To not understand why so many people view the wealth of others as public property

[FrogspawnSmoothie]

I've been noticing a lot of posts lately saying things like 'we need to sort out the wealth divide' etc and calling for the wealthy to pay for xyz 'because they can afford to', and I must say I've never quite shared this mentality.

I can see why people start to think this way when we're constantly told things like '99% of the nation's wealth is owned by 1% of the population', making it sound like they're hoarding resources. But the thing is, it's not a tin of biscuits given to the population which is now being hoarded by a few greedy chubsters. It may well have been foreign investment, for instance, which wasn't otherwise going to be invested in a UK business to then benefit the economy through taxes as it does. I go to work and earn my income, and that money is mine - I imagine most people would consider their paycheck to be their own.

I think of it like two farmers. One innovates in his processes and works out how to grow more apples with the same resources. He then reinvests his extra profit into better equipment and buys more land. Eventually, he owns 75% of the apples in the town, despite being only one of many farmers. I'm not convinced he now needs to start giving his apples to the other disgruntled farmers who envy his wealth, especially as he's now paying much more tax.

I'll admit it's a pretty simplistic way of looking at it (I'm no economist) but I'm not convinced that all the people moaning about the rich have given it a particularly nuanced consideration either. I was listening to some prat of a manbunned barista banging on about socialism and 'redistribution of wealth' in Costa today, and gotta admit I just thought to myself 'sounds like you should've worked harder at school, mate.' 🤷‍♀️

@CharlottesComplicatedWeb

Cronyism. Wish someone had given me 248 million to source poor standard PPE which was unusable. I think I could have done that job at that price.

Total cronyism. Cummings too. Nepotism has never been as blatant as it is now.

*14:35Orchidsindoors

"Do you honestly believe that everyone in the UK has access to a good education?"

Absolutely yes. Every single child gets a good education in the UK. What they do with that education is up to them.*

In the UK the state provides free education, which if course is not the case everywhere.(but children can be deregistered and home educated) Schools can vary (I think academies have different criteria for staff than state schools)
I have friends with children with SEN, and with disabilities. The children are intelligent and bright, but not catered for in mainstream schools. One family has paid for private school and their child has thrived , the other has fought tooth and nail for years to get appropriate education for their child. It's not as simple as just turning up at their local primary. What if those parents hadnt had a) the financial means or b) the knowledge and time to pursue finding an appropriate school.
What about children who are carers for parents?
Or those who have neglectful parents who cant/wont ensure they get to school?
Or those who might have missed months of school due to illness, or MH problems?

we do need people to perform the lower paid service jobs

We do need people to do those jobs, but there is no need for those who do them to be paid so little. That is a choice based on many factors, including because those with the power to change that choose to keep it that way.

No one is entirely independent, and the wealthy arguable less so. No one becomes a millionaire through their own blood, sweat, and tears alone - even in the creative industries, there is a whole supply chain of other people who are a big part of making that kind of wealth possible and it can be argued that there is plenty of pie for them to have a bigger part of it.

No system will ever be perfect, so people will come up with possible better solutions. Part of that currently is dealing with money being required to survive, but the control of the flow of it is in the hands of very few compared to who is doing the work that everyone needs

I keep thinking they've sunk as low as anyone could go, then there's another revelation. And they get away with it and so it goes on.

With I could be around to see the future historical take on this government.

But you can want to help those who are struggling without thinking that earned wealth is public property. There is a state of accommodation in which those with high salaries are happy to see some of their money going to others. But castigating them is going to sour this spirit of magnanimity. I think it's right to feel grateful to those who are bright, determined and keen to make money - and are ok about paying taxes and voluntarily supporting community projects. I definitely feel grateful to them. If I was a member of that poor family in Jane Austen's Emma who received parish aid and soup from Emma, I would be minded to accept graciously in view of the attitude with which it was given.

Absolutely yes. Every single child gets a good education in the UK. What they do with that education is up to them.

🤦🏼‍♀️ If this is what people actually think it's pointless to even attempt debate.

[quote Bananabread8]@Leaannb what do you mean by “really bad mistakes?” You can’t expect someone on a lower salary than to pay the same amount of tax as someone who may be in a top professional role. You cannot pay what you physically don’t have.

This is a really shitty view [/quote]
I thought you wanted equality? Or do just want equality for the poor. Set tax base across the board that's equal. That's equality. If I have to pay 35 percent income tax which would.cost me 63,000 a year just me not my husband. You think it would be unfair for a person making 18,000 pay 35 percent equaling 6500? They are still paying less than me. So poor people should not pay tax at all and all of my money and wealth should go to them....

What I mean by really bad mistakes is having children you clearly cannot afford. If you have to live your life and your children have to live their life stuck depending on handouts from the govermemmemt. Benefits should not be forever. It should only be for a short period of time with a max of 5 years. You have government help for housing and food? You have 5 years to do something about it and then you are cut off. It should not be a generational thing.

www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/03/the-problem-with-philanthropy/520989/

I thought you wanted equality? Or do just want equality for the poor. Set tax base across the board that's equal. That's equality.

This is why this thread is so stupid. People actually think equality means ‘everyone treated EXACTLY the same’ not ‘fairness’. You can’t treat everyone exactly the same because....wait for it.....not everyone is born in exactly the same circumstances. It’s so obvious, yet you pretend it isn’t.

You have government help for housing and food? You have 5 years to do something about it and then you are cut off. It should not be a generational thing.

And what happens if you can’t sort it after five years? Do we put those people to death? A quick lethal injection rather than money?

@Baaaahhhhh

Not all wealth provides for future generations though. There are plenty of examples of huge wealth being squandered and lost. Historically my DM's family had a lot of land and wealth, they also had a lot of children and second and third marriages, in two generations that wealth has been so diluted as to not exist any more.

This is very true. It only takes one gambler or very extravagant person or as Baaaahhh says, several divorces and several generations of careful management will be wiped out. The Marquis of Bristol and Lord Hesketh are examples of this.

@Pumperthepumper

You have government help for housing and food? You have 5 years to do something about it and then you are cut off. It should not be a generational thing.

And what happens if you can’t sort it after five years? Do we put those people to death? A quick lethal injection rather than money?

Hysterical, much?

"Good" education is irrelevant. I'm an immigrant. The secondary education I received was more advanced than of my British peers. But as I said... irrelevant. My certificates that I can do basic English and Maths have more value.

Hysterical, much?

No answer then? Isn’t that what you accused ‘the lefties’ of doing?

What do we do with those people after five years? How much do you earn?

Absolutely yes. Every single child gets a good education in the UK. What they do with that education is up to them

To clarify in case we're talking at cross purposes - you're definitely saying that every single child in the UK gets a good education? Not that they're legally entitled to one but that every child actually receives one?

This feels like a misunderstanding as the alternative is just a tad scary...

Your obsession with Philip Green aside (since he’s not the elected representative of the so-called rich), the richest pay the most tax, fact

Why should I put Phillip Green aside since he's the poster boy for rich people who have no social conscience? He and his ilk, the Barclay brothers, Dyson, Rees-Mogg all come into that category.

The rich, which I would say those earning over £150k (under that you could say you're well off not rich) pay 28% of income tax revenues. Not the most income tax. They individually pay more income tax, obviously, than someone on £30k but not necessarily a greater percentage of their income if they're using extreme tax avoidance schemes.

You obviously struggle with reading comprehension because my post was not about people with wealth, it's about a PP having a pop at people with wealth who spend it on themselves and their children but still have enough of a social conscience to recognise their tax responsibilities (champagne socialists). So your post makes zero sense as I didn't say all wealthy people came into that category.

It was further illustrating how much worse those people are who don't believe in society. They benefit from everything it has to offer but don't want to meet their obligations.

I think many people are disgusted by the fact there is so much poverty in the world contrasted with people who have billions they will never spend.

Here is a visual representation of how much money is a million, a billion etc:

I just think if you could single handedly change the world with the money you have and don’t, you’re not a good person. And I’m not talking about donating a few million to a few good causes - that’s the equivalent of a person on a regular wage donating a fiver to charity once a year.

Take Mike Bloomberg for example. They save the figure to end homelessness in America is $20 billion. He could do that and still have $20 billion left over.

Jeff Bezos makes $215 million a day. A day. Think of all the good you could do with that.

It’s not so much that I believe that I personally have a ‘right’ to other people’s money. It’s just that there are people who have more money than they, their children, their grandchildren, their great grandchildren etc - could spend in many lifetimes. And I think sitting on that is morally wrong. That’s my personal belief.

@LonginesPrime I would say that's an example right there, whatever education that poster received was clearly lacking!

Haven’t got passed the first page tbh. OP has a real problem with people with coloured dyed hair! Don’t worry OP there is some company out there making blue/green hair dye to sell to socialist types and make lots of money out of. Hopefully they treat their employees like shit, cream off all the profits and avoid tax.

sst2234 It isn't the individual child's fault if their parents don' t read with them, or if their parents have low levels of literacy. Happy the students whose parents hire a tutor to go over 'My Last Duchess' slowly and thoughtfully, responding to their questions with customised care. Just the whole shaping of the post-2014 exams ( you can't take the texts into the English lit exam) will favour those from a family who visit museums and art galleries and attend play performances. But this is just one small example of why it is good to consider reasons why people don't do well at school and then don't go to uni and into well-paid careers. But no blame from me here, as we aren't socially connected as we were 200 years ago, and the well-off don't live in communities in which it's expected that they should visit and help those less economically fortunate. Politics presents arguments divisively and taints the natural impulses to share and be generous, impulses which we see operate when natural disasters strike.
it is a shame that political Argent's stir up trouble and resentment because many people like to be generous, and that should be appreciated.

Arguments - not agents ( auto correct again)

@Pumperthepumper

Hysterical, much?

No answer then? Isn’t that what you accused ‘the lefties’ of doing?

What do we do with those people after five years? How much do you earn?

I personally earn over 300,000 for earned income and then another 150,000 as passive income. My husband makes very similar ...What's your point.....They get off and learn to take care of themselves. I work every day. Every single day. Why should I have to share (give my wealth) to.someone who absolutely refuses to help themselves? Why should I keep.working and giving my wealth away for people who refuse to work to support your family. In other words don't have kids while you are working a coffee shop and can't afford to.eat and do nothing but bitch about how I should "share" my wealth to make your life or the life of your kids better. If you can't afford one child who in the hel l are you having a second? If you can't afford childcare at are you having kids? Why are you having multiple kids? Why are you deliberately having children in poverty with very little means of getting them out of there

Leaannb That’s a pretty pathetic wage, why aren’t you a millionaire? You must be extremely lazy, work harder.

What’s your solution to the five year end of government money? Remember, this is your theory - do we leave them to starve to death or do we take pity on them and give them and their children a lethal injection? Is the point to make them suffer as much as possible, so slowly starving to death?

Why do you want to punish the children of people who make poor decisions? If you do decide to work harder and make a million (not sure why you haven’t already, probably
laziness) and your husband gambles it all away, how would you like us to treat your children? Fuck looking after them, that’s your problem.

DH & I are comfortable and recognise 100% how much our parents helped us. I find attitudes like @Leaannb abhorrent & very divisive.

I'm all for people working hard and making a success out of their life but that often isn't what is truly happening.

a) People should be taxed fairly. A billionaire shouldn't be paying 10% tax when a nurse pays 30% of their income.

b) Too many people get life handed to them on a silver plate, while others have no chances at all.

Economic systems (like QE and inherited property) have seen a vast divergence in equality without any hard graft being done.