To be confused by 'high earners' complaining about taxes?

no one who works full time at any company should not need uc, otherwise its not a suitable business model

because the jobs are not there

I actually read that only 15% of the care home workforce are on UC. Which means 85% manage their expenses? I believe social care funding is restricted by what the government allocates anyway.

So you're against people owning businesses. What about those who are employees and just get paid a lot for the good work they do?

Ah, we have reached peak MN. JuST GeT A HIghEr PaID JOb 🙄

and thats part of the issue in the end society only needs so many companies then whats left for the public etc,

Why don't people on lower wages just get higher paid jobs instead of moaning about those on higher wages?

Businesses are designed to kill competition, its how they grow.

Agreee with you on the tax thing.

No, not needing an interview is a massive red flag. People going for a job like that are desperate. And the workplace has a high turnover of staff because they leave or end up sick (or dead.... people have died in Amazon warehouses).

If everyone could treat their own medical issues, then you would be out of a job. So you actually rely on people needed medical care for you to be employed.

Thanks for clarifying.

When the bar is set that low, I don't really think the differences by state mean that much.

How much tax does Jeff evade in the UK? They make excessive profit and leave the UK employees and UK tax payers to pick up the tab, in addition to killing competition.

I meant that each US state does healthcare differently. And yes I'd rather a European system than the us system.

Yes, but their pay has to be set at a level that allows for non producers to profit.
For example, Joe owns three care homes. He lives off the profit he makes because the cost to him of providing his service is less than he is paid to deliver it. He makes it so by charging high rates for care, and paying the carers NMW.
Because if he paid them more he wouldn't make enough money to spend his days on the golf course.
His carers can't raise their families and pay their rent on NNW, so the tax payer tops their money up for them via benefits.
So not only does the labour of the carers keep Joe in his lifestyle, the tax payer contributes indirectly too. And that's without the tax payers money that goes to Joe to pay for the care of the residents.
But Joe pays 'a lot of tax'. So that's OK.

SWE - needs a stem degree, maths knowledge, coding knowledge. Requires skill and brain power.

As you said the warehouse job doesn't need any interview, no special skills required. Just go and you get the job. People are doing this voluntarily right?

DH works very hard. I have an admin job in a GP's surgery. What do you do? (Since you asked me)

I am not sure what point you are trying to make.

Corporates rule in the US leaving the poor to fall through the cracks. Not sure we are far off that here tbh. But If we brought in private health care it would be end up being a similar system to the US rather than the system our neighbours in France benefit from. Planning, negotiation and intervention are not skills I would associate with our government, whoever is in power.

im sure they never used cheap labour or underhand tatics etc

Okay

on slave labour wages

I assume you mean Software Engineer by SWE? Cushy office job.

Talk to the people who work in the warehouse. The staff who have a high turnover rate because of the shit conditions. There is an Amazon warehouse in my town, and you don't even need an interview to get a job there. That is a such a huge red flag.

You said your DH earns £200k+, and fair play to him. I bet he earned it. What job do YOU do? What is YOUR tax contribution?

Because Amazon outcompeted them by having better service at a lower cost?

Money is an imaginary. You can hack a bank and transfer the imaginary to a different account and zero goods and services move, although it makes the banks v sad.😢

However, goods and services are real. And the value of them is decided by what people will give for them. Willing to hand over better compensation for a surgeon with 20 years’ experience and a stellar reputation instead of a freshly minted junior? Well probably yes. You pay people for the years and years of learning how to deal with whatever comes up.

So no, all skills are not worth the same amount of sheep or money or seashells or whatever.

So the question is, how are the highly skilled and therefore relatively scarce resources like excellent surgery divided between the much larger pool of people who need them?

The metric we currently use is money, but it could be anything. We don’t all have rights to somebody else’s expert labour or knowledge because it isn’t an infinite resource that comes from the sky it’s tied to people - so highest bidder wins.

High earners pay more in taxes, but in return they get to live in a safe, stable, and well-run society that protects their wealth and quality of life. They have more assets to protect and often rely on workforces to run their businesses.

No it's not a unique skill, but its an essential part of the process nonetheless. Its not about the individual person being indispensable. It's the role that's important. Just because many people could operate a machine to make a product, doesn't mean the machine operator role isn't a vital part of the process that generates profit because without the machine operator there'd be no product and no profit.