I'm all for those that earn more shouldering a greater share of the burden with the obvious caveat that whatever tax arrangements are implemented increase, not decrease the total tax take. What I can't abide is that even after they do this, many people still resent the wealthy.
jealousy is a nasty human trait.
if we as a society do actually take the wealth from the top 1% or top 10%, and redistribute it amongst the less well off, many people forget that this would be a one off distribution, because do people really believe the wealthy would work to earn a fortune again, or would they 'up-sticks' and relocate to another country (or even not bother as their wealth may be confiscated again).
I'm all for those that earn more shouldering a greater share of the burden with the obvious caveat that whatever tax arrangements are implemented increase, not decrease the total tax take. What I can't abide is that even after they do this, many people still resent the wealthy.
I don't "resent the wealthy" certainly not those who have worked hard for their wealth and look after the people who helped them earn it (their employees)
My point/s are, as we are in the worst economic crisis since world war 2, and this crisis was brought about by the greedy rich taking huge risks with our taxes,
and as the tax payer is being called on to shoulder most of the burden, and the poorest are not only being hit the hardest, but are being blamed by many for the state of the economy, in a cynical attempt by the government to shift the public's focus away from the guilty and onto the victims,
What we really need, and what any decent government would have done, is a concerted effort to get everyone behind getting our country back on it's feet,
instead of rewarding those who got us into this mess, while punishing their victims,
as sort of 'call to arms' if you like, an encouragement of a sort of 'Dunkirk spirit'
the wealthy of this great nation are perfectly happy to sit back and rake it in while times are good, but the majority of them start to bleat at the idea of taking a drop in their huge wealth when the country needs them to 'step up' and give some back,
All I am asking is that, for the common good, the super rich step up grit their teeth and take a bit of 'pain' for a while, a little temporary hurt for a long term gain,
do i believe what? are you saying my anecdote is not true?
do you want names and places?
It has nothing to do with the name, place or whether it happened or not, it's the universal comment from right wing types that is vacuous, as I tried to make clear by putting it in italics.
Why does anyone talking about the very real inequalities that there are in society all have to be 'jealous of their wealth'?
What a completely glib and ill founded allegation that is. Designed to allow no further debate on the issue because to do so would just result in more childish 'you're just jealous' comments. And some of the biggest users of it are also ones complaining about the quality of left wing types debate!
I'm all for those that earn more shouldering a greater share of the burden with the obvious caveat that whatever tax arrangements are implemented increase, not decrease the total tax take. What I can't abide is that even after they do this, many people still resent the wealthy.
That's a bit of a sweeping statement, how can you possibly know that many people resent the wealthy ?
Why does anyone talking about the very real inequalities that there are in society all have to be 'jealous of their wealth'?
What a completely glib and ill founded allegation that is. Designed to allow no further debate on the issue because to do so would just result in more childish 'you're just jealous' comments. And some of the biggest users of it are also ones complaining about the quality of left wing types debate!
or...........roughly translated, you've lost the argument so resort to tha above type of post.:D
c'mon windy, i thought you were better than that (i do read a lot more on here rather than posting).
ok, then - how much more would you like the top 1% to pay? - at the moment its about 30% as previously mentioned. 40%? 50% higher?
That's a bit of a sweeping statement, how can you possibly know that many people resent the wealthy ?
Lot of it about, sadly, I am still waiting for one of the many posters here who seem to be able to read minds, (because plenty of them tell me what I think, or what I will say about X, Y, Z),
to give me next weeks lotto numbers or at least a good tip on a horse,
or...........roughly translated, you've lost the argument so resort to tha above type of post.:D
c'mon windy, i thought you were better than that (i do read a lot more on here rather than posting).
ok, then - how much more would you like the top 1% to pay? - at the moment its about 30% as previously mentioned. 40%? 50% higher?
Lost what debate? This started when I pointed out the significance of the figures annsyre posted. From that we have moved to wanting to take their money off them to being jealous of their wealth and now to wanting to know how much I would take off of them to try and mitigate my 'loss of an argument'. Maybe it's a bit uncomfortable for right wing supporters to have to face the very real inequalities that exist and writing it off as envy or spite is enough to satisfy any awkward questions...
That's a bit of a sweeping statement, how can you possibly know that many people resent the wealthy ?
My impression, The resentment really emanates from forums like this where many (that word again) posters claim time and again to speak on behalf of everyone - but it's also clear from research into social attitudes on this issue that there's a pervading lack of trust, understanding and tolerance when talking about those at the top of the earnings scale.
ETA.
GMTA. Just as I was saying it, it appears Boris was, too.
Johnson called for the rich to be hailed for their contribution to paying for public services as he said that the top 1% of earners contribute 30% of income tax. "That is an awful lot of schools and roads and hospitals that are being paid for by the super-rich. So why, I asked innocently, are they so despicable in the eyes of all decent British people?
It's not a case of taking more money off the wealthy it's more about taking less money off the poor.
All the cuts that this Government is making are hurting the poor, including hard working people who are striving to do their best....is that right ?
As I have pointed out before - we are taking less off the poor. Not only is something like 90% of taxes paid by the wealthiest 50% but the bottom fifth are actually net beneficiaries of the tax system (they pay less tax than they receive in benefits)
net tax rate of the poorest fifth is -46% of their original income (or -32% of their after-tax income), with the negative number reflecting that they are net beneficiaries. At the other end, the richest fifth have a net tax rate of +33% of their original income (or +50% of their after-tax income).
My impression, The resentment really emanates from forums like this where many (that word again) posters claim time and again to speak on behalf of everyone - but it's also clear from research into social attitudes on this issue that there's a pervading lack of trust, understanding and tolerance when talking about those at the top of the earnings scale.
ETA.
GMTA. Just as I was saying it, it appears Boris was, too.
Interesting you should bring Boris up.
London's Mayor Says We Should "Thank The Super Rich"
If you thought you had seen it all when it comes to sob stories of the “super rich” following the comparison of the criticisms of banker bonuses to the lynching of black people in the south by AIG’s CEO in September, think again. The latest groveling, inane defense of the “super rich” comes from none other than the gatekeeper of the largest oligarch whorehouse on planet earth. The Mayor of London, Mr. Boris Johnson.
Now I warn you, do not read the following Op-Ed on a full stomach. The vapid, nonsensical, Onion-like prose may very well induce fits of nausea and uncontrolled regurgitation. This is quite frankly one of the worst things I have ever read in my life. It echoes like a sort of grandiose ass-kissing ritual one would have encountered in a Middle Age court from an aspiring manservant of the realm, desperately trying to rapidly advance a coupe of notches up the social strata of some decadent feudal kingdom. Simply put, Boris Johnson should be ashamed to show his face in public after writing such disingenuous garbage.
Lost what debate? This started when I pointed out the significance of the figures annsyre posted. From that we have moved to wanting to take their money off them to being jealous of their wealth and now to wanting to know how much I would take off of them to try and mitigate my 'loss of an argument'. Maybe it's a bit uncomfortable for right wing supporters to have to face the very real inequalities that exist and writing it off as envy or spite is enough to satisfy any awkward questions...
but, someone as clever as you knew that inequality grew more under new labour than it did under the tories.;) (this has been pointed out many times in various other threads). a fact that left wingers don't like to be reminded of.
but, someone as clever as you knew that inequality grew more under new labour than it did under the tories.;) (this has been pointed out many times in various other threads). a fact that left wingers don't like to be reminded of.
What has that got to do with anything?
It exists and is getting worse with each passing year, whether it was Labour or Tories is immaterial to what I am pointing out. It is right wing folk on here defending it isn't it?
It exists and is getting worse with each passing year, whether it was Labour or Tories is immaterial to what I am pointing out. It is right wing folk on here defending it isn't it?
Income equality narrowed between 2010-11 and 2011-12, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said, which means this data does not cover the latest changes to benefits.
Since 2007-2008
The largest fall during this period was a 6.8% drop for the richest fifth of households. They still had an average income, before tax and benefits, of £78,000 in 2011-12.
This was 14 times greater than the poorest fifth of households, who had an average income of £5,400. However, this group has seen their average income rise by 6.9% since the economic downturn.
After all taxes and benefits were taken into account, the top fifth of households had an income of £57,300, compared with £15,800 for the poorest fifth - a ratio of four-to-one.
Income equality narrowed between 2010-11 and 2011-12, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said, which means this data does not cover the latest changes to benefits.
Since 2007-2008
The largest fall during this period was a 6.8% drop for the richest fifth of households. They still had an average income, before tax and benefits, of £78,000 in 2011-12.
This was 14 times greater than the poorest fifth of households, who had an average income of £5,400. However, this group has seen their average income rise by 6.9% since the economic downturn.
After all taxes and benefits were taken into account, the top fifth of households had an income of £57,300, compared with £15,800 for the poorest fifth - a ratio of four-to-one.
Rely on all the figures you want but the point is, inequality is rising between the few at the top and the rest of society. Some in the middle might be worse off for a while but they will all be worse off in comparison to the 1% that annsyre was referring to.
Rely on all the figures you want but the point is, inequality is rising between the few at the top and the rest of society. Some in the middle might be worse off for a while but they will all be worse off in comparison to the 1% that annsyre was referring to.
Awkward facts do get in the way of your prejudices don't they.
but, someone as clever as you knew that inequality grew more under new labour than it did under the tories.;) (this has been pointed out many times in various other threads). a fact that left wingers don't like to be reminded of.
And I thank you for the opportunity to remind you that the Tories campaigned, and then voted, to make inequality much worse during that period by trying to stop the National Minimum Wage.
Rely on all the figures you want but the point is, inequality is rising between the few at the top and the rest of society. Some in the middle might be worse off for a while but they will all be worse off in comparison to the 1% that annsyre was referring to.
Yes I will stick to the figures and facts rather than what some random punter with an axe to grind thinks on an internet board.
It exists and is getting worse with each passing year, whether it was Labour or Tories is immaterial to what I am pointing out. It is right wing folk on here defending it isn't it?
well, you mentioned right wingers and inequality, so i just mentioned my point - for balance.
And I thank you for the opportunity to remind you that the Tories campaigned, and then voted, to make inequality much worse during that period by trying to stop the National Minimum Wage.
thank you. i agree that the tories were wrong on this issue.
Lost what debate? This started when I pointed out the significance of the figures annsyre posted. From that we have moved to wanting to take their money off them to being jealous of their wealth and now to wanting to know how much I would take off of them to try and mitigate my 'loss of an argument'. Maybe it's a bit uncomfortable for right wing supporters to have to face the very real inequalities that exist and writing it off as envy or spite is enough to satisfy any awkward questions...
I guess that there are people on this thread who think that it is "normal" to envy what others are earning.
They must be dreadfully puzzled by the 20 million people in the UK who do voluntary work. Why would anybody work for free? Surely they would use that little bit of spare time to take paid work?
Maybe - just maybe - not every person in the Uk is greedy and self obsessed?
My impression, The resentment really emanates from forums like this where many (that word again) posters claim time and again to speak on behalf of everyone - but it's also clear from research into social attitudes on this issue that there's a pervading lack of trust, understanding and tolerance when talking about those at the top of the earnings scale.
ETA.
GMTA. Just as I was saying it, it appears Boris was, too.
Out of curiosity the 'many' you are claiming speak on behalf of everyone , into which group would you put them politically ?
Yes I will stick to the figures and facts rather than what some random punter with an axe to grind thinks on an internet board.
The top 1% income and wealth is not something easily discovered due to off shoring,sister companies/ subsidiaries, charities they have set up and so on, but then you know that anyway. You need to read a bit outside of DS and Conservative home to see what goes on in the world.
Comments
do i believe what? are you saying my anecdote is not true?
do you want names and places?
jealousy is a nasty human trait.
if we as a society do actually take the wealth from the top 1% or top 10%, and redistribute it amongst the less well off, many people forget that this would be a one off distribution, because do people really believe the wealthy would work to earn a fortune again, or would they 'up-sticks' and relocate to another country (or even not bother as their wealth may be confiscated again).
My point/s are, as we are in the worst economic crisis since world war 2, and this crisis was brought about by the greedy rich taking huge risks with our taxes,
and as the tax payer is being called on to shoulder most of the burden, and the poorest are not only being hit the hardest, but are being blamed by many for the state of the economy, in a cynical attempt by the government to shift the public's focus away from the guilty and onto the victims,
What we really need, and what any decent government would have done, is a concerted effort to get everyone behind getting our country back on it's feet,
instead of rewarding those who got us into this mess, while punishing their victims,
as sort of 'call to arms' if you like, an encouragement of a sort of 'Dunkirk spirit'
the wealthy of this great nation are perfectly happy to sit back and rake it in while times are good, but the majority of them start to bleat at the idea of taking a drop in their huge wealth when the country needs them to 'step up' and give some back,
All I am asking is that, for the common good, the super rich step up grit their teeth and take a bit of 'pain' for a while, a little temporary hurt for a long term gain,
It has nothing to do with the name, place or whether it happened or not, it's the universal comment from right wing types that is vacuous, as I tried to make clear by putting it in italics.
What a completely glib and ill founded allegation that is. Designed to allow no further debate on the issue because to do so would just result in more childish 'you're just jealous' comments. And some of the biggest users of it are also ones complaining about the quality of left wing types debate!
That's a bit of a sweeping statement, how can you possibly know that many people resent the wealthy ?
or...........roughly translated, you've lost the argument so resort to tha above type of post.:D
c'mon windy, i thought you were better than that (i do read a lot more on here rather than posting).
ok, then - how much more would you like the top 1% to pay? - at the moment its about 30% as previously mentioned. 40%? 50% higher?
Lot of it about, sadly, I am still waiting for one of the many posters here who seem to be able to read minds, (because plenty of them tell me what I think, or what I will say about X, Y, Z),
to give me next weeks lotto numbers or at least a good tip on a horse,
It's not a case of taking more money off the wealthy it's more about taking less money off the poor.
All the cuts that this Government is making are hurting the poor, including hard working people who are striving to do their best....is that right ?
Lost what debate? This started when I pointed out the significance of the figures annsyre posted. From that we have moved to wanting to take their money off them to being jealous of their wealth and now to wanting to know how much I would take off of them to try and mitigate my 'loss of an argument'. Maybe it's a bit uncomfortable for right wing supporters to have to face the very real inequalities that exist and writing it off as envy or spite is enough to satisfy any awkward questions...
My impression, The resentment really emanates from forums like this where many (that word again) posters claim time and again to speak on behalf of everyone - but it's also clear from research into social attitudes on this issue that there's a pervading lack of trust, understanding and tolerance when talking about those at the top of the earnings scale.
ETA.
GMTA. Just as I was saying it, it appears Boris was, too.
As I have pointed out before - we are taking less off the poor. Not only is something like 90% of taxes paid by the wealthiest 50% but the bottom fifth are actually net beneficiaries of the tax system (they pay less tax than they receive in benefits)
see http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/4813 (Institute of Fiscal Studies Do the poorest really pay the most in tax? )
Interesting you should bring Boris up.
London's Mayor Says We Should "Thank The Super Rich"
If you thought you had seen it all when it comes to sob stories of the “super rich” following the comparison of the criticisms of banker bonuses to the lynching of black people in the south by AIG’s CEO in September, think again. The latest groveling, inane defense of the “super rich” comes from none other than the gatekeeper of the largest oligarch whorehouse on planet earth. The Mayor of London, Mr. Boris Johnson.
Now I warn you, do not read the following Op-Ed on a full stomach. The vapid, nonsensical, Onion-like prose may very well induce fits of nausea and uncontrolled regurgitation. This is quite frankly one of the worst things I have ever read in my life. It echoes like a sort of grandiose ass-kissing ritual one would have encountered in a Middle Age court from an aspiring manservant of the realm, desperately trying to rapidly advance a coupe of notches up the social strata of some decadent feudal kingdom. Simply put, Boris Johnson should be ashamed to show his face in public after writing such disingenuous garbage.
Now for some excerpts from the UK Telegraph:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-11-26/londons-mayor-says-we-should-thank-super-rich
Continues on link.
but, someone as clever as you knew that inequality grew more under new labour than it did under the tories.;) (this has been pointed out many times in various other threads). a fact that left wingers don't like to be reminded of.
What has that got to do with anything?
It exists and is getting worse with each passing year, whether it was Labour or Tories is immaterial to what I am pointing out. It is right wing folk on here defending it isn't it?
Just jumping in to correct you...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23253092
Income equality narrowed between 2010-11 and 2011-12, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said, which means this data does not cover the latest changes to benefits.
Since 2007-2008
The largest fall during this period was a 6.8% drop for the richest fifth of households. They still had an average income, before tax and benefits, of £78,000 in 2011-12.
This was 14 times greater than the poorest fifth of households, who had an average income of £5,400. However, this group has seen their average income rise by 6.9% since the economic downturn.
After all taxes and benefits were taken into account, the top fifth of households had an income of £57,300, compared with £15,800 for the poorest fifth - a ratio of four-to-one.
Rely on all the figures you want but the point is, inequality is rising between the few at the top and the rest of society. Some in the middle might be worse off for a while but they will all be worse off in comparison to the 1% that annsyre was referring to.
Awkward facts do get in the way of your prejudices don't they.
And I thank you for the opportunity to remind you that the Tories campaigned, and then voted, to make inequality much worse during that period by trying to stop the National Minimum Wage.
Yes I will stick to the figures and facts rather than what some random punter with an axe to grind thinks on an internet board.
well, you mentioned right wingers and inequality, so i just mentioned my point - for balance.
thank you. i agree that the tories were wrong on this issue.
I guess that there are people on this thread who think that it is "normal" to envy what others are earning.
They must be dreadfully puzzled by the 20 million people in the UK who do voluntary work. Why would anybody work for free? Surely they would use that little bit of spare time to take paid work?
Maybe - just maybe - not every person in the Uk is greedy and self obsessed?
Out of curiosity the 'many' you are claiming speak on behalf of everyone , into which group would you put them politically ?
Full Fact Factcheck on lowest income inequality for a generation/social mobility/workless households:
http://fullfact.org/factchecks/income_inequality_workless_households_social_mobility-29263
I don't see much disagreement.
The top 1% income and wealth is not something easily discovered due to off shoring,sister companies/ subsidiaries, charities they have set up and so on, but then you know that anyway. You need to read a bit outside of DS and Conservative home to see what goes on in the world.