Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?

    The people who say "they don't need the money", "it could go to help other people more" are too nieve and think they are "good samaritans" to take into account the fact that these rich people have money for a reason - they have been given it! You don't get given a £50,000 salary for nothing, you work hard at school, get a good degree and get a good job where you work hard 5 days a week. You deserve this money, just like a slacker who has failed in school though messing round, never gone to university, and who works in a much lower paid job earns their much lower salary.

    In my opinion, this is the way the market should work - if you don't like it, tough, you're lazy and you deserve what little you get. It may not be nice, but it's justice. These progressive taxes are leaning towards communism - something that simply doesn't work.

    And if people start with the "No one needs a swimming pool in their garden", please define 'need', becuase I'm sure there are things even the poorest homeowners buy that they don't genuinely need to survive. It's simply a case of work harder, have a better lifestyle.

    Agree? Disagree?

    (Original post by mik1a)
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?

    The people who say "they don't need the money", "it could go to help other people more" are too nieve and think they are "good samaritans" to take into account the fact that these rich people have money for a reason - they have been given it! You don't get given a £50,000 salary for nothing, you work hard at school, get a good degree and get a good job where you work hard 5 days a week. You deserve this money, just like a slacker who has failed in school though messing round, never gone to university, and who works in a much lower paid job earns their much lower salary.

    In my opinion, this is the way the market should work - if you don't like it, tough, you're lazy and you deserve what little you get. It may not be nice, but it's justice. These progressive taxes are leaning towards communism - something that simply doesn't work.

    And if people start with the "No one needs a swimming pool in their garden", please define 'need', becuase I'm sure there are things even the poorest homeowners buy that they don't genuinely need to survive. It's simply a case of work harder, have a better lifestyle.

    Agree? Disagree?
    The sick, weak, and failed in life look at the healthy, strong, and sucessful with resentful and revengeful eyes. And so they come up with "social justice" - a pious term that hides very base, degenerate, and nihilist feelings.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1a)
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?

    The people who say "they don't need the money", "it could go to help other people more" are too nieve and think they are "good samaritans" to take into account the fact that these rich people have money for a reason - they have been given it! You don't get given a £50,000 salary for nothing, you work hard at school, get a good degree and get a good job where you work hard 5 days a week. You deserve this money, just like a slacker who has failed in school though messing round, never gone to university, and who works in a much lower paid job earns their much lower salary.

    In my opinion, this is the way the market should work - if you don't like it, tough, you're lazy and you deserve what little you get. It may not be nice, but it's justice. These progressive taxes are leaning towards communism - something that simply doesn't work.

    And if people start with the "No one needs a swimming pool in their garden", please define 'need', becuase I'm sure there are things even the poorest homeowners buy that they don't genuinely need to survive. It's simply a case of work harder, have a better lifestyle.

    Agree? Disagree?
    While i get furious knowing that huge chunks of any money i make now and in the future will be taken away to support welfare cheats i do think there should be a higher level of tax for those who earn more, within reason though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    example

    DO FOOTBALLERS DESERVE THEIR MONEY
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eddiedaboss)
    example

    DO FOOTBALLERS DESERVE THEIR MONEY
    Christ footballers piss me off.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1a)
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?

    The people who say "they don't need the money", "it could go to help other people more" are too nieve and think they are "good samaritans" to take into account the fact that these rich people have money for a reason - they have been given it! You don't get given a £50,000 salary for nothing, you work hard at school, get a good degree and get a good job where you work hard 5 days a week. You deserve this money, just like a slacker who has failed in school though messing round, never gone to university, and who works in a much lower paid job earns their much lower salary.

    In my opinion, this is the way the market should work - if you don't like it, tough, you're lazy and you deserve what little you get. It may not be nice, but it's justice. These progressive taxes are leaning towards communism - something that simply doesn't work.

    And if people start with the "No one needs a swimming pool in their garden", please define 'need', becuase I'm sure there are things even the poorest homeowners buy that they don't genuinely need to survive. It's simply a case of work harder, have a better lifestyle.

    Agree? Disagree?
    Where have you plucked this idea from that seemingly everybody in receipt of state benefits is a 'slacker' or a 'failure'?

    Have you never stopped to realise that there are certain barriers to prosperity which prevent the deprived from improving their economic status?

    Progressive taxation does not result in a shakeup of the economic hierarchy, it is just a fairer redistribution of resources - the poor will still be poor and the rich still rich, except the gap will narrowly close.

    Why shouldn't you care for your fellow man? I'll tell you why - because people like you stand for self-interest and couldn't care less about the plight of others. Some of the most wealthy and succesful entrepreneurs have opened their eyes to the benefits of philanthropy and social justice to the whole of society (not just its lower reaches) - hopefully, one day, you will.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1a)
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?
    Reality is a bit more complicated. There are plenty of good arguments for why the government should charge the same amount of money from everyone. There are plenty of good arguments for why the government should charge the same percentage of income from everyone, and there is plenty of good arguments for why the government should charge a greater percentage for those who are rich. In practice what is used is a compromise that the majority of the population can accept. Governmental spending and charging is far from a question with one single objective "correct" answer and therefore a compromise between different interest groups is necessary.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mobbdeeprob)
    Where have you plucked this idea from that seemingly everybody in receipt of state benefits is a 'slacker' or a 'failure'?
    Where does he say this?

    (Original post by mobbdeeprob)
    Have you never stopped to realise that there are certain barriers to prosperity which prevent the deprived from improving their economic status?
    Maybe in the 19th century, maybe even during part of this one, there certainly isnt anything in place to stop somebody with abillity and determination achieving what they wish nowadays though.

    (Original post by mobbdeeprob)
    Progressive taxation does not result in a shakeup of the economic hierarchy, it is just a fairer redistribution of resources - the poor will still be poor and the rich still rich, except the gap will narrowly close.
    Yes.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    Reality is a bit more complicated. There are plenty of good arguments for why the government should charge the same amount of money from everyone. There are plenty of good arguments for why the government should charge the same percentage of income from everyone, and there is plenty of good arguments for why the government should charge a greater percentage for those who are rich. In practice what is used is a compromise that the majority of the population can accept. Governmental spending and charging is far from a question with one single objective "correct" answer and therefore a compromise between different interest groups is necessary.
    Well said.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ugh. No point.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The problem with taxing the rich too highly is that they'll leave the UK to live elsewhere which is definately not in the best interest's of the UK.

    A good example is Robbie Williams moving to LA for tax purposes.

    The effects of losing the rich may be similar to the effects 'white flight' has had on many urban areas.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Well said.
    Thank you. I think it really helps to understand why things work the way they do when you have to try to compromise with other people about something. I am growing quite tiered of arguing with people who fail to see that there is more than one side of an argument.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1a)
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?

    The people who say "they don't need the money", "it could go to help other people more" are too nieve and think they are "good samaritans" to take into account the fact that these rich people have money for a reason - they have been given it! You don't get given a £50,000 salary for nothing, you work hard at school, get a good degree and get a good job where you work hard 5 days a week. You deserve this money, just like a slacker who has failed in school though messing round, never gone to university, and who works in a much lower paid job earns their much lower salary.

    In my opinion, this is the way the market should work - if you don't like it, tough, you're lazy and you deserve what little you get. It may not be nice, but it's justice. These progressive taxes are leaning towards communism - something that simply doesn't work.

    And if people start with the "No one needs a swimming pool in their garden", please define 'need', becuase I'm sure there are things even the poorest homeowners buy that they don't genuinely need to survive. It's simply a case of work harder, have a better lifestyle.

    Agree? Disagree?
    AGREE! A look out i did a post just like this about a month or two ago called Tax, Tax, TAX! and I got a hell of a slating for this point of view. :mad: Good Luck...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    all the tax issues dont have a right or wrong answer, its up to the individual to decide, although many who are againts high taxes for the rich have not done all the reaserch and lack knolegde of the issue, and viceaversa
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by an Siarach)
    Maybe in the 19th century, maybe even during part of this one, there certainly isnt anything in place to stop somebody with abillity and determination achieving what they wish nowadays though.
    If you are so wrapped up in archconservative woolythinking as to state that the issue of stuctural inequalities is not a problem in 21st century British society then you are simply delluded.

    Certain groups of people are excluded from more profitable functions within the economy through no fault of their own. You, I and every other person in this country are victims of varied circumstance. I, like many other people on this forum, probably wouldn't have too much of a problem walking into a £30,000 a year job in 10 years time - without exactly breaking my back on the way to achieving it. Could the same be said of certain others in this country, hailing from altogether less privileged backgrounds?

    Why should the less fortunate have to break their backs to achieve what is a formality for the more fortunate? Afterall, circumstance is life defining and those in poor circumstances should not be snubbed and left on the margins of society (which still happens today, no matter what you may say).

    I haven't done a second of paid work in my life, and yet I can look forward to holidays, a life of relative comfort and eventual prosperity - others cannot. I have worked hard at school, simply because I have not been dragged-up and have not encountered deprivation, squalor and a culture of underachievement, others have.

    How can you judge one's success relative to the success of someone who has had fewer life chances?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mik1a)
    I just learnt about this today - it's insane. How can you justify taking more money of people who earn more?

    The people who say "they don't need the money", "it could go to help other people more" are too nieve and think they are "good samaritans" to take into account the fact that these rich people have money for a reason - they have been given it! You don't get given a £50,000 salary for nothing, you work hard at school, get a good degree and get a good job where you work hard 5 days a week. You deserve this money, just like a slacker who has failed in school though messing round, never gone to university, and who works in a much lower paid job earns their much lower salary.

    In my opinion, this is the way the market should work - if you don't like it, tough, you're lazy and you deserve what little you get. It may not be nice, but it's justice. These progressive taxes are leaning towards communism - something that simply doesn't work.

    And if people start with the "No one needs a swimming pool in their garden", please define 'need', becuase I'm sure there are things even the poorest homeowners buy that they don't genuinely need to survive. It's simply a case of work harder, have a better lifestyle.

    Agree? Disagree?
    Your one big idiot, just because you earn a large amount doesnt not mean you have earnt it nor does it mean you deserve it!
    What if you inherit the money? how have you earnt it?
    Wot if you were lucky?
    The vast majority of fortunes are not made by hard graft but a simple case of being in the right place at the right time.
    You have a lot lot learn about the real world.
    Albert Einstien was expelled from school, so was Bill Gates, they both failed there exams, does this mean they dont deserve rewards just because they had fun in school?!

    Any one who lives just for money is, in my eyes, lonely and pathetic
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yogafan)
    Your one big idiot, just because you earn a large amount doesnt not mean you have earnt it nor does it mean you deserve it!
    What if you inherit the money? how have you earnt it?
    Wot if you were lucky?
    The vast majority of fortunes are not made by hard graft but a simple case of being in the right place at the right time.
    You have a lot lot learn about the real world.
    Albert Einstien was expelled from school, so was Bill Gates, they both failed there exams, does this mean they dont deserve rewards just because they had fun in school?!

    Any one who lives just for money is, in my eyes, lonely and pathetic
    It is a myth that Eisntein had problems in school, most likely an incorect interpretation of Einsteins claim that he had severe problems with mathematics (Anyone who have seen the maths he had to do to formulate his general theory of relativity can testify that this is not an indication of poor mathematics skills). He went out with top grades in close to every subject except french. As for bill gates he deliberately dropped out of school in order to set up Microsoft (a smart decision), he was not expelled.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jonatan)
    It is a myth that Eisntein had problems in school, most likely an incorect interpretation of Einsteins claim that he had severe problems with mathematics (Anyone who have seen the maths he had to do to formulate his general theory of relativity can testify that this is not an indication of poor mathematics skills). He went out with top grades in close to every subject except french. As for bill gates he deliberately dropped out of school in order to set up Microsoft (a smart decision), he was not expelled.
    Richard Branson was a dropout, in the true sense of the word, and at one point ended up in prison.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Bringing it back to economics:

    One argument is that propensity to spend declines as income increases: rich people save more. This is a leakage from the economy. So if some of their income was taxed (which would possibly be saved or spent on imports otherwise) and the revenue transferred to the poor who are more likely to spend it, the economy will grow.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Isn't tax a percentage of the money you earn?
 
 
 
Poll
Are you going to a festival?
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.