The Student Room Group

Why do British people hate success (wealth) so much....?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by dj1015
Lets introduce a mansion tax and and see what happens.

However if you wish to live in a public sector paradise, maybe another country would be more suitable for you?


What will happen is what's always happened, rich people will continue to press hard to come and live here from every corner of the planet.
Original post by dj1015
But cutting them.

Did you miss the part where I said we need less government.


No I did not miss that part. I hate people like you who suggest arbitrarily cutting the public sector. Cutting what exactly? Let me guess, everything that doesn't affect you at the present such as JSA and housing benefit like you are immune from being made redundant and falling on hard times.
Reply 22
People are deluded into thinking that they cannot become rich themselves because of their roots, which generally isn't true if you have the right work ethic.
Reply 23
Original post by Really_now
No I did not miss that part. I hate people like you who suggest arbitrarily cutting the public sector. Cutting what exactly? Let me guess, everything that doesn't affect you at the present such as JSA and housing benefit like you are immune from being made redundant and falling on hard times.


That and the NHS, Police, public sector pensions, the public sector in general etc etc....
Reply 24
Original post by dj1015
All this talk of a mansion tax has got me thinking.

Is it really fair to have a tax raid on the rich every time we want to fund some pointless public spending program?

The top 25% of earners in the country already pay 90% of the income tax. Any more taxes is simply ludicrous.

To be honest, I think middle and low earners like to say they are "squeezed", but the reality is much different. Some of those people have never had it so good.

What we really need is less government and less attacks on wealth. The 3 main parties are totally out of touch with whats needed, and just pander to the idiots (the electorate) with cheap one liners to maintain their career in politics.

If we carry on like this, we will end up like socialist France. And surely the fate that greeted Greece will be awaiting us.


That's rather ironic, because part of the reason Greece went down the drain was because no one actually paid taxes.
Original post by LittleMissNoface
The wealth is not correlated with kindness/intelligence/altruism/purpose.
If you are from a **** hole, you will stay in the **** hole. Unless, of course, you fight to the top.

Obviously this is not the case always.

But to think that wealth is always success is silly.
It mainly is not - if you look at the bigger picture.

However I am not rich, so seeing the problem is a little hard for me.

All I know id the amount of money we have lost these past three years has changed my household's life.
So... Hum.


Exactly, this isn't a case of poor human scum envying wealthy human perfection.

This is a simple case of mathematics.

The poorer cannot afford to pay much tax just by virtue of their low wealth and incomes. The wealthy (especially the upper ends of wealth who effectively just sit on accumulated wealth doing nothing) can afford to pay up, AND NOT EVEN TAKE A REAL HIT TO QUALITY OF LIFE.

You tax a poor family even a relatively small amount too much that family loses food, heating, electricity and even roofs over their head.

You tax the wealthy a bit more and you know what happens? Nothing. Except they moan.

Honestly I couldn't give a **** about sitting on a mountain of money, beyond the pipe-dream of financial security. As long as my job isn't utterly **** and I can afford the basics + some disposable income I couldn't care less for over-priced restaurants and other pointless fodder for the wealthy. You got the latest highest techest fancy heavily priced Apple kit? Great I got something which is just as good/better for much cheaper, cry some moar.

But I do believe sitting on mountains of cash is just morally repugnant at best and outright damaging at worst, when the state (the state that taxes everyone, that allowed you to earn your wealth on the backs of everyone you climbed over to get it), the state who's services, infrastructure and stuff you rely on) requires revenue and ones greed means hardship for poorer people and cutting of services and infrastructure in an attempt to plug the gap.
Reply 26
Original post by Really_now
You're acting like all they've done to tackle the debt is bother the rich :/ what about the cuts to housing benefit, council tax benefit, lowering housing benefit if you have more rooms than people, the tripling of university fees, getting rid of EMA and adult learning grant.

There's nothing wrong with expecting the rich to contribute as well.


EMA was pointless in most cases.
I had a friend who lived less than a 5 minute walk from his college and he collected £30 a week.
His course did not require him to have any materials, as the college provided them.
Nothing like giving away a free monetary financial incentive.

If anything, I think its financial schemes like that, that are good on paper but poor in practice. Most of the financial schemes operated by the state, are loosely controlled and have too much of a net for possible applicants.
Reply 27
Original post by dj1015
But cutting them.

Did you miss the part where I said we need less government.


That's your opinion.
Original post by dj1015
That and the NHS, Police, public sector pensions, the public sector in general etc etc....


Good luck with that. Replace the NHS with a system like America, because their health system is amazing of course. The police, firemen and doctors aren't going to work for free as volunteers. I agree that public sector pensions are too bloated.

I'm guessing you use none of these public services yourself.
Reply 29
Original post by Really_now
You're acting like all they've done to tackle the debt is bother the rich :/ what about the cuts to housing benefit, council tax benefit, lowering housing benefit if you have more rooms than people, the tripling of university fees, getting rid of EMA and adult learning grant.

There's nothing wrong with expecting the rich to contribute as well.



expect th rich to contribute.... they already contribute a massive amount, why should their hard work have to be diminished by giving away large sums of money to the government in aid of something they will never see the benefits of!

i agree with what was said earlier the rich will just start leaving the country if the government takes anymore money from them! and then the country will be stuffed.

what about the cuts to housing benefit, council tax benefit, lowering housing benefit if you have more rooms than people, getting rid of EMA and adult learning grant. ALL of these are benefits being handed out by the government, that are payed for by the rich. wheres your argument?

I dont come from a rich family but we are fairly well of and my parent pay in excess of £60,000 in tax a year, this includes corporation tax etc from my dads business which would be even higher if profits werent slashed using 'clever ways' all of these increased taxes make what my mum and dad have worked for seem far less worth it.

my dad does a manual job and as he gets older it gets harder, he now has to work a lot harder to get the same profits/money as a few years ago and now cant retire untill later, yes this is partly due to th previous governments c**k up but still. the poor are not the only ones being hit hard, everyone is!

BUT YOU CANT EXPECT THE RICH TO PICK YOU'RE ASS UP EVERYTIME YOU FALL FLAT ON YOUR FACE, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO GET UP YOURSELF AND THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO DO THESE DAYS INSTEAD OF WAITING FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO HAND OUT MORE MONEY PAID FOR BY TAXING THE RICH EVEN MORE THAN THE MASSIVE AMOUNTS ALREADY!!!!!!!!
Reply 30
Original post by dj1015
[…] Is it really fair to have a tax raid on the rich every time we want to fund some pointless public spending program?

The top 25% of earners in the country already pay 90% of the income tax. Any more taxes is simply ludicrous.

To be honest, I think middle and low earners like to say they are "squeezed", but the reality is much different. Some of those people have never had it so good. […]


I have removed the political elements and focused on the meat of your argument.

Define 'pointless public spending program'.

Your figures are wrong. According to HMRC, the top 25% pay 73.9% of all income tax. The top 50% pay 89.7% (i.e. wages of £25,000 and above). Someone's tax contribution is relative; top earners undoubtedly pay more tax, but this represents less of their overall income.

Tell me which low and middle-income earners 'have never had it so good'. This statement runs against financial reality, where wages have not kept up with the cost of living for the last 30 years, where employment opportunities have been drastically reduced in all areas outside of the south east, where educational opportunities have gone from being free to costing £9000 per year, and where life expectancy has dropped for the first time (i.e. children are expected to live shorter lives than their parents). By what measurement do you claim low and middle-income earners have never had it so good?
Reply 31
Original post by Frube
.

Hi sir, see this house you own. You're going to have to pay us 1% of its value to be allowed to live in it, on top off the vast taxes you probably already pay. Oh here are your new neighbours, the durkdurks. You're helping to pay for their house you know, make sure you welcome them to the neighbourhood.

:unimpressed::angry::angry:


This line made me laugh so hard! but the fact of the matter is it is so true, and it all comes down to the EU (yes it has its benefits) with their human rights laws and giving everyone a right to come to out country and live better on benefits than british peoplee not on them!
Reply 32
Original post by Frube
Just because you own a 2 mill house does not mean you have 20k a year sitting around to pay to live in your own house. Council tax already taxes wealth.

Hi sir, see this house you own. You're going to have to pay us 1% of its value to be allowed to live in it, on top off the vast taxes you probably already pay. Oh here are your new neighbours, the durkdurks. You're helping to pay for their house you know, make sure you welcome them to the neighbourhood.

:unimpressed::angry::angry:


Actually, taxing house ownership makes perfect sense from economic theory. Owning a house is imputed income and in Switzerland for example every house owner pays tax on it, regardless of how much the house is worth.

Imagine two countries, both with two houses, both worth exactly the same, and 2 people. In country A both people live in their own house. In country B both people own a house but rent it to the other person. If you don't count the imputed rent of living in your own home, then country A will have a lower GDP even though the two scenarios are identical up to renting.
Reply 33
I'd rather take a pound from Philip Green than one of his till cashiers to fund the sewage system

That's not jealousy, that's a sensible mindset, even drawing upon the scientific concept of diminshing marginal returns.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 34
Original post by dj1015
Lets introduce a mansion tax and and see what happens.

However if you wish to live in a public sector paradise, maybe another country would be more suitable for you?


Always wondered this, what income do your parents have?
Reply 35
Original post by klomd
expect th rich to contribute.... they already contribute a massive amount, why should their hard work have to be diminished by giving away large sums of money to the government in aid of something they will never see the benefits of!

i agree with what was said earlier the rich will just start leaving the country if the government takes anymore money from them! and then the country will be stuffed.

what about the cuts to housing benefit, council tax benefit, lowering housing benefit if you have more rooms than people, getting rid of EMA and adult learning grant. ALL of these are benefits being handed out by the government, that are payed for by the rich. wheres your argument?

I dont come from a rich family but we are fairly well of and my parent pay in excess of £60,000 in tax a year, this includes corporation tax etc from my dads business which would be even higher if profits werent slashed using 'clever ways' all of these increased taxes make what my mum and dad have worked for seem far less worth it.

my dad does a manual job and as he gets older it gets harder, he now has to work a lot harder to get the same profits/money as a few years ago and now cant retire untill later, yes this is partly due to th previous governments c**k up but still. the poor are not the only ones being hit hard, everyone is!

BUT YOU CANT EXPECT THE RICH TO PICK YOU'RE ASS UP EVERYTIME YOU FALL FLAT ON YOUR FACE, SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO GET UP YOURSELF AND THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE NEED TO DO THESE DAYS INSTEAD OF WAITING FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO HAND OUT MORE MONEY PAID FOR BY TAXING THE RICH EVEN MORE THAN THE MASSIVE AMOUNTS ALREADY!!!!!!!!


Wanna tell me this ain't about class? Jokers.
Reply 36
Original post by evantej
I have removed the political elements and focused on the meat of your argument.

Define 'pointless public spending program'.

Your figures are wrong. According to HMRC, the top 25% pay 73.9% of all income tax. The top 50% pay 89.7% (i.e. wages of £25,000 and above). Someone's tax contribution is relative; top earners undoubtedly pay more tax, but this represents less of their overall income.

Tell me which low and middle-income earners 'have never had it so good'. This statement runs against financial reality, where wages have not kept up with the cost of living for the last 30 years, where employment opportunities have been drastically reduced in all areas outside of the south east, where educational opportunities have gone from being free to costing £9000 per year, and where life expectancy has dropped for the first time (i.e. children are expected to live shorter lives than their parents). By what measurement do you claim low and middle-income earners have never had it so good?


statistics arent all of it! they dont show the real value of these tax increases to peoples lives, the top earners arent all 2mil+ people who can afford everything they want, the top earners are hit hard, the tax system needs to be reformed significantly
Reply 37
I am completely with you, my friend. An honest man works hard, provides for his family, has money taken from him every month by the state, is taxed on goods, and when he dies, inheritance is taxed. The individual just cannot win against a greedy and reckless state. It's time to reign in the frontiers of the state!

The problem in this country is, "oh look, a rich person!" - "bee, gum, gee, I am jealous, let's tax him!" Instead of leaving people be.
Reply 38
Original post by Eboracum
It's not hating wealth to give somebody else a chance. If the government needs more revenue, and has to tax more, you tax those that have more, not people struggling as it is. Only a right wing idiot would dress it up as hating wealth. Miliband is right to propose a mansion tax. We cannot be held to ransom by the wealthy. If they leave, don't let the door hit your arse on the way out...


If you tax the wealthy they will leave, meaning their money goes to. If you left them alone, they may start businesses and create wealth. Good idea! :facepalm2:
Reply 39
Original post by Really_now
You're acting like all they've done to tackle the debt is bother the rich :/ what about the cuts to housing benefit, council tax benefit, lowering housing benefit if you have more rooms than people, the tripling of university fees, getting rid of EMA and adult learning grant.

There's nothing wrong with expecting the rich to contribute as well.


Everyone should contribute the same amount, i.e. flat tax rate. Any more is bordering on theft.

Those benefits you've outlined aren't exactly rights.

Quick Reply

Latest