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.' 🤷‍♀️

‘Hang on. I thought the usual leftie answer to public sector pay rises and benefit payments was that the money is spent in the economy and therefore benefits local people etc. ‘

Maybe you’d find it easier to address people’s arguments rather than disagree with imaginary left wing posters.

Some public sector workers are overpaid.

Benefit rises are largely swallowed up by rent rather than contributing to the local economy.

@FrogspawnSmoothie

You can’t get disability benefit just for having depression and being on SSRIs. You wouldn’t get a GP’s fit note for years on end for it either.

Perhaps he just gets standard benefits then. To be fair, I had assumed he was getting some kind of disability benefit as he claims to have been signed off work by the doctor.

Surely your mate who you’ve known for twenty years would have told you the ins and outs of her brother’s medical history though? Otherwise why would you pretend to know all about him to the extent you’re happy to continually talk about him as a benefit scrounger and a lazy bastard?

He can’t be signed off work by a doctor if he doesn’t have a job.

I think just because it’s bullshit? You’ve been friends with your mate for 20 years yet slag off their brother on an Internet forum to prove a badly made point about benefit scroungers and the feckless poor?

It just seems to fit your narrative very, very neatly, yet at the same time proves once again that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

Well, I can't ultimately prove it to you.

What I do know is that I've encountered a fair few people who could work but choose not to. Including the temp who didn't want to work as he'd then have to pay for his own HGV training, and the people working for my mate who can't do more hours as they'd lose their benefits (which as I said is also partly a fault in the system).

I think the very wealthy need to realise sometimes that without the people they’re so vehemently against ‘bankrolling’, they’d never get wealthy in the first place. You cannot have a capitalist society without poverty. People at the bottom are either intrinsic to, or a by product of the system.

People also do not live and grow in a vacuum. The wealthy do not get wealth simply upon their own merit, any more than the poor can be blamed 100% for being poor.

This is why, in my opinion, the wealthier you are higher your moral obligation is to protect those worse off than you.

I don’t understand how under universal credit anyone can lose benefits by working more hours. It’s worked out based only on the current month’s income.

Anyone can do what I did. I don’t have a degree, didn’t get any financial help to start, I had €100 to invest in my business and I used it to start my website.

Perhaps anyone could (assumong they have that spare €100, some people don't), but the point you're missing is that not everyone can. If everyone had the same abilities, opportunites, drive and ambition not everyone would make it into the 1%, because that's impossible. And we'd be screwed as a society because we'd have no cleaners, bus drivers, shop workers etc.

@FrogspawnSmoothie

I think just because it’s bullshit? You’ve been friends with your mate for 20 years yet slag off their brother on an Internet forum to prove a badly made point about benefit scroungers and the feckless poor?

It just seems to fit your narrative very, very neatly, yet at the same time proves once again that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about.

Well, I can't ultimately prove it to you.

What I do know is that I've encountered a fair few people who could work but choose not to. Including the temp who didn't want to work as he'd then have to pay for his own HGV training, and the people working for my mate who can't do more hours as they'd lose their benefits (which as I said is also partly a fault in the system).

Of course you have. Having read this thread though, you now know that the cost issue comes from hoarding wealth rather than benefit fraud. Again, how lucky are you to have this free education? You could use this thread next time you have a conversation with your mate about her brother and the ins and outs of his medical and/or benefit history.

Surely your mate who you’ve known for twenty years would have told you the ins and outs of her brother’s medical history though? Otherwise why would you pretend to know all about him to the extent you’re happy to continually talk about him as a benefit scrounger and a lazy bastard?

What I know is that he lives at home and uses his benefit money to buy weed. His mum tried to make him get a job by turning off the internet so he couldn't play games all day and he then claimed he was depressed and went on SSRIs - possibly so she wouldn't kick him out due to pity. There's no reason he couldn't work in a warehouse like his brother does - he's actually turned down this opportunity.

I can't be arsed to engage with you any more, Pumper.

Your only contributions are ad hominem insults and the suggestion that we indefinitely support those who are able to work but choose not to.

@FrogspawnSmoothie

I can't be arsed to engage with you any more, Pumper.

Your only contributions are ad hominem insults and the suggestion that we indefinitely support those who are able to work but choose not to.

Sure, it’s really me who doesn’t understand the topic. Not you with your mate’s brother and your embarrassing understanding of economics or wealth distribution or benefits or disability or education or tax. Or society. You can’t even tell me how many people ‘are able to work but choose not to’ because you don’t know, and because you’re so ignorant of the world around you, you don’t care.

suggestion that we indefinitely support those who are able to work but choose not to

But you have to ask yourself, why would people chose this life?

@Pumperthepumper may I ask why you keep referring to the OP as 'he'?

Appreciate I might have missed something (I have ADHD too and often do) or that you might know OP from elsewhere (although you're clearly not best buds...).

[quote LonginesPrime]@Pumperthepumper may I ask why you keep referring to the OP as 'he'?

Appreciate I might have missed something (I have ADHD too and often do) or that you might know OP from elsewhere (although you're clearly not best buds...).[/quote]
Just a hunch.

Just a hunch

So you made an unfounded assumption (which might or might not be correct) based on the OP's career choice and the fact they have a girlfriend?

Just seems a bit rich for you to accuse others of being ignorant about the world around them while making ignorant assumptions yourself.

It doesn't even matter what the OP's sex actually is - the fact you've assumed they must be male based on stereotypes offends me as both a woman and a lesbian.

@Pumperthepumper may I ask why you keep referring to the OP as 'he'?

Because a woman couldn't possibly operate a crane or drive a truck. 🤷‍♀️

You can’t even tell me how many people ‘are able to work but choose not to’ because you don’t know, and because you’re so ignorant of the world around you, you don’t care.

My apologies, I'll just go and do a quick census. I'll ensure to design it so that nobody lies about whether they're able to work so we get an infallible number.

@LonginesPrime

Just a hunch

So you made an unfounded assumption (which might or might not be correct) based on the OP's career choice and the fact they have a girlfriend?

Just seems a bit rich for you to accuse others of being ignorant about the world around them while making ignorant assumptions yourself.

It doesn't even matter what the OP's sex actually is - the fact you've assumed they must be male based on stereotypes offends me as both a woman and a lesbian.

More on tone. And the OP didn’t mention it until you brought it up - a convent deflection for his unanswered questions and lack of argument.

This seems a strange angle to pick too - you’re ignoring the ignorance the OP has shown in his benefit/disability/poverty bashing but are telling me off for assuming he’s male?

You also seem to be assuming that I’m female and straight. You’re also assuming that I care what sex the OP is. I don’t. I care that he’s happy to spout bullshit about wealth distribution and what benefits his mate’s brother gets as if that’s some gotcha moment for his ignorance.

@FrogspawnSmoothie

You can’t even tell me how many people ‘are able to work but choose not to’ because you don’t know, and because you’re so ignorant of the world around you, you don’t care.

My apologies, I'll just go and do a quick census. I'll ensure to design it so that nobody lies about whether they're able to work so we get an infallible number.

Just a rough ballpark will do. You can compare how much money is taken from the government by benefit scroungers buy how much is hoarded by billionaires, if you like.

If you can.

£35 billion in tax avoidances in 2019.

"I don't think either total capitalism or total socialism are models that work. I think there needs to be some kind of welfare state and we need to reform it. I do think the likes of amazon and Starbucks need to pay their full taxes and loopholes need to be closed. I do think the super rich have a moral obligation to be more altruistic. I do think something needs to be done about landed gentry owners who come from old money and have more than necessary. I don't know what exactly. I don't have all the answers."

^This. I don't begrudge anyone wealthy their cash, or whatever they want to do with it, as long as they earned it fairly. Companies dodging millions in taxes isn't on. Money from arms and munitions, dodgy oil empires (running the oceans with spills), etc, are surely at least as bad as drug dealers, extortion rackets etc.

I also think people should be paid fairly for their time, and I think a lot of people, if not most, on minimum wage, work just as hard if not much harder, than people on much big salaries. It's often just different types of work, or work that involves skills or qualifications, some people just can't achieve because poverty is bloody hard, and can hold people back for many reasons. People like carers who couldn't afford full time care, so can't enter further or higher education, in the way someone whose ill parent was wealthy and could hire a private nurse, cleaner, and cook, nanny for younger siblings or an au pair etc could. People on minimum wage, and these days sometimes only 80% of that, are really struggling atm. Especially mothers let down by fathers, financially (not always easy to predict).

"The people at the top are not as skilled as they would have you believe. Many of their jobs could be done by anyone with average intelligence. Academics etc may be different but they're not highly paid."

^This too. It still baffles me, for example, that neurosurgeons etc in the UK, earn less than a lot of footballers.

I just thought about a guy I know. Said to be quite wealthy, had seemingly intellegent, well mannered/adjudted, "normal" parents, who gave him every opportunity. I also heard (probably not true, but it made me think), that the guy's adopted. I made me think about how the chances we get (or don't) in life, could shape us.

*Excuse typos, been a long day, am half asleep.

Premiership money just comes under the banner of obscene - but football is a sport where you don’t need to be well connected to progress to the top - and it does reward pure talent. So while the amount paid to the top players is ludicrous it feels a lot fairer than many other industries!

This seems a strange angle to pick too - you’re ignoring the ignorance the OP has shown in his benefit/disability/poverty bashing but are telling me off for assuming he’s male?

I'm not sure what led you conclude that I'm ignoring the OP's ignorance - have you actually RTFT?

You also seem to be assuming that I’m female and straight

Are you sure you're not assuming that I'm assuming that? I suggested you were hypocritical in accusing someone else of being ignorant. I'm not sure whether you see these as stereotypically female traits or if you've got something else in mind.

Yeah, footballers are massively overpaid but there's no question that the guys at the top are prodigiously talented.