AIBU to not understand why some people seem to have an absolute hatred for rich people in this country.

[Barbierella]

I cannot understand why people find it acceptable to slate rich people as if they are all the same and responsible for all that is wrong in society.

Surely people can understand that many rich people do pay tax and generally are an asset to society? And without the many successful businesses in the private sector we would not have a public sector?

AIBU to think that people who like to lump all rich people into one tax avoiding bunch of tossers can be the very same people who get outraged at the lumping of all out of work people as benefit scroungers?

Neither are ok in IMO.

spero

What do you think of someone like JK Rowling? Do you think after a certain number of books that she sould recieve no profit? If so, then who should keep the profit?

It's imo of course morally wrong to have sizable assessts just sitting in the bank accumulating profit whilst there are people starving in the world. It's as simple as that to me. I dont care about capitalism and its ins and outs, it will crumble one day mark my words and then wie'll know destruction. Im not ardantly communist, but it appeals more to my moral sensibilities which a lot of people can easily cast aside in this day and age. I think if you have money tied up in the bank accumulating for no reason then you are directly starving someone of essentials.

I think JK Rowling is bloody marvellous.

Because she actually donates huge sums of money - particularly to issues around MS.

And I have never heard her whinge about paying tax.

By all means, if you are a skilled and talented footballer and someone wants to pay you £300K A WEEK, then go for it, good for you.

But I don't have to like it, particularly not when there are research scientists on £20K A YEAR.

Spero

Do you have the figures for tax paid by footballers? Are you sure they get out of paying tax? I would be very interested.

I think the answer is not to start capping people's incomes but to be a damn sight less 'relaxed' about people becoming filthy rich, if the way they are becoming filthy rich is by aggressive and quasi criminal tax avoidance schemes.

No op, I don't have figures.

I have my experience of life in the real world. The rich people I know have money invested in trusts for their children, or they invested in 'film companies' and wrote off those investments for tax purposes etc, etc, etc.

They certainly did everything they could to minimise their tax liabilities, as their accountants would advise and encourage.

So I would be, to put it mildly, a little surprised if premier league footballers don't have easy access to very high quality financial services advice.

spero JK may not whinge about tax, but for all we know she avails herself of accountants and what have you to reduce her tax burden. I'd be surprised if she didn't.

We also have no idea how much more quiet rich people give to chairty, do we?

But that's not the point. You say you feel drawn to a cap on earnings, and so I wondered where you would set it for someone like JK? At which point should she stop receiving the profit from her sales? And who should recieve it instead?

Spero it looks like they pay tax on their salaries as in PAYE but any extra endorsement earning they can be clever with and avoid tax.

So capping their wages would just lose the country money.

I explicitly said I did not think a cap on earnings was feasible.

The fact that you interpret that to mean I am 'drawn' to such a scheme is I am afraid yet more evidence of the poverty of your understanding.

Or perhaps your lack of skill in making yourself clear and your ideas cohesive?

No. I very clearly set out what I thought. It isn't feasible to cap people's earnings, but it makes me feel sick.

I think that is a pretty coherent view. Sorry you find it hard to grasp.

I do agree with some of what you are saying as I do see lots of examples in RL but the worst examples have been on MN.

DH was made redundant from a job he cycled to, his mum passed away 5 weeks later from cancer. He got a job within a week but it was not local so he had to buy a car, as we had some extra money he bought a sporty soft top,nothing that fancy.or expensive though and not brand new. About a month later it was badly keyed as was the soft top parked 2 cars away, my old banger and the neighbours cars were untouched in between. We are often told 'we're lucky' and 'it's ok for us'. We are a long way from rich!

On MN I have seen OPs asking for advice about money but being slated in a really vile way as their DH earns a lot or their DCs go to private school so they can't possibly have problems.

None of it applies to all rich people or all people without money, the Op has not said that. There can be a real jealousy issue though.

I said cohesive not coherent.

Simply repeating things doesn't make your ideas, so.

I trust your RL doesn't require you to make any cogent arguments with a discernible thread , without getting so rude to anyone who can't follow your wobbly thinking ...

thewordfactory I had previously wondered whether you were JK Rowling!

Anyway there are all sorts of ways in which to structure your income to make it tax efficient. All perfectly legal and permissible. The amount of tax higher earners pay is considerable, even if they operate as limited companies and take dividends, the saving is only a NIC saving (in fact the combined corporation tax and income tax paid is greater). The fact that they can afford to put large amounts of money into tax efficient wrappers such as pensions etc is fair enough since they are options open to all of us. Its just that some can make greater use of the tax efficiencies than others.

If Wayne Rooney is paying over top rate tax on every pound he earns then he is indeed behaving in a very unusual and very tax inefficient way, clearly he won't be given the other methods of protecting his money.

If there was to be a further tax band it would only impact on a very small number of people. The vast majority of the population earn less than £150k.

atticus I wish .

But I do know her a little and she would be hellish embarrassed to be held up as some sort of bastion of Goodness.

The reality is that both WR and JKR continue to earn as they do, while they're continuing to sell their product/skill. There's no morality here, just market forces.

And if we're uncomfortable with how much WR gets paid and think it should be somehow curtailed, then the same must surely apply to JKR.

The idea that JKR is a Good rich person and WR is a Bad rich person seems to me absurdly puerile as no one here knows anything about them...

I totally agree with Thewordfactory, in these instances it is market forces.

Many people pay a lot of money to watch football matches, when our team were in the premiership we paid over £1K for 4 season tickets plus football shirts for £40 each. It's something we enjoyed doing as a family but of course lining footballers pockets. I can't see how it is taking anything away from people who are poor as long as they are paying tax etc. That is something out of our control though.

My friend has bought every version of the Harry Potter books, all the different front covers and collectors versions, why should JKR not receive the benefit of this, she has provided something millions of people want but what makes her better than a footballer, most people can't vouch for her personally.

I repeated myself because you didn't seem to have read it the first time.

I think my position is both coherent and cohesive, as the distinction between those two words seems meaningless in this context - I think my argument is both clear and holds together.

Whether you agree with it or not is of course an entirely different matter.

But just because something exists and is tolerated, doesn't mean I have to like it.

Apart from inherited wealth, the rest are self made.. Come from nothing. I think if they have done that then they deserve it. Yes we can be envious if we aren't doing as well but still they deserve their money.

I think without businesses then no one would have a job and the benefit system wouldn't be propped up either.

I think people find excuses to pick on self made people because they are envious. Why not have a go rather than making excuses? We can't all have the same wealth but you could have a piece of the pie!

I just don't get the whole looking at people with more money and having an issue with it.

I still don't want to be them or have their stuff. I would like more money than I have but I don't want to be super rich. so I can either earn more, or not and except that I am not that talented...just did not try hard enough or was just plain wrong.

I do however love a good nose. the stuff of other people's lives is fascinating. and often inspiring

If people have a talent or have developed a skill in an area that is highly paid good luck to them. People may shout at the TV at WR and his team mates but the vast majority of people couldn't play at that standard no matter how much they practiced. Its the same when people label successful film stars as "thick" etc. and you think "how thick is someone who has managed to find a job where people are prepared to pay them $10m+ because of the revenue they will bring in?" If its that easy to do what they are doing why aren't we all starring in blockbusters?

Spero
You appear to be valuing some contributions to society as more valuable than others on moral grounds. You could argue that someone who brings entertainment to millions of people is providing a socially useful function. Yes, research scientists are poorly paid but should a scientist working weapons research get paid less than the scientists working on cancer research?

thinking beyond this country,

what about if you live in a shanty town in nigeria (for instance)
what about people in your country being billionaires? is it ok to hate them? what about us, with our western 'poor' or 'middle class' lives? is it ok to hate us? or perhaps is it ok to hate the system that produces those inequalities? or is that also just the politics of envy? should they just work harder? get a better job? have better parents?

Yes I absolutely do value some contributions higher than others on a moral scale and I would have no difficulty in judging a scientist who researches more efficient ways to kill people as of less moral worth than a scientist who researches a cure for cancer.

But I am also not an idiot and I appreciate that my moral compass cannot dictate the taxation system of any country.

All I am asking is that we do not allow a culture of tax avoidance to develop and grow - which seemed to be the attitude of the last few governments - and people who are well off make contributions to those who are less well off without being begrudging or sneering.

people who are well off make contributions to those who are less well off without being begrudging or sneering.

as many people do.

"people who are well off make contributions to those who are less well off without being begrudging or sneering."

I am fairly sure many rich people do this already.

On the subject of Premiership Footballer wages, in the USA some years ago they brought in a type of wage cap in the major sports - the team was not allowed to exceed a certain figure in wages say it was $10 million total, they could pay 1 player $9 million, but all the others would have to split the remaining $1 million. I am not sure how well it worked or if it is still in place, but FIFA and UEFA have been looking into similar schemes in order to curb 'excessive' wage bills for Clubs.

When David Beckham signed for Real Madrid on a huge salary package the Club stated that the extra revenue from shirt sales more than justified the cost of his salary.

The extra endorsements sports people gain is what pushes their earnings into the stratospheric category, hence Lewis Hamilton leaving McClaren because he wanted more of the sponsorship endorsements.