Ffs did I congratulate peeps on their reasoned debate on a previous political thread. guess this has just shot that to shit.
Its not a matter of left is good and right is bad, they are two sides of the same coin. You can of course go a bit too far one way or the other.
Grow the fuck up, the pair of you. You sound like a couple of undereducated schoolboys too scared to fight each other, so resorting to name-calling. You both look stupid to the rest of us, is that what you're trying to achieve? "Steve will tell you I can look after myself" - ffs.
Even in that response you come across as a petulent child. You go ahead and do and say what you want, but whatever you write is on the internet forever, and you can't delete it. It's not looking good so far...
Thanks for posting this table; it's extremely simplified and omits a lot, obviously, but it represents a good starting point. And at least it counts Stalin as right wing!
I find politics fascinating, it is inseparable from life. The key to healthy debate is to respect the other persons view, even when they are clearly wrong, as is so often the case when I discuss politics with other people, a bit like Anthropogenic Global Warming really.
To bring things back on track and ignore some stuff on here .. Don't they? They don't get jobs that the big guys create? They don't benefit from the 90% of the income tax take that comes from the top 10%? The reality is they do.
Great, so let's not tax them disproportionately because you'll discourage these results. Further, the truth is that these people are very able to choose where they pay their tax and could leave if they wanted. Do you really want to encourage the top 10%, that pay the 90% of tax, to bugger off? An extremely short sighted view that will reduce the Govt's ability to pay for your services and service their debt. There is truth to the view that lowing the top tax bracket will actually increase the overall tax take because these people will choose the lower rates and therefore increase the size of the pool of people paying. What do we think is more important? Increasing the overall tax take or making sure the 'rich', and everyone's definition of rich is different, pay what low-middle income earners think they should? I agree with this - pay should be performance based IMO. But, this doesn't justify increasing the tax burden on those that have been able to make money. It also doesn't take into account the attitudes of some workers. Who steal stuff from work 'because they can afford it' or sit around doing sweet fa, or have a massive sense of entitlement and think the world owes them a favour etc etc, I could go on. I have worked as a project manager in the UK and in Australia and I can tell you that these people exist and cost businesses, or more specifically, business owners, large amounts of money that they should have gone to their bottom line. Taxation needs to be viewed from the top to the bottom and all should pay their fare - I don't believe in excessively taxing any one particular group. One could argue that these people took action and made things happen when those around didn't. And that's why they are where they are. But, as this situation applies to the UK anyway, I don't have a lot of knowledge of how all that transpired so I'll only make that general statement and this: I don't think anyone has a right to tell anyone what to do with their money, as long as they pay taxes and are legal. Fortunately, captain's of industry don't feel the same way as you because the thousands and in some cases hundreds of thousands of jobs they create and money they pump through the economy both personally and professionally, wouldn't exist and everyone would be fucked.
Up to a certain amount,the rich aren't taxed anymore than anyone else.If everyone earned say £100k,then we'd all pay broadly the same amount of tax.(Yes I know wealthy people lose their allowances after they reach a certain level,I'm generalising) Only a few of these people could move to other Countries.Those with businesses built here/employing people here/selling their products/services here,(the ones I respect the most),are unlikely to move,the upheaval would cost them more than any tax benefit.I didn't mention these people should be taxed any higher anyway,these are the very people who should be encouraged to stay/come here! And I don't dispute that there are lazy or dishonest toerags in the workforce.I've had the misfortune to employ some of them.But that goes for all pay grades,not just the lowest...some achieve elevated positions by the old boy network,nothing to do with talent or hard work So being a murdering bully in the past should entitle the descendants of said bully to enjoy the booty in perpetuity?.So what you're saying is,it's ok to change the rules after you've stolen all the land,thus denying future generations to become the landed class? If that's what you advocate,I doubt it's much of an incentive for those of us at the bottom to try and reach the top. Captains of industry,if they are Directors,are required by UK law to do what is best for the Shareholder,no one else:If that means sacking the local workforce,moving production to a cheaper location,hence increasing the dividend to their Shareholders,I wouldn't expect the redundant workforce to be grateful that those Captains of Industry pay their share of tax. And it doesn't matter how rich you are,you can only spend so much.Despite the term,"fat cats",I'm pretty certain they can only eat the same amount as a poorer person,drive the same number of cars etc.So the percentage of their income paid in indirect tax,VAT etc,is unlikely to be much higher. I respect your views,but sorry,not convinced. Too many undeserving arseholes earning too much and demanding an even bigger a share of the cake.Thats not saying Socialism works,IMO it doesn't,but at least treat Mr Average fairly,and even better,give him a fair chance at becoming wealthy
All the chances are there, Lightning. The fat cats took them and succeeded, others were less successful, but the same opportunuties are open to you and me, if we're willing to take the risks. The reason we're still feeding from the bottom is simply because we don't want to take the risks.
