Should Billionaires Exist in the UK?

Entertainment Forum Helper, Debate & Current Affairs Helper

As long as they and their businesses pay their fair share of tax I don't see an issue. It's usually the billionaires who create jobs that employ a great number of people.

Duh hun.

Instead of trying to get rid of billionaires, they should improve education and make it more possible for poorer persons to access these opportunities and become billionaires. Some rich people inherit from their parents, they may be aristocrats. Other rich people did not inherit and worked hard(in their education) to achieve their billions whether that be by technological innovation. They came up with ideas and products through hard work that changed the world, and therefore they should be entitled to their wealth. What the government should do is improve the education so that child intellects from all backgrounds could be nurtured and inspired to go into ground-breaking, revolutionary sectors to contribute to it.

Reply 4

Andrew97

Yes, I don’t care how much money somebody else has.

Reply 5

Stiff Little Fingers

21

Billionaires and homelessness & poverty shouldn't exist in the same system (which was the actual claim), no question. It's fundamentally unethical to hoard wealth like a fairytale dragon while there are people living and dying without so much as even a roof over their heads.

Reply 6

It's****ingWOODY

They should, but with much higher tax percentages so they're contributing their basically unneeded millions back into their country. This will of course lead to many using loopholes to dodge taxes, but that will always be the case anyway.

Reply 7

Rakas21

OP

21

Original post by Stiff Little Fingers

Billionaires and homelessness & poverty shouldn't exist in the same system (which was the actual claim), no question. It's fundamentally unethical to hoard wealth like a fairytale dragon while there are people living and dying without so much as even a roof over their heads.

But if the two are not linked is there any practical point in imposing restriction beyond virtue signalling. In the context of an £800bn government budget should we really chase the wealthy away when the choice to allow homelessness is one which politicians have the existing resources to solve.

Reply 8

What a ridiculous thought process. Billionaires are the reason that many in our society have jobs, take away their money and you take away money from thousands, even millions, of people who would lose their jobs as a consequence. Not only that, the top 1% contribute more in taxation than any other group, think of all the taxation that would be lost as a result of taking their billions.

Reply 9

Stiff Little Fingers

21

Original post by Rakas21

But if the two are not linked is there any practical point in imposing restriction beyond virtue signalling. In the context of an £800bn government budget should we really chase the wealthy away when the choice to allow homelessness is one which politicians have the existing resources to solve.

Who says the two aren't linked? Billionaires aren't the only problem, also the sheer amount of land barons in this country stockpiling housing to profit off, leaving empty if people can't afford to pay their gouging, but if we accept the idea that the government can't afford to tackle homelessness and poverty (and the latter is absolutely driven by billionaires stealing the wealth created by their employees without proper compensation), then that is definitely the fault of the richest refusing to pay their fair share

Reply 10

Reality Check

22

Original post by Rakas21

In recent days Clive Lewis MP (backed by Momentum acolytes) has stated on shows like Politics Live and Newsnight that billionaires should not exist in the UK because it is in his view unfair and also that people don't 'need' billions.

[video]https://twitter.com/i/status/1190039075706814464[/video]

I would like to know your thoughts.

- My own view is that Clive's comments are very wrong and indicative of the Politics of envy. Clive argues that we should not have billionaires in the UK because a small minority of people are homeless or struggling however in my view the two issues are not linked. While a minority of billionaires may employ folk abroad and just live here, many of them are providing jobs, investing in our firms for example and this decade have paid a higher proportion of our income tax total than ever before.

Far from condemning billionaires, i celebrate them. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have done more for Africans than their own governments, Zukenburg has given a good £10bn to charity and Elon Musk has pushed the boundaries of innovation to the point that he may revolutionise entire sectors.

Finally i consider his Momentum backers to have the most dangerous view. A momentum woman (head of their electoral campaign for labour i think) argued that we should not have billionaires because 'nobody needs a billion'. I find this view dangerous because not everybody has the same level of aspiration. While some people only have ideas of what they would spend £5m on, i have plans right upto £10bn (not that i will ever have it) on the basis that it would allow me to enter fields like space mining and genetic engineering. To set an arbitary limit is to potentially impose restriction on the next Elon Musk.

Vote and provide your opinion.

Oh, more Labour class warfare. Joy...

I agree with all your comments in your OP. Labour have always struggled to understand that jobs have to be created somehow; they don't just fall out the sky. And if a entrepreneur risks his capital and invests his labour in a venture, then he is doing a public good by creating jobs and increasing wealth generally, not just for himself. It is only right that he should be rewarded for his risk and endeavour.

Reply 11

username2950448

Sensible people and nobel prize winning economists: billionaires should be taxed very highly and preferably out of existence

Right wing losers struggling to make ends meet on <£40,000 a year: this is class warfare how dare you attack billionaires I might be rich like them one day !!!!

Reply 12

username4406682

Er, yes. We can debate up and down about whether zero-hours contracts and the micromanaging of workers are ethical, but without billionaires those jobs wouldn't exist.

Want to put millions of workers on the dole? Abolish billionaires.

Reply 13

Original post by LiberOfLondon

Want to put millions of workers on the dole? Abolish billionaires.

With the abolishment of billionaires also comes a huge decrease in tax revenue. Yes, the government can take the billions from billionaires and use that, but that will run out eventually. As a very wise and amazing woman once said, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" and that is essentially the issue here. So those fired workers probably wouldn't be able to get a dole after a while.

Reply 14

username4406682

Original post by The Mogg

With the abolishment of billionaires also comes a huge decrease in tax revenue. Yes, the government can take the billions from billionaires and use that, but that will run out eventually. As a very wise and amazing woman once said, "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" and that is essentially the issue here. So those fired workers probably wouldn't be able to get a dole after a while.

The richest people in Britain have a net worth of about 115 billion pounds. Let's pretend Labour take all of that (and nationalise their companies). The billionaires would now pay no tax (taking a sizable sum of around 10bn out of the economy), the newly nationalised businesses would be boycotted by Tories and Blairites (in other words, about 80% of the country) and the workers Labour has just put on the dole won't pay tax or buy from the nationalised industries.

Nationalising businesses from the private sector or forcible confiscation of assets (above and beyond regular taxes) would be the stupidest thing Labour could possibly do. Have they never heard of the Laffer curve?

Agree with you about Thatcher and that quote.

Reply 15

davesantana

who cares. lifes short. their wealth aint going to the grave with them.

Reply 16

Original post by LiberOfLondon

Agree with you about Thatcher and that quote.

Thatcher?! I was clearly on about Diane Abbott.

Reply 17

username4406682

Original post by The Mogg

Thatcher?! I was clearly on about Diane Abbott.

The Abacus said something sensible?

Well I never. Next thing she will have endorsed Mao Tse Tung and said it was alright because ”she changed her hairstyle”.

What... You're telling me she did that already?

Reply 18

Reality Check

22

Original post by The Mogg

Thatcher?! I was clearly on about Diane Abbott.

Essentially polar opposites who meet at their extremes.

Reply 19