in this life if you work for it you dont get anything for nothing.
What home-spun BS.
Ever get born with a congenital disease? Mental health issue? Abuse? Poorly parented? Not encouraged to aim higher?
It doesn't matter how you made your money bit I can see that you still believe that you shouldn't have to share it. Any over it preferably.
Your position is very, very clear Mate ive always paid my taxes as dictated by the law of the land, yes i could have avoided them like a lot of people i worked with when working abroad.A lot of my mates moved their family's to malta and spent their time off there instead of the uk as it was tax free if you spent less than 90 days a year in the uk.So dont give me that bollox.
Why was it so hard for you to say that? "Yes, the rich have no more right to pay less tax than anyone else".
Would you say that they should also pay a bit more because quite frankly it will not change their lives one jot?
If so, what are you so angry about?Im not angry whatever makes you think that? i just dont have a hangup about people who have more than me.If people are avoiding tax then take them to court im all for that but im not for penalizing people just because they are successful.
Your insistence that people with money are somehow being victimised.
Nobody proposed that anyone should be penalised for being successful.
The point of a progressive wealth tax is for the rich to contribute relatively a bit more to maintain a nice, stable country to live in where everyone can be, more or less, content and well and safe whatever their circumstances.
The point of a wealth tax is to reduce money being accumulated by a few people who have more than they and their families can ever hope to spend. To get it out into the economy to be used.
That does make sense doesn't it?I think people should be able to do what they want with their money and the title should billionaires be banned suggests penalising them."What was written in the OP does not. Beyond that, why do we need billionaires? What difference to them if they are taxed to the point where they "only" have several hundred million? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
