Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think rich people steal money all the time and that’s often why they’re rich?

647 replies

MyAmusedOpalCrab · 05/08/2025 16:48

We hear so much about “hard work” and “smart investments” but let’s be honest, so many rich people didn’t get wealthy by being ethical. From dodgy business practices to exploiting workers, tax dodging, insider deals and straight-up corruption, wealth often comes at someone else’s expense.

Governments bail out billionaires while ordinary people struggle to afford rent. CEOs cut wages and benefits while pocketing massive bonuses. Huge corporations find loopholes to avoid taxes while the rest of us get squeezed.

Obviously not every rich person is a thief but AIBU to think that a lot of them are? That the system is rigged in their favour and they keep getting richer by bending or outright breaking the rules?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
11
Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:15

ShinyAppleDreamingOfTheSea · 07/08/2025 17:10

I think your title is a bit goady, but in general I agree with the gist of what you are saying. Once you have real money it’s easier to keep it and to have accountants find all the loopholes to avoid paying tax etc . I think it’s shocking that there are people like the first reply on here who are more upset by poorer people cheating on their benefits than hugely wealthy people who are able to do pretty much the same thing but to the tune of so much more money, they they don’t really need.

It's depressing that so many people have that view but it really isn't surprising I don't think. It's the reason Reform are doing so well. People just love to punch down. It's human nature I think to get angry about the small stuff and ignore the actual problem.

cardibach · 07/08/2025 17:20

FlyMeSomewhere · 07/08/2025 16:53

Jesus fucking Christ, are you honestly sitting there stating that the disability system should be defrauded by fit, healthy, mobile people just so they have extra money for luxuries?? Thats illegal fraud and a great big insult to all the honest workers that don't take the piss!

Anybody on here questioning the abuse of system only needs to look at your comment to see the issue! Your mentality is what the government are seeing and why they want reforms. People that don't screw the system often don't have money left for luxuries either.

Yes that’s exactly what I said.
No point in this discussion is there?

Sally20099 · 07/08/2025 17:20

Grammarnut · 07/08/2025 14:14

I suspect the top 1% of the UK earn a lot more than 160k. But I was thinking of the global 1% who are exemplified more by the super rich of the US, who make money out of every transaction that average US citizens carry out.
And someone on 160k will use more of the services available in the UK than the people on 30k. I.e. the police, armed forces etc are protecting their property; they are likely to use the road network to a greater extent, and also the (subsidised) trains.

People who earn less devour less of the infrastructure of a country than those who are well-paid because they are not about doing things, not buying in large amounts (financial protection provided by the government being used). Most legislation and most state protection is geared to the advantage of the well-off rather than the badly-off. So the woman on 30k is not getting as much for her tax as the woman on 160k, even though the woman on 160k is paying more out in tax.
NB We are the 1% - anyone living in the developed world, including the woman on 30k. The 1% of the 1% (us) are the super rich.

My source was OBR for £160k = top 1% of uk earners so I assume that comes straight from HMRC. As for your proposition that these people consume more of the state resources I can barely believe my eyes. Top 1% would “consume” considerably less. Private medical care, private dentist, private schooling, non council leisure facilities etc and zero benefits and private pensions. They use hardly any state resources compared to a lower income family who will utilise nhs, state schools, nhs dentist, council sports facilities, council swimming pools, universal credit, maybe disability benefit, free prescriptions, child benefit.

cardibach · 07/08/2025 17:22

Sally20099 · 07/08/2025 17:20

My source was OBR for £160k = top 1% of uk earners so I assume that comes straight from HMRC. As for your proposition that these people consume more of the state resources I can barely believe my eyes. Top 1% would “consume” considerably less. Private medical care, private dentist, private schooling, non council leisure facilities etc and zero benefits and private pensions. They use hardly any state resources compared to a lower income family who will utilise nhs, state schools, nhs dentist, council sports facilities, council swimming pools, universal credit, maybe disability benefit, free prescriptions, child benefit.

Like I said. Earners. We aren’t talking about people who earn big salaries. We are talking the top 1% of wealth.
Wealth hoarding makes us all poorer.

TheLudditesWereRight · 07/08/2025 17:38

Swirlythingy2025 · 07/08/2025 16:35

Why Billionaires Are Politically and Structurally Indispensable

The raison d’être of billionaire indispensability lies in the fusion of concentrated wealth with concentrated power—a fundamental feature of modern capitalist states rather than an accidental anomaly. This fusion serves multiple interconnected purposes:

Preservation of the Status Quo:
Billionaires finance political campaigns, lobby governments, and influence regulatory frameworks to safeguard policies that protect their wealth and market dominance. Their financial muscle ensures political elites remain beholden to their interests, preserving a system designed to perpetuate their privilege.

Economic Stability and Market Confidence:
Financial markets equate billionaire success with systemic health. The collapse of a billionaire empire—often a proxy for a large corporation or entire sector—can precipitate panic, capital flight, and recessions. Governments prioritize bailouts to prevent cascading failures that threaten employment, pensions, and national economic metrics.

Control of Critical Infrastructure and Innovation:
Billionaires often own or control pivotal sectors—energy, technology, finance—that underpin everyday life and national security. Their investment decisions dictate technological progress, supply chains, and global competitiveness. This concentration centralizes risk but also concentrates decision-making power deemed too critical to decentralize.

Legitimation of Inequality:
Their existence provides a narrative that justifies vast wealth disparities as rewards for “innovation,” “risk-taking,” or “merit.” This ideology discourages redistribution and critical examination of systemic flaws, maintaining social order through aspirational myths.

In essence, billionaires are indispensable not because economies must rely on their wealth but because the political economy is structured such that their survival is conflated with national economic survival, and their power sustains the hierarchical order underpinning contemporary capitalism. It is a deliberate arrangement—not an inevitability.

Fuck that pile of rancid old chatgpt bollocks

OriginalUsername2 · 07/08/2025 17:42

This is AI pasted below but I think in this case it helps because these are facts, not my opinion. Everyone on here needs to understand this, then the conversation can happen properly!

Ultra High Net Worth Individuals (UHNWIs):

  • Own multiple properties, land, or corporations.
  • Make money from capital — not wages.
  • Often live off investments, rents, inheritance, or tax havens.
  • Have access to lobbyists, private banking, and offshore accounts.

Example: The top 1% in the UK starts at around £170k a year…
But the top 0.01% have tens or hundreds of millions in assets — they shape policy, own media, buy up housing, and rarely pay full taxes.

So when we say “the rich”:

We mean owners of capital, not high earners.
It’s about wealth, not income.

Swirlythingy2025 · 07/08/2025 17:45

TheLudditesWereRight · 07/08/2025 17:38

Fuck that pile of rancid old chatgpt bollocks

its an old essay for uni finance / history course, try reading it you may learn something

TheLudditesWereRight · 07/08/2025 17:46

Chinny reckon

Swirlythingy2025 · 07/08/2025 17:48

I created it because I'm a fan of the series "Billions," featuring Damian Lewis.

dh280125 · 07/08/2025 17:52

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:11

Is your partner a multi millionaire? If so then it's highly unlikely that they made their money through "hard work". It's basically impossible to make that kind of huge amount from working yourself. You'd need to have benefited from the work of others (who you probably paid too low wages to, meaning the tax payer had to top it up for them to be able to afford to live) to get there. Or I guess have had ancestors who did so and inherited THEIR wealth. Either way it's pretty much impossible to become a multimillionaire / billionaire from your own hard work, you need to be screwing over your workers / the tax payer / your tenants or have had ancestors who did so.

That is utter bs. If that’s your attitude to creating wealth then I’ll be utterly unsurprised to hear you don’t.

usernamealreadytaken · 07/08/2025 17:53

BIossomtoes · 07/08/2025 15:07

Benefit fraud is still a fraction of the cost of tax evasion. Unclaimed benefits also exceed the amount of benefit fraud.

Unclaimed benefits is a red herring. Lots of benefits are unclaimed because the people entitled to claim them don't because they don't need to - I’m one of those and TBH I feel like a mug because so many claim every penny whether they need it or not. Some people just have a moral compass, and yes, i do include myself in that. We were entitled to claim but decided not to because we could manage without and thought the money should go to those who needed it more, but on reading so many MN threads through the last few years where everyone is encouraged to claim everything, I resent my kids having missed out on some things we could have afforded with an extra few ££.

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:55

Sally20099 · 07/08/2025 17:20

My source was OBR for £160k = top 1% of uk earners so I assume that comes straight from HMRC. As for your proposition that these people consume more of the state resources I can barely believe my eyes. Top 1% would “consume” considerably less. Private medical care, private dentist, private schooling, non council leisure facilities etc and zero benefits and private pensions. They use hardly any state resources compared to a lower income family who will utilise nhs, state schools, nhs dentist, council sports facilities, council swimming pools, universal credit, maybe disability benefit, free prescriptions, child benefit.

Well actually this is bollocks. Me and DH are in the top 1% of EARNERS. We earn a combined income of around £280k (ish). But we also use state schooling, healthcare (we do have private healthcare that we can use but there isnt really any emergency private so sometimes we have to use NHS) me and the kids have NHS dentists (DH couldn't get one so has to use private) obviously we dont get benefits and we DO have private gyms but we also use council facilities for example for the kids swimming lessons. So it's absolute nonsense to suggest the "top 1%" don't use services. We do. We also pay our way BUT it's not the earners who need to pay more. I'm happy to pay my taxes. It's the super rich who don't pay their way. The wealth hoarding is what's causing the problems. Me and DH have no hoarded wealth. We save into a pension and we have a mortgaged 4 bed semi. That's it. You can't get RICH from work alone. There has to have been some level of exploitation to make it to ultra high net worth level. If you can give me an example of where that hasn't been the case I will be very surprised.

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:56

dh280125 · 07/08/2025 17:52

That is utter bs. If that’s your attitude to creating wealth then I’ll be utterly unsurprised to hear you don’t.

It's not BS. If you can give me one example of someone who is ultra rich without exploitation I'll be very surprised.

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:58

TheLudditesWereRight · 07/08/2025 17:46

Chinny reckon

How can anyone argue with this? 😂

TheLudditesWereRight · 07/08/2025 18:01

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:56

It's not BS. If you can give me one example of someone who is ultra rich without exploitation I'll be very surprised.

TBF I think arts billionaires like JK Rowling and Taylor Swift get there without exploitation via the winner-takes-all principle

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 18:07

TheLudditesWereRight · 07/08/2025 18:01

TBF I think arts billionaires like JK Rowling and Taylor Swift get there without exploitation via the winner-takes-all principle

Fair play. They probably have. But I bet there's a level of exploitation in their keeping / hoarding / investing it now.

Everyday99 · 07/08/2025 18:18

usernamealreadytaken · 06/08/2025 22:40

You think that escaping poverty by getting dead-end jobs and working your way up, and getting married and scrimping every penny are good choices from good choices? I made choices from bloody bad situations. if mine were good choices from good choices, what would you consider no good choices to choose between would be?

She's well of having a house, costing 1 million due to inflation.

dh280125 · 07/08/2025 19:36

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:56

It's not BS. If you can give me one example of someone who is ultra rich without exploitation I'll be very surprised.

Make your mind up! Ultra rich or, as per the quote, multi millionaire. I don’t have to look far for the last one. I’ve exploited no one. Entrepreneurs do not thrive through exploitation. But if you insist on ultra rich let’s go for James Timpson. I think he’s worth about £500m and is absolutely the nicest guy.

Dingledongledell · 07/08/2025 20:13

Wonderwendy · 07/08/2025 17:56

It's not BS. If you can give me one example of someone who is ultra rich without exploitation I'll be very surprised.

JK Rowling. And she is utterly fastidious that she pays every single penny of tax she owes - prior to donating millions to charities.

Magpie105 · 07/08/2025 20:30

FlyMeSomewhere · 07/08/2025 16:53

Jesus fucking Christ, are you honestly sitting there stating that the disability system should be defrauded by fit, healthy, mobile people just so they have extra money for luxuries?? Thats illegal fraud and a great big insult to all the honest workers that don't take the piss!

Anybody on here questioning the abuse of system only needs to look at your comment to see the issue! Your mentality is what the government are seeing and why they want reforms. People that don't screw the system often don't have money left for luxuries either.

We spent £900bn of taxpayers money bailing out the private sector. I hear you but please show some outrage to that as well! I am not aware of a single banker or business owner turning down a penny of taxpayer money when it came their way

Magpie105 · 07/08/2025 20:34

dh280125 · 07/08/2025 17:52

That is utter bs. If that’s your attitude to creating wealth then I’ll be utterly unsurprised to hear you don’t.

You are living in denial. I am not saying it is impossible but I have barely met anyone wealthy my age (late 30s) who has not had some help through family. I work in wealth management and have seen the huge sums people generate through passive income, often at a low tax rate. It really is a rigged system

Pliudev · 07/08/2025 20:53

MyNameIsX · 06/08/2025 18:29

Yeah, that would be the simple reason why Reeves is nursing a GBP 51 bn deficit (and growing).

No that would be because of the gross mismanagement of the economy over many years by Tory governments. Do you read newspapers? If so you'll have read about the 194 billion £s Thatcher's sale of council properties cost the tax payer. But go ahead blame people on the lowest rungs of society if it makes you feel smug.

Dingledongledell · 07/08/2025 21:01

Magpie105 · 07/08/2025 20:34

You are living in denial. I am not saying it is impossible but I have barely met anyone wealthy my age (late 30s) who has not had some help through family. I work in wealth management and have seen the huge sums people generate through passive income, often at a low tax rate. It really is a rigged system

In what way is this evil / cheating / whatever else they have been accused of. Yeh it’s irritating when some people inherit lots of money, but that’s life.

MyNameIsX · 07/08/2025 21:03

Pliudev · 07/08/2025 20:53

No that would be because of the gross mismanagement of the economy over many years by Tory governments. Do you read newspapers? If so you'll have read about the 194 billion £s Thatcher's sale of council properties cost the tax payer. But go ahead blame people on the lowest rungs of society if it makes you feel smug.

You are out of your depth - perhaps you know that, perhaps you are in denial.

Your background presumably extends to posting effluent on MN, rather than residing in the real world.

I recommend that you stop formulating opinion from the ‘newspapers’, and actually think for yourself.

Then, we can have a proper debate.

Magpie105 · 07/08/2025 21:11

Dingledongledell · 07/08/2025 21:01

In what way is this evil / cheating / whatever else they have been accused of. Yeh it’s irritating when some people inherit lots of money, but that’s life.

I never said it was evil. However there is this paradigm that you work hard and you can achieve financial freedom. Maybe in the past that was true but now you would struggle to find any young person in that position without family assistance. Wealth inequality has grown to a level that it is now damaging our economy and the aspirations of so many people.

Swipe left for the next trending thread