Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    The rich don't get rich because of their hard work alone, or even with any hard work. They get rich because a state system protects their assets, provides a healthy educated workforce and an infrastructure for them to get rich. Taxes pay for these things, so of course the rich should pay for what has played a huge role in their material position.

    You have a skewed view of people on benefits. The vast majority of those recieving benefits are genuinely unable to work or are unemploying and looking for a job, despite what the Daily Mail might tell you.

    If it didn't require hard work to be rich, everyone would be rich. The poor benefit from the same things you listed as the reason rich people become rich, except in many cases they don't do the work and take advantage of it. The rich people pay the taxes with money they make, the poor don't pay as much, yet they gain the same from it. Hardly fair. You can keep kidding yourself that everyone on benefits is a victims, but a large amount of them cheat the rest of us.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    Well I'd think you were an idiot for putting the lottery on in the first place, but I wouldn't hate you for winning, no. It's the system that allows such wins to take place which angers me.

    The national lottery fund does do a lot of good things, but it would have several million MORE to do good things with if it didn't distribute such obscene winnings to louts and wasters, and if people just put money into it because it was charitable to do so, and not because they were hoping for an undeserved windfall.
    You sound jealously anti-rich and bitter... any reason for that?

    (Original post by oo00oo)
    In my ideal world the lottery would be banned. It just doesn't fit with my meritocratic model. Getting wealth through luck just aggravates me.
    Wow... what about gambling, betting and stock-markets? What about life-insurance?

    What else does your unrealistic and idiotic models calls for a ban against?

    Will you be banning payments housewives receives from their husbands as well or are you going to tax those allowances as well?

    (Original post by oo00oo)
    Then we should intervene before they inherit it and tax it at that stage of proceedings.
    How? Do you even understand how a business or company functions?

    Tell me something, why do you think IKEA and TetraPak are no longer based in Sweden?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    No. To but it bluntly.

    Not only do a lot of the time the higher earners work incredibly hard, but those with inherited money shouldn't be taxed extra on money that is a limited resource for them.

    I'd say take down the maximum tax limit to 35% and raise the minimum tax limit to make it more equal. Paying HALF of one's earnings to the government is obscene.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aequat omnes cinis)
    If it didn't require hard work to be rich, everyone would be rich. The poor benefit from the same things you listed as the reason rich people become rich, except in many cases they don't do the work and take advantage of it. The rich people pay the taxes with money they make, the poor don't pay as much, yet they gain the same from it. Hardly fair.
    A lot of people work hard, but very few are rich. Two more pertinent reasons for getting rich are:

    -Luck. There are plenty of entrepeneurs but very few successful ones. Luck plays a large role in whether a financial risk pays off.
    -Access to Captial, either personal (e.g. education) or financial.

    (Original post by Aequat omnes cinis)
    You can keep kidding yourself that everyone on benefits is a victims, but a large amount of them cheat the rest of us.
    Any evidence for this? In any system there will be people who diddle the system, but they are very much in the minority. Perhaps you'd like to direct your anger at the bankers who have got rich off a system and, through the bailouts, received more tax payers money than the entire welfare budget for the last 10 years.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    Many rich people do work for their pay. But many poor people work hard too, and get grossly underpaid. Also many rich people don't work for their money.
    What jobs do these grossly underpaid people do? Obviously in the NHS a lot of workers are not paid fairly, however just wondering where else you think there is unfair pay?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fudgesundae)
    What jobs do these grossly underpaid people do? Obviously in the NHS a lot of workers are not paid fairly, however just wondering where else you think there is unfair pay?
    Although I don't agree with the OP, to answer your question: teachers?
    • CV Helper
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    CV Helper
    no, they pay enough.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    NO definitely not. They have worked hard to earn the amount of money they earn and we should not penalise them for that. We should be encouraging them to earn as much money as they can, as it brings money into the country, which they will spend, helping the economy.
    They pay enough of their earnings to the government anyway and we shouldn't ask them to pay any more, as it is just ridiculous.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    Yes, I do. I don't see your point though?
    Why do you think those 2 companies I mentioned are no longer based in Sweden..

    Hint : your version of equality has something to do with it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gamma)
    Although I don't agree with the OP, to answer your question: teachers?
    Sorry, I should have been clearer. Apart from the public sector workers (who are definitely underpaid).
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    We should just tax those who haven't worked for it and let those who have worked for it keep every penny.

    It's not difficult to see who earns and who inherits.
    Why shouldn't they be able to keep the money if they inherited it? Their parents have worked hard to make lots of money in their life, why can't they do with it what they want?

    (Original post by oo00oo)
    I expect my children to make their own way in life. I will love them, and to express that love, I will give them care, attention, support, teaching, and do my best to endow them with the skills, passions and determination to put themselves to good use for the good of society, and for the good of their own personal lives. I will make honest people out of them.

    My children will not receive inheritance from me because it's simply not in the spirit of graft, hard work and due reward, and in my experience, people who obtain wealth and unlimited treasures and material gifts from their parents tend to be airheaded ***** with no concept of reality or work, and I would loathe for my children to turn into those very people I despise.

    It'll be tough for my kids, but they'll look back on their lives and all of their own wealth and be able to say "everything I have, I earned for myself", and as somebody who has earned everything he has, I can tell you that it makes success so much the sweeter when you weren't living in somebody else's pockets to do it.

    P.S. it's quite disgusting that you equate 'love' with 'giving obscene amounts of money to'.
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    I'm to say it's wrong. It produces some NASTY, NASTY individuals, promotes nothing, encourages nothing, and rewards the lazy whilst penalising the hard workers.
    Generalising massively here, no real substance to your argument. Basically you despise kids who inherit a lot of money because you are jealous. If your parents decided to give you £10 mil when you turned 21 would you reject it?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    There are similarly stressful jobs with similar skill levels that don't get £1,000,000+ bonuses.
    Very, very, very few bankers make £1 mil + bonuses. Even the ones who earn £1 mil incl. bonuses are in the vast minority. You're just jumping on the bandwagon of all bankers sitting around in their office watching the millions roll into their bank account. Do you actually know what M&A bankers do?

    OH NO, NOT EARLY RETIREMENT, HOW STRESSFUL FOR THEM.

    Expectations or not, whether they win or lose is neither here nor there in the grand scheme of things. It's not an important job, and if they were to be paid an amount that reflected having to retire early then they would be paid twice, max three times the average. Not paid more than the average salary PER DAY.
    Football is a business. People pay a lot of money to watch the footballers, so they are paid with that money. Why should they be paid the same as the average worker when the average worker brings in nowhere near as much money and adds much less value to the economy.

    Go read an economics textbook before you embarrass yourself even further.

    I don't care if their ancestors earned it. They have their ancestors by luck and nothing else, and nobody should get wealth through luck.
    So what should happen to their ancestor's wealth? Give it to the poor? Well they haven't earned that money either then have they?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If you believe in a welfare state then yes.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For me it is difficult to answer.

    Imo people/families who want to do well and work hard deserve to be rewarded for their efforts but on the other hand just because someone is poor does not mean they are not hard working. It could stem from a poor upbringing, lack of good education or both.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    Because their children never earned it and they're doing society an injustice by bringing lazy spoiled brats into it. The accident of your birth should, in an ideal world, determine nothing about your life. Not your religion, not your wealth, not your education, and not your opportunities.
    Again generalising, not all people who inherit are lazy spoiled brats. And they are giving society people who will stimulate the economy. I will inherit a lot of money but still intend to forge a good career.

    My parents have offered me financial help among other things (so have others in my family), and yes, I have actively rejected it.
    Large amounts of financial help? millions?

    I'm not jealous of people who inherit money. Quite the contrary, I pity them, because in my experience people who don't have to earn their keep are quite frankly stupid, living in a dream world, have no experience of reality, have a very narrow realm of experience, and don't know what it feels like to earn... and tbh I'm addicted to earning things - it gives me a buzz and a sense of self worth to have all the things around me purely through my own hard work.
    Life isn't about earning money and knowing how to go through financial hardship. You get a sense of self worth through earning money? How low is your self worth? Honestly though, life is about enjoying yourself and inheriting money means you are lucky enough to enjoy your life without having to work hard for it.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    I am fully aware of how the world works. What I am proposing is how the world SHOULD work, not HOW it currently works. I am aware of the reasoning behind footballers wages, but it doesn't fit in with a meritocratic world view that I hold, and even 90% of football fans agree with me on that point.
    hahaha, best statement ever. You seem prone to massive over exaggerations. They may agree with you, doesn't stop them going to games, buying merchandise (i.e. paying these player's wages) does it?

    Ideally a person would spend their own wealth before they die. Anything left over should be redistributed to everybody in a proportion related to their worth to society, the complexity and profoundness of their work, etc.

    I don't advocate giving money to the poor just because their poor. I only advocate giving money to those who earn it, and the vast majority of poor people deserve to be poor imo.
    Can you honestly not see the contradiction here? Yes they may deserve this money, but they are still getting money that they have not earned. Whilst someone who has earned millions has to share their money with random people rather than share it with the people they love.

    Also I see you made no comment on my response to your point about banker's compensation. Why?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    I'm generalising because the rule is true for MOST of those type of people. I'm fully aware that there are exceptions, but not enough to destroy my argument.

    And if you intend to forge a good career than why take the inheritance?



    Nope, but what's the difference? If I'm going to turn down thousands of pounds, then obviously I'd also turn down millions.



    I get a sense of self-worth from knowing that everything I have, I've earned, yes.

    Life IS about enjoying yourself, but everybody should start with a clean slate, and everybody should have to earn the enjoyment they get from life. We shouldn't have tossers like Michael Carrol living it up in mansions with million-quid cars when good, honest, hard-working and intelligent people slave day in day out for 30k a year and a pitiful pension.
    Michael Carrol is now in a council house where he belongs, and his wealth has been re-distributed to those who actually deserve it because they are intelligent and/or hardworking. If people don't want to be wage slaves they shouldn't use their free will to become one. They should choose a job that has scalability; If you're a nurse you can only tend to say 20 patients in a shift. If you're a footballer you can entertain 10 people or you can entertain 10 million people depending on how good you are. The nurse however benefits because her job is stable and relatively guaranteed, whereas those who choose to be footballers 999/1000 will end up being brick layers.

    Inheritence is a good thing. If all my money was going to be grabbed by the state upon my death i'd make damn sure it had been distributed among my friends and family. Or failing that it would be in multiple offshore accounts across the world. To be fair, it will already be spread across multiple offshore accounts any way, I resent paying 40% tax on something I have already paid tax on. Then again, I will use every loophole in the book to get that % as close to zero as I can too. Your policy will just screw over people whose net worth is between 250k and a million, probably locked up in their property. And you will be removing the piece of mind that many people crave, that their family will be cared for after their gone.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    Even if one of of one thousand footballers breaks the £50k a year mark, that's too many. Michael Carrol is indeed back where he belongs, but that's perhaps a bad example, because there are as many scumbags like him living the high life through unearned cash and are retaining their wealth.

    Inheritance is not a good thing, although I completely agree with you when it comes to income tax in this country - it's frankly ridiculous the amount taken in tax from hard-working people.

    Finally, I'll get peace of mind with respect to my family's future after my death from the fact that I'll have taught them well enough to be able to look after themselves, and not have to rely on handouts. If the only way your children will be secure after your death is when a massive wad of cash is handed to them, then you have failed as a parent, imo.
    It isn't too many though. They took a risk and it paid off. People are paying them that money to do it, more fool them. I don't think you have necessarily failed as a parent if you think your children could do with a boost to their bank balance when you die; Afterall houses prices are now astronomical. The idea that people I don't even know deserve the money i've amassed over a life time of hard work, just because I live on the same island as them, over my children is ridiculous. I don't want my money taken out of my cold dead hands, I want to give it to the charities and organisations I believe in, not some stupid pissant Labour government who will just spunk it up the wall on the likes of Michael Caroll.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No cos then toilet cleaners will get same pay as doctors.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oo00oo)
    Yes, more fool them. It's the system I hate, not the people that are currently exploiting it.



    So?



    The fact that your children are who they are is as random as the fact that your countrymen are who they are. What's the difference?



    Absolutely, I don't want a single penny of my money going into the current political system that we have either. The welfare state boils my blood, and the politicians in this country, and the system within which they operate is an insult to our worth.
    You can't change the system. I already explained to you why some positions earn more than others; Scalability and risk. They will always garner higher amounts of money. That's the way it is, and the way it always will be. The idea that my children are 'random' is altogether stupid. If I choose to have children, it's not like i'm going to some sort of prize draw where I come home with a randomly selected baby. They will be the product of my wife and I. They will be my DNA, and I want my DNA to be comfortable and have a good life. Yes it's unfair one child will be born to a junkie in Glasgow, and mine will be born to a reasonably wealthy individual who lives in the 3 counties, but i'd rather prioritise my child over people i'm not related to. I had them, I owe them a duty of care. I did not choose to have a welfare baby, so why should I work my entire life to fund a whole gaggle of them?
 
 
 
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.