Viewing 40 posts - 241 through 280 (of 390 total)
  • Same old Tories…
  • dannyh
    Free Member

    Not turning them all into glorified mechanics and plumbers

    I didn’t suggest that. In my vision they are already working at the science/tech companies when the graduates pitch up. Some of the 18+ intake will have been promoted into positions above the graduate entrants by the time they arrive.

    Just as an aside, seeing as you mention those two professions, have you noticed how a lot of good mechanics and plumbers can now command a good hourly rate as a lot of people consider themselves above such jobs?

    The prevailing attitude towards education and employment as a linked idea is wrong in my opinion.

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Which is an effect of being better educated. It’s not because they work for a pittance, it’s because they take higher education more seriously.

    Please bother to read what I have written before arguing, at least it will stop me wasting time on explaining things twice.

    The ‘developing’ countries are squeezing our ‘loftier’ ambitions, the ‘undeveloped’ (for want of a better word) are the ones who have the labour for digging stuff up, melting it into shape and hammering it together.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    I didn’t suggest that. In my vision they are already working at the science/tech companies when the graduates pitch up. Some of the 18+ intake will have been promoted into positions above the graduate entrants by the time they arrive.

    Just as an aside, seeing as you mention those two professions, have you noticed how a lot of good mechanics and plumbers can now command a good hourly rate as a lot of people consider themselves above such jobs?

    The prevailing attitude towards education and employment as a linked idea is wrong in my opinion.

    I agree with the latter, the problem with educating everyone in industry is that it leads to typical industrial science, as in stagnant safe evolutionary science.

    It rarely develops people who are good at working in blue skies projects that transform the world and industry. That’s what we need and university breeds creativity, companies most of the time do not. We need more creative people with the way the world is going.

    The ‘developing’ countries are squeezing our ‘loftier’ ambitions, the ‘undeveloped’ (for want of a better word) are the ones who have the labour for digging stuff up, melting it into shape and hammering it together.

    Which countries would those be? China isn’t an undeveloped country, India isn’t, the Philippines isn’t, neither is Brazil. These are all countries that manufacture cheap goods, by the time it becomes uneconomical to manufacture cheaply in these countries I can see technology allowing developed countries to manufacture at competitive rates again.

    Vast swathes of undeveloped Africa are so **** on the other hand that it’s not really manufacturing that much. I’ve yet to buy a bike frame that says “made in Kenya” as the Taiwanese do such an excellent job that few can match for a not entirely cheap rate.

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    RustySpanner
    Full Member

    He sounds peeved.

    Peeved?

    I’m **** furious.
    Because of tbe great god ‘competition’ many people do not get the care they clearly need, because the local authority award care contracts to the lowest bidder, regardless of the consequences.

    30 minute calls which used to be an hour:
    In that 30 minutes I am expected to assess the condition of someone with severe physical and/or mental issues, get them out of bed, ensure they are washed, fed, dressed, medicated, safe and happy.

    Does this actually take 30 minutes?
    No, it takes me an hour, because I actually give a **** about my clients and refuse to leave them distressed or sat in their own urine and faeces.

    Do I get paid for that hour?
    Do I bollocks.
    I get paid for the time on the contract.
    £3.50.
    To look after a **** human being and to ensure their welfare and happiness.

    I don’t claim benefits, never have, too proud.

    Peeved?
    After reading some of the attitudes displayed on here reagarding ‘the poor’ I’m more than peeved mate.

    I still love my job though.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Really, people actually think this, how does someone “make” someone else do the work? Sounds like bitter nonsense. Yes some people have family wealth, some even have employees

    there you go just answered your won question and then gave another example

    Man has a successful garage, takes home 250k employs 10 mechanics on decent money, 2 office staff and has a couple of apprentices on 8k, what an absolute bastard, let’s rise him for 50% and mansion tax his house too, because that’s fair

    You did not even say if he works in this example – lets assume he does not then eh. You seem to think it is fair he does **** all. makes the most money and should not pay more tax then the rest and anything else is unfair 😯
    i think you will be in a tiny minority of thinking his situation is the unfair one in this scenario
    I am not even sure if you have amoral compass , you seem to want those that have the most to have even more as anything else is unfair.

    FWIW people do not employ people as a favour, they do not do it as charity, they do not do it for spiritual reward they do it because they make personal wealth from doing so. If they did not have to do this to make the money for them or a machine was cheaper they would do that instead.

    You will be telling me the Duke of westminster worked hard for all that money next and it is unfair he pays moe tax than Rusty

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Just as an aside, seeing as you mention those two professions, have you noticed how a lot of good mechanics and plumbers can now command a good hourly rate as a lot of people consider themselves above such jobs?

    That is not true.

    Have you any idea how many college students have gained a level 2 and a level three in these professions and never done a days work in the sector? ANy idea how many we produce each year?
    IN construction either?
    Thousand per year in my county alone!!!!

    there is more supply than demand in these professions people will do the jobs it is just that the demand for the profession is not there.

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    Hell, Ernie, I didn’t think I’d ever have to explain something to you.

    Why not ? I’m one of those ‘plebs’ what didn’t go to university that you mentioned.

    And which you very generously pointed out ‘shouldn’t be left to rot’.

    Gawd bless you sir.

    🙂

    joolsburger
    Free Member

    Rusty’s situation sounds awful and of course what he does is essential and deserves better pay. Why should my mythical garage owner be taxed differentially to make up the shortfall I still don’t get it, isn’t he paying more already anyway? Maybe with his new tax burden he’ll decide to sod it close the garage and now 14 people are on the dole?

    RustySpanner
    Full Member

    Deleted as uneccessary.
    Sorry.

    grum
    Free Member

    Good on you Rusty.

    Maybe with his new tax burden he’ll decide to sod it close the garage and now 14 people are on the dole?

    Well that would be pretty stupid wouldn’t it.

    And yes it’s easy to make money when you start with lots of it. Buy some property in London then sell it on a bit later – there you go. Genius and lots of hard work required?

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    Maybe with his new tax burden he’ll decide to sod it close the garage and now 14 people are on the dole?

    Why 14 people on the dole ?

    Either cars need to be repaired and serviced, or they don’t need to be repaired and serviced – I can’t see how the garage owner has created any work. Unless of course he’s been sabotaging his clients cars.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    isn’t he paying more already anyway?

    he is also earnign 31.25 times the apprentice and he does not even work in your scenario – could you tell us all how this is fair and could you explain how the only injustice here is his tax bil?

    Maybe with his new tax burden he’ll decide to sod it close the garage and now 14 people are on the dole?

    Dont be silly he would need to work then and he wont earn anything like his 250 k for doing **** all

    joolsburger
    Free Member

    Maybe he did maybe he started on his own, did good work, had an ethic and employed similar people. Over the years he gave good service, treated people well and gained loyalty from staff and customers and now he rewards himself for all the long hours and hard work with a very healthy income. How is that wrong, how is he bad? My point which I think is a fair one is it’s not the few hundred gazillionaires who get soaked it’s the bunch in the middle who employ a few make a bit and are generally decent people. It’s those people who get berated as selfish and uncaring when in many cases they are closer to their staff and more involved than most. Go after the big corporations for tax avoidance, collect what’s due from individuals but don’t tell me I’m my brothers keeper and owe him more of what I have because that’s fair.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    don’t tell me I’m my brothers keeper and owe him more of what I have because that’s fair.

    your right it is fair that you have much more than them
    **** em

    Dont complain when we say you are selfish and only thinking of yourself as you just admitted it

    FWIW 160 k puts you in the 1%
    No idea where 250k puts you

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    Maybe he did maybe he started on his own, did good work, had an ethic and employed similar people. Over the years he gave good service, treated people well and gained loyalty from staff and customers and now he rewards himself for all the long hours and hard work with a very healthy income.

    That sounds great, but people only get their cars repaired and serviced because they need to be repaired or serviced, no one takes a car that doesn’t need to be repaired or serviced to a garage and hand over money for no work because the owner is a great guy.

    There is no reason for his 14 former employees to be on the dole, the same amount of cars will need to be repaired and serviced.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    That sounds great, but people only get their cars repaired and serviced because they need to be repaired or serviced, no one takes a car that doesn’t need to be repaired or serviced to a garage and hand over money for no work because the owner is a great guy.

    There is no reason for his 14 former employees to be on the dole, the same amount of cars will need to be repaired and serviced.

    Which makes the owner a drain on society unless he’s splurging his 250k income, as savings reduce cashflow. Buohahah, nice one ernie!

    Which means we now have en economic incentive to tax him.

    joolsburger
    Free Member

    250k maybe a lot of money but it’s not outlandish, a successful SME owner could easily pay themselves that. Me being selfish or not is irrelevant to the discussion, the fact remains that a higher earner pays more already. No-one has actually adresssed why them paying even more in % terms is right other than the spurious arguument of, well they are rich and obviously oppressed the poor to get there so they deserve it the rich bastard, which doesn’t stand.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    250k maybe a lot of money but it’s not outlandish, a successful SME owner could easily pay themselves that. Me being selfish or not is irrelevant to the discussion, the fact remains that a higher earner pays more already no-one has actually adresssed why them paying even more in % terms is right other than well they are rich and obviously oppressed the poor to get there, which doesn’t stand.

    You haven’t explained why he should keep it, other than he worked hard.

    We just made an economic case for taking some of his wealth.

    Also.

    http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2014/res041214a.htm

    :mrgreen:

    molgrips
    Free Member

    Maybe he did maybe he started on his own, did good work, had an ethic and employed similar people. Over the years he gave good service, treated people well and gained loyalty from staff and customers and now he rewards himself for all the long hours and hard work with a very healthy income. How is that wrong, how is he bad?

    I don’t think anyone’s saing it’s wrong.

    The point is that lots and lots of people do all that – start careers, do well, make a big difference and gain loyalty etc etc, and end up with cock all.

    Teachers, for example. How’s it fair that someone who happens to be good at fixing cars and running a garage deserves the easy life, whereas someone who teaches and inspires generations does not?

    Or social workers, or nurses etc etc? Hell, I make more than my parents ever did and I don’t work anything like as hard. Why? Because I have an aptitude for something that pays well. It’s not fair in the least.

    The point about taxation is that Mr 250k garage owner doens’t really need 250k, he can spare a bit to help people on 8k who are never going to be able to run businesses.

    Let’s face it – we don’t really need to give a shit about this guy. He does not need help. But plenty of people do, and where’s the money going to come from?

    RustySpanner
    Full Member

    Because it’s what a decent, advanced, humane society would do:
    How we deal with the less fortunate in our society defines us as a nation.

    Northwind
    Full Member

    Tom_W1987 – Member

    You haven’t explained why he should keep it, other than he worked hard.

    And of course, he hasn’t just done it by working hard himself- if he could do that, he wouldn’t be employing 14 people, who all get paid much less than £250K yet do all the actual car fixering. That might sound like a “down with the bosses” criticism, it’s not- it’s just an observation of how it is. Why should he pay more? For the same reason that he should be able to profit from other people’s work.

    joolsburger
    Free Member

    So our garage guy is paying all his taxes at around 40% + his business rates and so forth as he’s a honest bloke. How much would you say is fair, how much can he afford to contribute 50% 60% 70%? 90% like in the 70’s?

    I’d be surprised to see an answer.

    grum
    Free Member

    No-one has actually adresssed why them paying even more in % terms is right

    Well they don’t do they. Poorer people usually pay more tax as a percentage of their earnings, as VAT is a flat rate that everyone pays and they still buy stuff (and business owners and high earners can normally be more ‘tax efficient’).

    Also, why do people always quote these tax percentages as if that’s the amount you pay on everything you earn?

    well they are rich and obviously oppressed the poor to get there so they deserve it the rich bastard, which doesn’t stand.

    Pretty pathetic straw man there.

    molgrips
    Free Member

    how much can he afford to contribute

    He can afford to contribute 100% of anything over about £30k since that’s what you can live on.

    However this disincentivises him to grow his business of course, so is not a good idea. He can certainly AFFORD to pay 50% on his earnings above £150k but he probably won’t want to. Why? Cos he likes money, just like everyone else.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    So our garage guy is paying all his taxes at around 40% + his business rates and so forth as he’s a honest bloke. How much would you say is fair, how much can he afford to contribute 50% 60% 70%? 90% like in the 70’s?

    I’d be surprised to see an answer.

    However much the people and the state deem necessary to reduce inequality which in turn boosts growth making everyone richer.

    The duty of government should be to improve the wealth of as many people as possible, not the select few.

    We’ve given you so many reasons as to why he should be charged more tax but you’ve ignored them all. If the Tories ever introduce a flat rate tax it will be March 1990 all over again.

    dannyh
    Free Member

    Why not ? I’m one of those ‘plebs’ what didn’t go to university that you mentioned.

    And which you very generously pointed out ‘shouldn’t be left to rot’.

    Gawd bless you sir.

    Why not? Because you almost always seem to actually read what people post, have a clear idea of what your own stance is, and can articulate it really well. I just don’t agree with you a lot of the time! You could almost say I felt let down(!)

    Nice try to try to paint me as some kind of patrician Dickensian factory owner. What I actually argue for is true meritocracy. Where intelligence rather than money or connections dictates your ‘life outcomes’ (blimey I sound all department of education there). Why do we shy away from a careful amount of elitism when it comes to intelligence and application? Surely these are things we ought to aspire to. Note my use of the word ‘careful’.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    Why do we shy away from a careful amount of elitism when it comes to intelligence and application?

    We already have that (see Oxbridge, Russell group and postgraduates), even these aren’t that good at sifting out the idiots and you will find plenty of highly intelligent youngsters in ex Pollies who are as easily capable as those of Russel group universities.

    Along with the other arguments I’ve made in support of our education system, a larger base of A-level graduates or undergraduates gives a better chance of the best to eventually find their way to the top. Not everyone succeeds at 16, technical colleges will see to it that people become stuck once they are past a certain point in life.

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    Nice try to try to paint me as some kind of patrician Dickensian factory owner.

    Sorry guv, didn’t mean no harm to a gentleman like yourself 😐

    RustySpanner
    Full Member

    Because everyone benefits from a more highly educated society.

    If you really only want the ‘most intelligent’ 10% educated to degree level, let’s have a level playing field;
    A ban on private education would be a nice start.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    If you really only want the ‘most intelligent’ 10% educated to degree level, let’s have a level playing field;
    A ban on private education would be a nice start?

    +1

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    My point which I think is a fair one is it’s not the few hundred gazillionaires who get soaked it’s the bunch in the middle who employ a few make a bit and are generally decent people. It’s those people who get berated as selfish and uncaring

    Someone is not selfish and uncaring for earning a lot and no one has said this. You seem selfish and uncaring though.

    joolsburger
    Free Member

    We’ve given you so many reasons as to why he should be charged more tax but you’ve ignored them all

    He already pays much more tax 40% of 250k is loads more than 40% of 15k.

    I appreciate the desire to progressively tax income I have serious issues with council tax, VAT and income tax for the poorest in society but I also believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul is a pretty crappy way of doing it, especially if you justify it by claiming that Paul robbed Peter with no proof at all.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    No-one has actually adresssed why them paying even more in % terms is right other than the spurious arguument of, well they are rich and obviously oppressed the poor to get there so they deserve it the rich bastard, which doesn’t stand.

    Risible straw man and they have but it seems beyond your comprehension

    You think it is ok that he earn 31.25 more than his apprentice without actually working and you still cannot work out why we might tax someone in the top 1 % more than the rest of society – HONESTLY – you cannot see why?

    How much would you say is fair, how much can he afford to contribute 50% 60% 70%? 90% like in the 70’s?

    I’d be surprised to see an answer.
    I would say 60 % above 150k is fair rising by 10% every 50 k. Once you are in the top 1 % you dont need the money

    Are you surprised now?

    Its obvious if folk can earn disproportionate levels then we can tax disproportionate;y
    Poor people need our help not rich people
    Rich people need to pay more via tax
    At the end of this process they are still rich and still the winners in society

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    especially if you justify it by claiming that Paul robbed Peter with no proof at all.

    I posted proofs earlier, unless you disbelieve the IMF’s work. Which is, I guess, another story.

    At the end of the day, if you try a flat rate tax it will end up with rioting like Thatchers pole tax did.

    tinybits
    Free Member

    I’m understanding the reasons behind the ‘unfair’ earnings and taxation arguments, but I’m struggling to see alternatives. Without the discrepancy in tax, there’s not enough money, however without the difference in earnings, there is a level of communism, where a genuine race for the bottom starts as there’s no incentive to do better. I don’t think for a moment we live in a Europa, but I do struggle to see a different picture.

    Junkyard
    Free Member

    Scandinavian models of reduced inequality is probably your choice then

    He already pays much more tax 40% of 250k is loads more than 40% of 15k

    40 % is 40% its not more it is th esame
    Council tax and VAT will then be a greater % of the poorer persons income so they will pay a higher % of tax than the rich person

    .

    I appreciate the desire to progressively tax income

    Why do you keep asking us why we should do i then?

    I also believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul is a pretty crappy way of doing it, especially if you justify it by claiming that Paul robbed Peter with no proof at all.

    At the end of this the apprentice still has **** all and he still has shit loads – its hard to portray him as the victim here or the loser

    I have no idea why you are struggling with this but I am done trying to explain it

    this is the reason

    The point about taxation is that Mr 250k garage owner doens’t really need 250k, he can spare a bit to help people on 8k who are never going to be able to run businesses.

    Let’s face it – we don’t really need to give a shit about this guy. He does not need help. But plenty of people do, and where’s the money going to come from?

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    I’m understanding the reasons behind the ‘unfair’ earnings and taxation arguments, but I’m struggling to see alternatives. Without the discrepancy in tax, there’s not enough money, however without the difference in earnings, there is a level of communism, where a genuine race for the bottom starts as there’s no incentive to do better. I don’t think for a moment we live in a Europa, but I do struggle to see a different picture.

    I don’t see that happening in Scandinavia. They still seem to work hard, get good educations, try to find good jobs etc.

    joolsburger
    Free Member

    Junkyard that is completely unfair and how you cannot see that is beyond me. Several people seem to suggest that having wealth is some kind of wrongdoing and I just don’t agree.

    I read the IMF article, very interesting but seemed more focussed on global inequality than our debate especially as even the worst off in the UK are in a far better position than the poorest around the world.

    I think people are mistaking a lack of agreement with a lack of understanding, I get your positions I just don’t accept them. What I earn I want to keep happy to contribute but not at the 60% outlined above, perhaps my council estate upbringing made me selfish.

    People keep talking % but I work in real numbers 100k tax paid is a bigger contribution than 10k if I earned a million I’d be paying 38%ish 380k. Isn’t that enough apparently not, I should pay more like 500k or 600k because I’ve got enough and that’s simply bollocks.

    grum
    Free Member

    I also believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul

    If you consider paying tax to be ‘robbing’ then you’re always going to struggle with basic concepts aren’t you.

    Tom_W1987
    Free Member

    Junkyard that is completely unfair and how you cannot see that is beyond me.

    I read the IMF article, very interesting but seemed more focussed on global inequality than our debate especially as even the worst off in the UK are in a far better position than the subjects of that piece.

    I’m going to be a dick and extrapolate it to the uk for now. 😆

    I’ll try and find out if there comes a point at which inequality is no longer linked with growth. You say that we are more equal than the rest of the world, but the problem with the Tories is, is that I can’t help but feel that they’d secretly like us to be like India.

    Anyway, just so we’re clear, I don’t think you’re a jerk or stupid like some are insinuating. I just disagree with you jools.

Viewing 40 posts - 241 through 280 (of 390 total)

The topic ‘Same old Tories…’ is closed to new replies.