Is there an 'underclass' on MN?

[wildswans]

I have name changed for this.

I have been on MN for about 6 months - off and on - and one of the most interesting aspects is the insight into people's lives and the contrasts and similarities. You can communicate with others you probably wouldn't meet in RL and in circumstances where they feel able to be completely open and frank about themselves, their families, their worries, their aspirations etc.

However, I can't help wondering if there is an 'underclass' who subscribe to MN. I have noticed, in particular, that any site which relates in any way to money or status - such as jobs and level of earnings and spending or whether a SAHM or WOHM - provokes very strong reactions. By this I don't just mean engaging in heated debate - which is part of the fun - but there is an undercurrent of envy and spite, which is very unattractive.

There are clearly a lot of high earning, highly successful women in MN and a number who have DHs who are well off. There are also lots who are earning less but do worthwhile and fulfilling jobs and others who are happy to care for their DC full time. Most MNs agree that it's all about choices and it doesn't really matter what you choose as long as it's right for you.

Yet the 'underclass' often seek to highjack interesting and constructive threads by pouring scorn on anyone who is a high earner, can afford tickets to the theatre (or even the zoo in one case!), or go on decent holidays. Presumably these are the ones who want the entrepreneurs to be taxed into exile and for a 'mansion tax' to be imposed. I can tell you that you don't get a 'mansion' for £2m in london or the South East, so what is that all about? In my view, it's nasty spiteful class envy and emanates from a small number of people on MNs who haven't achieved much in their lives so don't think anyone else should either.

Has anyone else reached this conclusion or AIBU?

OP YABU partially. i have rewritten it with the bits i agree with:

one of the most interesting aspects is the insight into people's lives and the contrasts and similarities. You can communicate with others you probably wouldn't meet in RL and in circumstances where they feel able to be completely open and frank about themselves, their families, their worries, their aspirations etc.

I have noticed, in particular, that any site which relates in any way to money or status - such as jobs and level of earnings and spending or whether a SAHM or WOHM - provokes very strong reactions. By this I don't just mean engaging in heated debate - which is part of the fun - but there is an undercurrent of envy and spite, which is very unattractive.

There are clearly a lot of high earning, highly successful women in MN and a number who have DHs who are well off. There are also lots who are earning less but do worthwhile and fulfilling jobs and others who are happy to care for their DC full time. Most MNs agree that it's all about choices and it doesn't really matter what you choose as long as it's right for you.

Yet the underclass dysfunctional posters often seek to highjack interesting and constructive threads by pouring scorn on anyone who is a high earner happy with their life

So the mansion tax/inheritance tax argument goes like this it seems:

'It's not their fault the house has increased in value so much; therefore, they shouldn't have to pay...' (so no effort on the part of the householder, no additional financial investment has been made...) 'Having a high value house doesn't mean they have a high income...' So the argument goes that despite the fact that they have a high value asset, they shouldn't have to pay more tax than people in a modest, low-value property.

On the other hand:
'Tax has already been paid on the money'.
Tax hasn't been paid on the vast increase in value though, has it? My parents' house is worth about 500,000. They bought it for around 36,000. They have not paid tax on its increase in value (464,000). They have just bought a house and watched its value rise in the two decades they've lived in it.

Both arguments seem to defend a position that people with a sizeable financial asset shouldn't be expected to pay tax on it.

If inheritance tax is not paid on it when they die, tax revenue would have to be raised elsewhere. So where?

blighter - I didn't mean it like that. Actually, there are also a lot of well-educated and ignorant people here, just like anywhere else in RL!

madamchinlegs quite

I took no issue with the OP in that thread being able to buy theatre (or was it theme park?) tickets but I have a huge issue with anyone describing that sort of cost as "loose change" and stand by my assertion that they are a twat to do so.

I earn a generous salary as does my DH and many of of our friends and whilst I know plenty of us do spend that sort of money regularly I cannot begin to imagine any of us considering it "loose change" or indeed referring to it as such.

BI, i know, i responded without finishing reading your post, you went on to clarify, i take it back :). although i do stand by the comment that there does seem to be a fair few uni' types who seem to take great satisfaction in talking down to people and labelling them ignorant if they have different views to them, they seem to shout louder than anyone else. i know alot of people like this, an awful lot, take themselves very seriously and think they are on a higher level than most people

blighter - do you actually consider if other posters went to university when you read their posts? yes there are arses who comment on grammer etc. but i really dont care who went to university & who didnt.

i might be wrong, but i think...well hope.... you are the exception.

when you say take themselves seriously, what do you mean?

There are a wide ranges of backgrounds and socio economic level son MN which I like a lot. There is definitley a left leaning, Guardianista, BBC, bias though.

As a former Tory voter and soon UKIP voter though I still get along nicely with the 'lefties'.

Thanks for the champagne.

I am not expecting Inheritance Tax to be abolished. I know the country can't afford to do so at present.

However, I think that the family home should be exempt. It is exempt between spouses, but not everbody is married and families come in different shapes and sizes.

I suspect that Inheritance Tax could be phased out if 'Call me Dave' didn't waste so much of our money interfering in other countries' affairs.

It has also become apparent that many people are claiming benefits who should not be claiming them. The new work capability assessment (introduced by a Labour government) has resulted in over one third of claimants of incapacity benefit being assessed as fit for work (as reported in the Guardian btw, not the hated DM). Even allowing for the fact that some of these assessments are likely to be overturned on appeal, it is still a huge amount of money - taxpayers' money - which is being wasted.

I think virtually all tax payers are happy to have their money spent in helping the genuinely needy, that is not the issue.

I personally would be happy for university education to be free again, even though I appreciate that there would be a cost to this. It is tragic that so many young people now emerge into society after three years at university with little prospect of a job and a pile of debt.

Benefit bashing now?

i dont agree with everything the OP has said but why is any debate about benefits on MN called 'Benefit bashing'?

its not really contributing anything to the debate is it?

Yes, I don't see why the OP has to be subjected to abuse.

Abuse? Where?

And it seems to me that this statement:

"It has also become apparent that many people are claiming benefits who should not be claiming them"

Is deliberately provocative. Just to add to the other things that the OP has asserted.

.

is deliberately provocative...in your opinion. what if she believes it and thinks it is an interesting topic...to discuss?

It seems to be an otherwise civilised discussion.

The OP is very moderate in her tone.

Agree with Wasabi. Any mention of benefits, and someone will shout "benefit bashing". It kind of shows the point OP is trying to make...

These threads always result in the OP being able to say: "I rest my case."

Agree with OP partially - I don't think there's an underclass , but definitely a noisy group out to destroy certain discussions. However tentatively an OP might raise a contentious issue, in come the heavies and seek to shut it down. I can't stand that biscuit emoticon. It's been hijacked by belligerent posters who shove it in there instead of constructing a reasoned argument.

OMG! I totally agree with OP.
I wouldnt consider us "well off" or "priveledged" at all. were lucky to be financially stable and both have good jobs which we work hard for.
When I first started out my MN career I posted about an obnoxious couple spoiling everyones day at the london aquarium...it turned into about 5 pages of insults about MY parenting choices and why or how I could afford the entrance fee to the aquarium?!?!? Its silly and ruins alot of posts!

And the cliche: "My very first ". Has that been overdone, or what.

wasa - i don't care/am not interested in uni' (who went, what degree they got/what they studied) but i have observed that some people on here who went seem all consumed with it all. alot of people take themselves too seriously, you can attribute that to all walks of life ie media/banking etc, i just find that often, those that shout the loudest & have both strong views and are quick to put down others openly at some point have stated that they have been to uni', tis' all, i find it irritating. i have known some who have been and are not nice/interesting people, i have known people who left school early with no qual's at all but are fab people, be it interesting and/or successful in one way or another. i don't like people being called ignorant by 'educated' people because they don't agree with them, happens alot on MN. sorry OP, this seems to have gone away from your post, now what was it about again? oh yes, different types of posters...

i really enjoy reading lots of different opinions & think you can learn the most from posters who are different to you in all sorts of ways.

but some times posters seem to want you to be their stereotype of what X type of person is... to the point where what they respond, not to what you have actually written but to whats in their own head.

i got called vile to saying that you can always remember there are lots of people worse on than you. it was in reference to my DP's mum dying of cancer & helping him cope (he was fairly young). then my DF being completely paralysed & wanting me to kill him; me spending several years only working & looking after him; putting my own life on hold..etc. etc..

i am sure some posters think their own situation is worse (rightly or wrongly) but telling me i was vile & minimising other people's plain when i was explaining how we coped was indeed very strange. i think they assumed i was telling DPs mum & my DF that it could be worse. when i hadnt said that & actually it was how my DP & i coped. alternatively they thought i was trying to minimised their pain, which i dont see a being related to thinking of others getting a worse lot than you.

oh i was called a malign pollyanna. so i think there are dysfunctional posters who dont like to see other people happy or coping with life.

Wibbly 'most poor people have worked harder than most rich people on MN'

Really? What makes you think this?

And what are your rough brackets for rich and poor?