The rich are getting richer. Do we need more socialism?

Badges: 0

Rep:

#1

Report Thread starter 4 years ago

#1

You may have heard of Thomas Piketty's fantastic book, Capital in the 21st Century, in which he explains how society is becoming more and more unequal.

How can the government act to stop this? Should the rich pay more to reduce the gap? Should we have a tax on capital, e.g. 1% tax on anything over £1 million?

Let me know your ideas for making the world fairer!

0

reply

username33685

Badges: 11

Rep:

#2

Report 4 years ago

#2

Margaret Thatcher comprehensively answered this question 24 years ago

2

reply

Martyn*

Badges: 13

Rep:

#3

Report 4 years ago

#3

(Original post by rich2606)
Margaret Thatcher comprehensively answered this question 24 years ago

And she was wrong even then. She clearly confused Marxist Socialism or Communism with proper Socialism, and like the Tories do today, accuse Labour of being the same thing. By mentioning eastern Europe in regards to socialism and not what she should have said in regards to Communism, shows how ignorant and misinformed she was on the matter.

0

reply

Rakas21

Badges: 21

Rep:

#4

Report 4 years ago

#4

(Original post by PresidentObama)
You may have heard of Thomas Piketty's fantastic book, Capital in the 21st Century, in which he explains how society is becoming more and more unequal.

How can the government act to stop this? Should the rich pay more to reduce the gap? Should we have a tax on capital, e.g. 1% tax on anything over £1 million?

Let me know your ideas for making the world fairer!

Relative inequality can never be stopped by virtue of the fact that capital breeds wealth, hence it's easier to retain wealth by sitting on capital accumulation from land than it is to be the one in a million who creates the next Google starting from nothing.

Absolute inequality is what we as capitalists should be aiming to arrest somewhat by endorsing measures which aid in the creation of equal opportunity and maintaining a small welfare state to ensure that the poorest in society can still eat and that their children have the quality of education and opportunities which allow them to escape poverty.

Personally (and i say this as somebody far poorer than half the lefties on here), i have no objection to incredible wealth and no desire to punish the rich with excessive taxation just so that we can be on paper all a little more equal (a banker not getting a bonus will not make my family any wealthier) (the Thatcher video is an extreme but relevant example). With that being said, i do believe that the poor should be freed from the burden of taxation and so i would support taxation of land for example to disproportionately take from the rich to fund infrastructure like energy and transport and housing (where i don't want the money being spent is on health and welfare which already have significant scope for further cuts).

0

reply

Kill3er

Badges: 13

Rep:

#5

Report 4 years ago

#5

(Original post by rich2606)
Margaret Thatcher comprehensively answered this question 24 years ago

She dead.

0

reply

PicardianSocialist

Badges: 6

Rep:

#6

Report 4 years ago

#6

Properly defined, yes.

0

reply

Moosferatu

Badges: 19

Rep:

#7

Report 4 years ago

#7

(Original post by Rakas21)
Relative inequality can never be stopped by virtue of the fact that capital breeds wealth, hence it's easier to retain wealth by sitting on capital accumulation from land than it is to be the one in a million who creates the next Google starting from nothing.

Absolute inequality is what we as capitalists should be aiming to arrest somewhat by endorsing measures which aid in the creation of equal opportunity and maintaining a small welfare state to ensure that the poorest in society can still eat and that their children have the quality of education and opportunities which allow them to escape poverty.

Personally (and i say this as somebody far poorer than half the lefties on here), i have no objection to incredible wealth and no desire to punish the rich with excessive taxation just so that we can be on paper all a little more equal (a banker not getting a bonus will not make my family any wealthier) (the Thatcher video is an extreme but relevant example). With that being said, i do believe that the poor should be freed from the burden of taxation and so i would support taxation of land for example to disproportionately take from the rich to fund infrastructure like energy and transport and housing (where i don't want the money being spent is on health and welfare which already have significant scope for further cuts).

Sensible, as per I find myself agreeing wholeheartedly.

0

reply

Quick Reply

Oops, nobody has posted
in the last few hours.

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

Today on TSR

Poll

Where do you need more help?

Watched Threads

Oops, nobody has posted
in the last few hours.

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

TSR Support Team

Get Started

Using TSR

Info

TSR Group

Connect with TSR

The rich are getting richer. Do we need more socialism? Watch

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Oops, nobody is replying to posts.

See more of what you like onThe Student Room

Today on TSR

Poll

Where do you need more help?

Watched Threads

Spotlight

Oops, nobody has postedin the last few hours.

Oops, nobody is replying to posts.

See more of what you like onThe Student Room

TSR Support Team

Get Started

Using TSR

Info

TSR Group

Connect with TSR

Oops, nobody has posted
in the last few hours.

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

Oops, nobody has posted
in the last few hours.

See more of what you like on
The Student Room