Do you believe that rich people should exist?

[Bumpitybumper]

Having read lots of threads on here, I am starting to wonder about the proportion of people that believe that rich people shouldn't exist at all and that policies should be enacted to ensure a more or less even distribution of wealth.

So out of interest and just to satisfy my curiosity please vote:
YABU - there shouldn't be rich people in this country and that wealth should be distributed evenly to the extent that people aren't significantly richer than others.
YANBU - rich people are a necessary (and potentially even desirable) part of society

They are just leveraging other peoples hard work though. So this figure is meaningless.

I think the overarching goal should be to keep money moving around the economy.
I think people having more money that they can spend in a lifetime is not desirable, and especially not when governments are cutting basic services for its citizens and full time workers are struggling to afford rent, food and heat.

It’s not a bad thing that the rich pay more tax, you can’t take it from people who don’t have it in the first place.
I’m not against people having more, but I’m terrified of us getting to a point where there are very few jobs left because of technology, and all the jobs left are in companies all owned by the same person/people, so there is no incentive for workers rights or paying decent wages.

The muliti -billionaires, with wealth equivalent to nations? The ones that hoard resources, subvert democracy, monopolise communications? No I don’t think they should exist. I’m a fan of liberal democracy and not so keen on the consequences for all us if this crumbles.

Equally I think the disparity between the poorest and the wealthiest is shameful and degrading. Its a nasty trick to make poor people think that other poor people are responsible for their poverty.

I also have no idea why anyone lumps in people on tens or low hundreds of thousands in with the billionaires. I’m one of them and I’ll happily pay more tax for better public services. I (and they) aren’t the ones eroding the wages of poor people or responsible for exploitative practices. The narrative has got really polarised and poisonous. I’m with you OP because the “eat the not- all -that -rich” threads constantly pop up on Mumsnet. It’s really sour and doesn’t address the big structural issues of inequality or poverty.

Not particularly no.

And before you reply, not every job is the same. It depends on the skill.

And poorer people don't work hard?

More than likely not as hard as the ones that have made a tonne of money.

We live in a world with inhumane levels of poverty alongside obscene levels of wealth. But you believe this is inevitable. The rich are our saviours.

If you have a mortgage or are dependant on a salary or state services you are not secure unless our society is secure.

There was no war between 1945 and 1991 involving USSR. There still were mass oppressions and executions and life for 99.5% of population there was substantially worse than in western capitalist countries. Sorry, I'd really recommend you reading a bit of history books.

If you aren't bothered about material wealth then leave it to the ones who are, you shouldn't be worried about being poor and others being rich.

It sounds like you are really bothered about other being richer than you

There are always going to be people at the bottom of the scale though, and those people will always get called poor. But "poor" is nothing like it used to be. In the past, if you were poor, you'd starve to death on the streets. Now we have help, we have benefits and food banks, so the vast majority of people have a roof over their heads, food, phones, consoles, TVs etc.

Poverty, on the whole, is not really poverty in this country.

Of course they should - they're just people.
And trying to level out wealth across a population is Communism..... and we've all seen how "well" that turned out!
The politics of envy is nasty. I'm not rich at all, but I'm very happy for anyone who is - good luck to them.

I think as well that society is different these days; and that people that are wealthy often haven't earned their own money. It used to be the case even 30 years ago that (aside from aristos) if you had money, it was because you had worked for it. That's not the case any more. Young people that own property do so because they've had significant parental help. If you have a largish flat in the London area, it's likely to be a Council property. Middle aged/older people that have money tend to have inherited it. And of course times have changed and now this generation is poorer than their parents. I feel like all of this means that the rich aren't respected any more - the perception is they got lucky - they were born to wealthy parents, or played the game well. Hard working people generally these days are poor. So I feel that the fact that wealth is a game of chance or an accident of birth these days contributes to the lack of respect for the rich.

Stalin tried getting rid of the rich. Not a good idea. Being practical, wealth makes the economy go around and provides employment. Wealthy people also pay more tax, except for those individuals and companies that rip the rest of us off. The gap between very wealthy and poor should be less, and I would like to think we have a level playing field. Of course, we don't. Private education gives privilege that is not earned and seldom deserved, as in the previous government.

It's not that rich people should not exist. Inevitably they will. The problem in the UK is the gap between rich and poor. In the 70s 80s a well-paid chief executive etc might earn 7x the average salary. Now he (mostly he) is paid a disproportionately greater sum. Countries that have a good social balance, such as the Nordic countries, have differentials more in the 7x range than the UK's.
Most people are happy for rich people to exist but object to a society where people at the top are disproportionately rich compared to people at the bottom - esp when there is little equality of opportunity.

And the present one. Apart from a couple of MPs most of the Labour benches are full of people who went to private schools or whose parents could afford to live in the catchment of a 'good' comprehensive. Some went to grammar school (I don't object to that, but getting in one is no longer even a sort of level playing field).
Agree about the rip-off merchants. And no-one seems to understand the wreckage to the economy (and society) caused by high (profiteering) energy prices.

The problem is that it's exactly these ones with tens or low hundreds of thousands who are usual targets for tax policies and who are going to be decimated by Labour now. No government can tax Elon Mask.

Look at Charlie Mullins and his biography - very telling example. I'd also suggest googling KKR who bought his business, it's US private equity firm means money leaving UK. Only one of very many examples.

So yes, we need equality, what a shame those entrepreneurs don't buy into idea.

They are not just leveraging other people's hard work. If it was that easy then everyone with a business that has employees would make tonnes of money, except we know most businesses fail and when they do this often has a catastrophic impact on the business owner. This is much much worse than an employee losing their job.

So we know that to be successful in business you actually have to have a good concept that fits with the market and be someone that is willing to risk a lot to make the business work. Many owners end up devoting their whole lives to the business, especially in the early days. The level of commitment needed often far exceeds what could be reasonably expected from a paid employee. Just listen to the interviews with Elon Musk about how he slept in the factory to see how commited he felt he needed to be and how close he came to losing it all. The odds are against these entrepreneurs but they persevere because they know that if they do succeed then the reward will be worth it. These are literally the people will need in our economy, taking risks, innovating and driving economic growth.

For you to then denigrate their achievements and suggest it is all from leveraging other people's hard work is disgusting. They have created employment for people which is something the country desperately needs and should be celebrated not shamed.

Doctors, nurses and other HCPs have to pass UK standards before they can work here.
Also, working time directive. Doctors and other professionals have to sign a waiver in order to work the hours to deliver care

This

Communism always fails; you end up with dictatorial fat-cat govt whichever method of governing is in that country.
Try living in Russia, China, or other such country

Disagree. So many NHS staff are very anti private healthcare. It’s not about being rich for them. It’s about being paid fairly for the work they do though and not constantly used as a political football.

Doesn't matter what anyone thinks. It's a moot point. If all the wealth in the world was redistributed so that everyone had exactly the same, within days some people would have nothing, and some people would have many times more than what they started with.

'Do you genuinely believe it's possible to provide the best of healthcare and education to all? No country in the world has ever achieved even close to this.'

The Scandi countries seem to be giving it a god shot... don't they?

It's such a weird question OP , are you one of these 'politics of envy' people?? It would be good, as one of the weathiest nations on earth, we could provide for our population's basic needs well - and that the gap between the richest and poorest wasn't so big. I say that as someone who grew up at the lowest end of the income scale and am now at the highest.

I think the world could certainly do without billionnaires though 'rich' is very subjective

NHS staff aren't some homogeneous mass. Some are opposed to private healthcare, some aren't. Some don't care about money but many do. I have loads of friends who work for the NHS and they are as varied as any population. I know a good minority that do private work. They all do it for the money.

Income wise this would be around £65K and weather wise this would be around £1.5 million.

I don't the weather generally helps much with capital wealth, though perhaps extreme forms of weather may do.

For example, Norway is one of the coldest and inhospitable places on the planet. Yet, as a nation it has the only sovereign wealth fund in Europe and a high standard of living per capita. The Gulf States, which experience extreme heat as opposed to extreme cold, also have huge sovereign wealth funds.

In Britain, we are kept at a reasonable cool temperate climate, thanks largely to the Gulf Stream which prevents us from freezing over in winter. If, due to the North Atlantic Oscillation, the Gulf Stream were to shift it might drop the average temperatures in the UK and we might make more money as a nation for a few months each year.

However, because we have a climate that tends lead to less periods of extreme variability in our weather, it tends to rain more. We are much more liquid than other nations when it comes to capital finance, so thanks largely due to the rain that is likely to fall between now and the 30 October, the Chancellor's plans to redistribute wealth is likely to come to fruition. There is unlikely to be any watering down on proposals to stamp on tax avoidance.

This x 💯

I said many not all.