UK tax system

There's the safety walls being erected to protect the fragility of your beliefs. You then result to an ad hominem, attacking my spelling and grammar because you are uncomfortable sticking to the points in question.

I noticed you avoided answering all the questions aimed at you, while I have answered every one of yours, why is that?

Now I did not mention luck, but being as so you have I'll roll with it because at the moment I'm confident I can defeat your argument pretty easily from any angle

A baby boy is born to a wealthy family, they buy a private education this education provides a goldern ticket for said child, runs as a average person, C stream and becomes a Dr.

Vs

A baby boy born to a single parent, parents in and out of prison. A state education is provided and he is of average intelligenc, C streams and becomes a FLT Driver on minimum wage.

I call that luck of the draw, how do you define it?

An average person wouldn’t become a doctor no matter their upbringing or education level. The entry requirements to study medicine are high so if privately educated Hugo was only average he wouldn’t make the cut.

Same goes for the kid that went to a crap state school. If they don’t acquire top grades they’ll run into the same issue.

Plenty of people from poor backgrounds have worked hard and become millionaires. I’m sure plenty of people from well off backgrounds have done terribly in life also.

Of course, we’re not all born equal, I’ll agree with you on that. That’s just life and it’s fine. It’s what you choose to do with it that matters. We have equality of opportunity, thankfully not equality of outcome as some would like to seemingly have.

What? I was asking you which low skilled jobs pay a high salary.

I've already said huge sevtio d of people who are needed to make up society from care works to skilled butcher's to skilled nursery nurses all very low paid but needed.

I disagree. You've made assertions, but not provided any evidence, so it's not very convincing.

Now you are simply lying #32 it's written in text what you asked.

No point lying

You don't measure a economies sucess by how many millionaires it's go, t you judge it by how many homeless people in let down!

Oh you are sadly mistaken.

The top schools provide the majority of the top earners of the country. An example is how Eaton university has provided more prime ministers than all state schools combined.

Now unless you are buying into some type of fascist natural section of good genes for the wealthy, this is simply about buying a golden ticket for your child.

Now I'm not talking about communism somehow equaling outcomes, that's a strawman.

Now why have you still avoided answering the questions I asked you earlier in the topic?

Well I'm not here to educate you, look at national statistics on the gap between the richest and the poorest.

Well is it? Because unregulated free market capitalism will simply strave the majority of society for the benefits of the elite.

Also if you don't regulatate wages, in anyway and allow coporation to do what they like. What's to stop them exploiting the poorest for their own gain?

You don't measure a economies sucess by how many millionaires it's go, t you judge it by how many homeless people in let down!

An example is how Eaton university has provided more prime ministers than all state schools combined.

Well, actually... It's measured by GDP (although GDP per capita is probably the better measurement). Wellness is a new thing and I believe only New Zealand is looking int to?

Fascist?! I’d love you to define fascism for me!

Yes I do believe that parents who work hard and strive to achieve are likely to instil similar values on their children. Why wouldn’t they. Conversely, kids who see their parents lounging around with no work ethic are likely to think that’s the norm and follow suit.

And yes, genes are passed down. Basic biology for you there.

Fire away with your questions, I can’t be arsed to go back to find them.

I think that you meant Eaton College ..

In some extent, politics is the preserve of the wealthy. It's worse in the US.

Oxbridge has also supplied a lot of PMs, and it's open to anyone with the ability and potential.

Those on lower wages can get a better paying career if they like.

It's not just poltics, I did not know about Oxbridge, I will reserch that later.

The people who can afford the public services are those who are already wealthy and well-paid -- the reality is that the people who can afford it are the ones who have to pay because taking money from those who can't afford it just creates huge problems for both society and the economy.

Oxbridge has also supplied a lot of PMs, and it's open to anyone with the ability and potential.

Whilst I agree with most of what you said, I don't with this, although it really depends on how you define 'wealthy' and 'low wages'.

IMO, a society needs to obtain its funding for services from as large a proportion of its members as possible. There's something disturbing about people voting for others to pay them.

And what of the financial circumstances that a student needs to live in Oxford to allow them to study there?

Why?

Why should higher earners pay a greater proportion of their income in taxes?