The Student Room Group

Should the government take 10% off any savings over 50,000 pounds?

Scroll to see replies

Left wing barnpot policy if ever I've heard one.
Reply 161
Original post by LiberOfLondon
They do have the right to resign from their jobs though.

er, yes, but the bills dont stop so planning will be necessary.
I suspect that the point Napp was making has been missed in the societal context and that tmr19 while solid on the textbook basis has not considered the multitude of factors that go into selecting a job in the real world.

Granted I also think that people hate on Amazon too much. It’s loss leading is not as blatant or severe as other firms and its business model more sustainable, it really is better in many cases than the high street competition (unimaginative local councils and Treasury policy is also to blame) and also its warehouse workers are actually quite well paid and not treated as ruthlessly as when they first arrived.
Original post by Burton Bridge
You are not of the real world, may I ask what your wealth back ground is? Have you ever struggled? The only thing you have a point about is living to your means, however the rest of the content of your post is wild, absolutely wild.

Why are you making the attenment level survival, I mean how low can you go to try to justify the wealthy not paying any tax.
"Oh yars, well the peasants can survive, quarff quarff"

Also what is one of these days, these 3 working days? Do you realise what many NMW jobs are like, agency work, zero hours contracts, cleaning, supermarket work, etc? How are you judging this and what happens when said person gets Ill or has a child? They just die, because it's not fair to ask someone to pay a little tax they will barely even notice!


Mother unemployed until about 15, father completely absent, lived on benefits, not enough food etc heard the "hurr durr you'll never survive without me when you're in the real world it's so hard blabla". It really isn't and I've never struggled since leaving home.

Never felt it was my right to take from people with more than me. I'm also worth about £100k now (largely through luck with bitcoin) and don't feel it's anyone's right to take that from me now.

Yeah 3 8 hour days on NMW. I work this right now (care home for medical experience) although in the form of 2 12 hour days and it's easily enough to live on as a single person, my yearly expenses are about £7.5k. When you get ill you don't get paid (I do disagree with this, but then people schive off work all the time at my home and if they got paid it would get ridiculous) and obviously you can't have a child so you need to make sure you wear protection and plan ahead. One of my friends is paralysed neck down and has no problems living on what the gov gives him so it's not like you're doomed to living hell if you're out of work.

When you get sick you don't get paid so should save for the event e.g. what I've done. When you have kids you're ****ed so you shouldn't be having kids, and in that case I just feel sorry for the kids for lacking responsible parents. The tax rate on people earning over 150k is 45%.... that's already huge and I can't see people being motivated to work when the gov literally takes over half their paycheck. Sure you could tax them more but where do you stop? There isn't a limit to how many terrible decisions people make and some people just can't be helped by the gov.
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 164
Gets my vote as the most ridiculous thread post by an OP thIs year so far!
Original post by mgi
Gets my vote as the most ridiculous thread post by an OP thIs year so far!

Hear hear.
Original post by mgi
It doesn't quite frankly. And me thinks it smells of envy!

This is nothing new. The left has always run on the politics of envy.
Original post by mgi
The Op already knows this but he probably struggles to earn money to fund the life style he wants so he has brcome a Trotskyist!

A typical socialist approach: use the funds of others because you are too lazy to earn your own.
The only reason taking the money doesn't seem so bad to you, is because it's not your money being stolen.
Original post by It’s Jacob
A typical socialist approach: use the funds of others because you are too lazy to earn your own.

As a great lady said:
The trouble with socialism is that you always run out of other people's money.
Original post by LiberOfLondon
As a great lady said:
The trouble with socialism is that you always run out of other people's money.

The great lady? Great at what, speaking, causing division and devastation of industry and living conditions of many.

The trouble with Capitalism is the majority of people and up running out of money all together while the minority end up with too much and try to hide it! - Burton bridge April 2020
(edited 3 years ago)
Who the **** thought of this?
Reply 172
Original post by Burton Bridge
The trouble with Capitalism is the majority of people and up running out of money all together while the minority end up with too much and try to hide it! - Burton bridge April 2020

What does that even mean ahahaha
Original post by tmr19
What does that even mean ahahaha

Simple, it means the gap between the richest and the poorest grows wider. In real terms both extremes of poverty and immense wealth grow leaving the majority poorer.
Reply 174
Original post by Burton Bridge
Simple, it means the gap between the richest and the poorest grows wider. In real terms both extremes of poverty and immense wealth grow leaving the majority poorer.

People aren't getting poorer as a general trend. The wealth gap is growing, but saying the poor are getting poorer is untrue
Original post by Burton Bridge
The great lady? Great at what, speaking, causing division and devastation of industry and living conditions of many.

The trouble with Capitalism is the majority of people and up running out of money all together while the minority end up with too much and try to hide it! - Burton bridge April 2020

If you hadn't noticed, Mrs Thatcher pulled us out of a recession, ended the three day week and 25% inflation, stopped the unions striking every other week, gave us electricity that didn't flicker on and off and enabled many ordinary people (like my Lancastrian grandad) to prosper.
Please look up ”Winter of Discontent” on Wikipedia before you complain about what Thatcher did.
Original post by Burton Bridge
Simple, it means the gap between the richest and the poorest grows wider. In real terms both extremes of poverty and immense wealth grow leaving the majority poorer.

And what would your solution be?
Original post by tmr19
People aren't getting poorer as a general trend. The wealth gap is growing, but saying the poor are getting poorer is untrue

Yea? Thats not what the evidence points towards.

The wealthy are growing wealthier and the poorest are getting more poor. The way this mostly gets contested falsely is by using inaccurate forms of measurement like TV and phone availability, failing to mention a TV in 1960s cost a more than a months wage where as nowadays it costs less than a days wage!

Contest it how you like, it's still true
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 177
Original post by Burton Bridge
The wealthy are growing wealthier and the poorest are getting more poor. The way this mostly gets contested falsely is by using inaccurate forms of measurement like TV and phone availability, failing to mention a TV in 1960s cost a more than a months wage where as nowadays it costs less than a days wage!

Within the UK the working class is not poorer in real terms then they were in any point in history - their share of the overall pie has reduced, but the pie is just that much larger. Either way, is having access to far superior goods at far lower prices indicative of a standard of living increase? Earnings reports are definitely useful, but they don't properly account for how much infinitely better the actual goods and services (i.e. purchasing power of earnings) has gotten.

The worst car on the market today is better than most cars 40+ years ago. An average car today puts even a high end 25 year old car to shame in by most metrics, a budget smartphone today is leaps and bounds better than the iPhone of 10 years ago, it's never been cheaper to go abroad etc.

I'd rather be working class today than a upper middle class person 25 years ago.
Original post by Burton Bridge
a TV in 1960s cost a more than a months wage where as nowadays it costs less than a days wage!

Contest it how you like, it's still true

I don't know anyone earning £150 per day?
They should offer £1k, £5k, £10k etc. bonds to all people and make them compulsory to those with static savings over £20k.

Quick Reply

Latest