Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Labour kiss goodbye to any chance of being elected Watch

    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    It is "okay"; not every human is equally deserving, or capable of wisely using, the same amount of income.

    Large-scale income inequality is undesirable for society, but morally it is understandable.
    So you'd happily let some people have more income because they are more deserving? Deserving of what exactly? Nurses and Doctors should earn the most since they help preserve life. A banker or stock broker make money from playing the system...might make them smart, but morally to allow people to suffer inequality for reasons you haven't justifiably put forward.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Have you ever studied the weather statistics?

    The Inverness average temperature in July is 14C. Brrr.
    That's not that bad lol.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    It doesn't matter what the limit is, the fact remains it would be the most inane and damaging economic policy ever implemented in a western country.

    Our most talented would be encouraged to move away, there would be no incentive for talented outsiders to move in and, most importantly, our masses would be given the destructive message there are limits to what you can achieve, and those limits are in the hands of the wilfully destructive jealous.

    Corbyn's credibility was non-existent anyway, but this must demonstrate it to even the most idiotic of his fanboys.
    So your main glance is set on the "talented rich", but you ignore the majority which is far from rich. That money could go into the economy rather than into pockets of the rich so they can buy supercars and live in luxury. The problem is indeed adressed with the wrong solution, but showing care only for the rich minority is a problem by itself. Your views are the reason for the existance of a labour party.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    You can control the growth of a tumor but you've still got cancer, pal. Eradicate the capitalist class.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nutz99)
    Corbyn's brain, if there is one, is either very devious or very under-worked. If he ever got to a position where he could implement this (realistically there is more chance of Peter Sutcliffe getting a knighthood) he would probably ring-fence certain salaries - MPs for example. There would be a huge drain of talent out of the UK and Corbyn would then implement his plan to bring in migrants to replace the outgoing Brits. Corbyn openly wants more immigration into the UK. This would give him that opportunity.
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I think they kissed goodbye when they actually elected Corbyn in the first place.

    Well here's to another 10+ years of conservative power. :cheers:
    (Original post by Drewski)
    Corbyn declares there should be a maximum earnings limit

    But doesn't declare what it should be, naturally.

    People forget governments can govern too long, they get tired, people get bored with them. Ok for a short time in 2010 the Tory coalition might have been an exciting new change for some after 13 years of labour.

    But in six years the Tories have done nothing good at all. Public service cuts, austerity and misery.


    People are fed up of the tired Tories! If anything then a labour led coalition is the most likely and sensible outcome of a general election.

    We need change!
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    "morally understandable"? You jest.
    Then explain how someone who flips burgers should morally earn as much as someone who runs a chain of fast food restaurants?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ambitious1999)
    We need change!
    A hung parliament is more likely.

    Any election that elects Labour will be less sensible than one that elects Trump.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ambitious1999)
    We need change!
    Not from bad to worse.

    We need another party. Labour are rock bottom, Liberals have disappeared and Tories are doing what Tories have always done. Tories will win the next election by a landslide as there is no real opposition.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MildredMalone)
    Then explain how someone who flips burgers should morally earn as much as someone who runs a chain of fast food restaurants?
    Explain how someone who saves lifes like a police officer or paramedic should morally get so much less than some managers.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopelessMedic)
    What a ridiculous statement. Income inequality is not a problem, it is the consequence of people making good and bad life choices in the vast majority of cases.

    The problem is when people aren't put in the position to be able to make those good choices, which is inequity and something that should be addressed.
    Every CEO needs his workforce. If everyone made the "right" choices, who would work for all the managers, CEOs, high earners?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cbreef)
    That's not that bad lol.
    The average July highest is 18C, with an average wind of about 9mph - which is very cooling and makes that average feel much cooler.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopelessMedic)
    These situations that people create never happen, so it's pointless considering them.

    The facts are that there will always be people who work hard and there will always be people who don't. As along as they both had the same opportunity then there is no problem with one earning significantly more.
    You think the only measure is "hard work"?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopelessMedic)
    Measure of what exactly?
    You quite clearly implied that people who work hard get those high paying jobs and those that don't work hard get low paying jobs.

    "The facts are that there will always be people who work hard and there will always be people who don't. As along as they both had the same opportunity then there is no problem with one earning significantly more."
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The policy is aimed at limiting the wages of the bankers, CEOs, and business people who contribute 22% of Britain's GDP. If you destroy the biggest contributor to Britain's GDP, the individuals who will be hit the hardest are the individuals at the bottom.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HopelessMedic)
    I stand by that and it's pretty much common sense. Obviously there are some exceptions but for the vast majority of people the job you work has a direct correlation with how hard you work, not just in school but in other areas. Someone who is lazy and just plays video games all day won't, and shouldn't in my opinion, receive a high paying job.

    I'm not sure what you're getting at, do you think people who don't work hard should get the same pay as those who do?
    I am more thinking of those that have to work multiple jobs in the so-called richest country, because the wages the rich pay are so low.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    They did that in 2008. :lol:
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathemagicien)
    But for an example of a country and city much more densely populated than the UK, Japan's infrastructure copes even better than the UK's.
    Yes.

    Japan is interesting in other ways, though. It has had virtually zero immigration throughout its entire history.

    Yet despite its ageing, declining population, it still prefers cultural homogenity to immigration leading to naturalisation. They are allowing some foreigners in, now, but only as residents.

    Fascinating, huh?

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...an-refugees-in
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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