Turn on thread page Beta

Conservatives? watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pkonline)
    Seems a bit weird that you do't like the idea of equality e.g. racial, gender based etc...
    Excuse me? Racial equality? Gender equality? I don't think I ever suggested for one moment that a black woman should be paid less than a white man for doing the same job.

    That's equality and you won't hear a wimper of objection from me.

    If I misenterpreted what I think you are getting at I apologise but I get the impression that your take on equality goes much further than mine.

    I think you are talking about confiscating one person's money and giving it to another person to make people more "equal" If that's what you are driving at then I don't buy it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vienna95)
    how would you know?
    Because I do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Excuse me? Racial equality? Gender equality? I don't think I ever suggested for one moment that a black woman should be paid less than a white man for doing the same job.

    That's equality and you won't hear a wimper of objection from me.

    If I misenterpreted what I think you are getting at I apologise but I get the impression that your take on equality goes much further than mine.

    I think you are talking about confiscating one person's money and giving it to another person to make people more "equal" If that's what you are driving at then I don't buy it.
    Oops, sorry, that's what I thought your were hinting at, didn't mean to cause offense .

    Although I tend to disagree with the latter point when you say that it wrong that the state 'confiscates' money from the rich and give to the poor. Do you think the state has a responsibility to help the poor and therefore the rich should help the poor?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pkonline)
    Oops, sorry, that's what I thought your were hinting at, didn't mean to cause offense .

    None taken.


    Although I tend to disagree with the latter point when you say that it wrong that the state 'confiscates' money from the rich and give to the poor. Do you think the state has a responsibility to help the poor and therefore the rich should help the poor?
    To an extent, yes I do. But, should the rich (and actually we're not even talking about the "rich" but really the middle income earners) be treated as a bottomless pit, a milk cow?

    Should every person who achieves through hard graft a "better than average" level of comfort and income have so much of it taken away to achieve these lofty ideals? I think not.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    To an extent, yes I do. But, should the rich (and actually we're not even talking about the "rich" but really the middle income earners) be treated as a bottomless pit, a milk cow?

    Should every person who achieves through hard graft a "better than average" level of comfort and income have so much of it taken away to achieve these lofty ideals? I think not.
    nicely expressed
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    To an extent, yes I do. But, should the rich (and actually we're not even talking about the "rich" but really the middle income earners) be treated as a bottomless pit, a milk cow?

    Should every person who achieves through hard graft a "better than average" level of comfort and income have so much of it taken away to achieve these lofty ideals? I think not.
    Those who are below the middle income earners are taxed too and wont get as much back. The rich rich should have a high taxing, I see it very hard to understand why they need all that money... even more annoyingly when it comes from inheritances. People being poor only creates more crime and more strain on our public services, still that is not to say we should throw money at them - tighter rules for social security would probably have a better effect.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    Those who are below the middle income earners are taxed too and wont get as much back. The rich rich should have a high taxing, I see it very hard to understand why they need all that money... even more annoyingly when it comes from inheritances. People being poor only creates more crime and more strain on our public services, still that is not to say we should throw money at them - tighter rules for social security would probably have a better effect.
    tighter rules for social security - yes
    those below the middle income earners tend to be classed as relatively poor and therefore benefit most. Especially as the middle class tend to pay twice for everything, once through taxes and once privately (a huge generalisation)
    They need that money because in a meritocratic systme like capitalism they can earn it? THere is nothing wrong with that.
    Whats wrong with inheritances, there is huge tax on inheritances in the first place.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JSM)
    They need that money because in a meritocratic systme like capitalism they can earn it? .
    Except we don't live in a purely meritocratic society do we? We live in a society where peole are born into advantaged backgrounds, a society where sometimes even the brightest children don't go to university because they can't afford it. The idea of a meritocratic society is flawed.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JSM)
    tighter rules for social security - yes
    those below the middle income earners tend to be classed as relatively poor and therefore benefit most. Especially as the middle class tend to pay twice for everything, once through taxes and once privately (a huge generalisation)
    They need that money because in a meritocratic systme like capitalism they can earn it? THere is nothing wrong with that.
    Whats wrong with inheritances, there is huge tax on inheritances in the first place.
    It is not fair that the middle classes suffer, the highestest classes should.
    Ahh yes, I forgot about the inheritance tax. I don't know too much about it anyway but the Royal Family for instance they have not earnt any of their money fairly and I'm quite sure that none of the descendents did either. I can't see how anyone can be sooo rich and have earnt every last penny :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deadflower1984)
    Except we don't live in a purely meritocratic society do we? We live in a society where peole are born into advantaged backgrounds, a society where sometimes even the brightest children don't go to university because they can't afford it. The idea of a meritocratic society is flawed.
    I think if someone is bright enough they will go to university. Whether that means they have to stay at home or study near by, I think it is now possible for anybody to go to university. If they have to get in debt then they do as will many other people.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deadflower1984)
    Except we don't live in a purely meritocratic society do we? We live in a society where peole are born into advantaged backgrounds, a society where sometimes even the brightest children don't go to university because they can't afford it. The idea of a meritocratic society is flawed.
    um, so we dont go to a meritocratic society, what about private schools (scholarships and bursaries, previously assisted places) to help kids get into them. What about grammer schools. What about GCSEs and A levels, they are meritocratic although more from the point of effort. People are born into advantaged backgrounds but you cannot change that as every generation wuill wnat to pass on what it has acquired. The brightest chldren tend to go to universityanyway and their are scholarships etc. to help them. Where did you get your last statement from?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    Those who are below the middle income earners are taxed too and wont get as much back. The rich rich should have a high taxing, I see it very hard to understand why they need all that money... even more annoyingly when it comes from inheritances. People being poor only creates more crime and more strain on our public services, still that is not to say we should throw money at them - tighter rules for social security would probably have a better effect.
    Why does it annoy you so? In the unlikely event I make a million through a lifetime of endevour then at the time of my death I'd leave it to my kids. It's MY money. Shouldn't I be free to do what I want with it? Can I not decide better than the government how best to spend it?

    The rich should not have "high taxing" High taxation stifles, rather than creates wealth. Remember this much: If Bill Gates had been born in England they'd have been no Microsoft.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    It is not fair that the middle classes suffer, the highestest classes should.
    Ahh yes, I forgot about the inheritance tax. I don't know too much about it anyway but the Royal Family for instance they have not earnt any of their money fairly and I'm quite sure that none of the descendents did either. I can't see how anyone can be sooo rich and have earnt every last penny :rolleyes:
    Why should the highest classes suffer, so if your dad gains a promotion and therefore becomes a higher earner, should he suffer because he put long hours away from his family into that promotion and the extra money.
    The Royal Family pay tax, etc, i would say they earn their money as they probably cost less to keep than an elected HoS. None of their predecessors did you mean. Well quite a lot of what they own is gifts and the money they have tends to be from investtments and property that they own and that would have to go back to 1066.
    Well they or their ancestors must have earnt every last penny or else they would not have it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Why does it annoy you so? In the unlikely event I make a million through a lifetime of endevour then at the time of my death I'd leave it to my kids. It's MY money. Shouldn't I be free to do what I want with it? Can I not decide better than the government how best to spend it?

    The rich should not have "high taxing" High taxation stifles, rather than creates wealth. Remember this much: If Bill Gates had been born in England they'd have been no Microsoft.
    sorry i agree with u, but wtf about Buill Gates.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The thing is that the brightest students do not all go to grammar schools or private schools etc. Its the wrong way round in many private schools; first they ask whether u can afford it, then whether you meet their academic requirements.

    If grammar schools and private schools were soley based on interlligence then I'd guess they would have to let many of their students go !

    Also why should someone who 'isn't as quick' as someone else be deprived of a good life? If intelliegence is part genetic and part environment then it ain't fair is it?

    Also just cos u earn more or have an education doesn't mean you work harder.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JSM)
    Why should the highest classes suffer, so if your dad gains a promotion and therefore becomes a higher earner, should he suffer because he put long hours away from his family into that promotion and the extra money.
    The Royal Family pay tax, etc, i would say they earn their money as they probably cost less to keep than an elected HoS. None of their predecessors did you mean. Well quite a lot of what they own is gifts and the money they have tends to be from investtments and property that they own and that would have to go back to 1066.
    Well they or their ancestors must have earnt every last penny or else they would not have it?
    I do not have anything that my great (multiply by 35) grandparents have. They do not earn their money. The highest classes should suffer, when people who earn over a couple of million a year... I think that is taking this piss quite frankley. Although admittedly I have no idea what they get taxed now.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Why does it annoy you so? In the unlikely event I make a million through a lifetime of endevour then at the time of my death I'd leave it to my kids. It's MY money. Shouldn't I be free to do what I want with it? Can I not decide better than the government how best to spend it?

    The rich should not have "high taxing" High taxation stifles, rather than creates wealth. Remember this much: If Bill Gates had been born in England they'd have been no Microsoft.
    I did mention rich rich meaning that wouldn't specifically include you as a million isn't really that much.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by happysunshine)
    I do not have anything that my great (multiply by 35) grandparents have. They do not earn their money. The highest classes should suffer, when people who earn over a couple of million a year... I think that is taking this piss quite frankley. Although admittedly I have no idea what they get taxed now.
    I don't think it's taking the piss at all.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JSM)
    sorry i agree with u, but wtf about Buill Gates.
    I need an explanation on that too...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pkonline)
    The thing is that the brightest students do not all go to grammar schools or private schools etc. Its the wrong way round in many private schools; first they ask whether u can afford it, then whether you meet their academic requirements.

    If grammar schools and private schools were soley based on interlligence then I'd guess they would have to let many of their students go !

    Also why should someone who 'isn't as quick' as someone else be deprived of a good life? If intelliegence is part genetic and part environment then it ain't fair is it?

    Also just cos u earn more or have an education doesn't mean you work harder.
    actualy private schools ask you to take the test and then ask if you can afford it. But it would be a meritocracy which is also unfair, if all the brightest kids went ot better schools than anyone else.

    I agree with you, but "life isn't fair", you have to judge people on something and this is the current consensus view.

    I agree with you, but it goes both ways.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 10, 2004
Poll
Could you cope without Wifi?
Useful resources

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.