[Closed] Same old Tories...

Maybe just maybe there is a correlation between work and wealth

You are naieve and inexperienced, I'm afraid.

BT basic?

Its a difficult question to answer as rent is the huge elephant in the room. Its so huge it makes it look like people are getting massive handouts yet they dont get the vast majority of it. I'd like some one a living to be able to save for their future.

Cosy little arguments on an Internet forum don't really cut it, though, do they.

To pretend that the government are really in control is also naive. We are flotsam and jetsam on the sea of the world economy. We have to pander to that set up because, like it or not, that's the way it is.

Anyhow, the lefties will get their way eventually. The Tories will do all the dirty work to ensure we are at least slightly better positioned when the pieces finally reassemble themselves globally. Then we will revert to type and elect a labour government to spunk it all away when the good times are here again.

Some other global crisis will then kick this cycle off again and we will find ourselves taking a further hit in our impossibly deluded standard of living.

I believe the solution is to start working now to differentiate ourselves from other competitor countries in the world. We have the infrastructure to allow us to have one of the best educated populations in the world, but we piss our pants every time someone dares to suggest that maybe some people are just more intelligent than others and so should be educated at a different rate. And I am not saying that the 'plebs' should be left to rot. The 90% who shouldn't go to university should be vocationally trained and have a three year head start in the real world compared to the graduates. When the graduates then arrive in the workplace they had better be pretty damned good as they will be dealing with skilled people with a good base.

Instead we choose to devalue our education by dumbing it down. The first thing that blue chip companies did in recruitment after we decided that university was a right rather than an achievement was to alter their application forms from "must have an honours degree" to "must have an honours degree from a reputable university".

Anyhow, the lefties will get their way eventually.

How's that going to happen then, given that there are no 'lefty' political parties any more.

Rusty no disrespect meant but why are you doing that?

dannyh - Member

We have the infrastructure to allow us to have one of the best educated populations in the world.......Instead we choose to devalue our education by dumbing it down.

So we've got one of the best educated populations in the world with a dumbed down education system ?

I don't understand.

What's this got to do with Tories behaving like Tories and freezing benefits btw ?

Are you going to do it?

I do it because I discovered I'm bloody good at it.

I enjoy trying to make a difference to the lives of people less fortunate than myself.

It is not an easy job, but someone's got to do it.

But the privatisation of the care sector means I'm percived by my rapacious employers and a large percentage of the population as a replaceable drudge worthy of little more than contempt.

Otherwise you'd pay me a living wage, wouldn't you?

Nope. But as has been established I'm a terrible person. I just wonder why you are as you sound peeved with it.

cmon rusty think of your wallet will you and not your conscience

PFFT bedwetter do gooders eh what did you ever do for the great in great britain

Ps we could do with meeting up,when you have time. as you owe me a ride

All the really minted people I've met work loads harder than I'm prepared to.

A lot of stupidly rich people don't get rich by working hard, they get rich by making other people do the work or through investing family money.

If hard Work made you rich, every woman in africa would be a millionaire

I just wonder why you are as you sound peeved with it.

Does he sound peeved with his job ?

You suggested that if people wanted more money perhaps they should work harder.

Rusty Spanner makes a perfectly reasonable point imo by pointing out that he works many hours, 50% more than the norm apparently, on the minimum wage.

I believe the solution is to start working now to differentiate ourselves from other competitor countries in the world. We have the infrastructure to allow us to have one of the best educated populations in the world, but we piss our pants every time someone dares to suggest that maybe some people are just more intelligent than others and so should be educated at a different rate. And I am not saying that the 'plebs' should be left to rot. The 90% who shouldn't go to university should be vocationally trained and have a three year head start in the real world compared to the graduates. When the graduates then arrive in the workplace they had better be pretty damned good as they will be dealing with skilled people with a good base.

We need a high tech industry like Germany and Japan, which means educating people. Not turning them all into glorified mechanics and plumbers, if it weren't for the EU we would not have anywhere near enough decent science graduates to fill laboratories in this country.

So we've got one of the best educated populations in the world with a dumbed down education system ?

I don't understand.

What's this got to do with Tories behaving like Tories and freezing benefits btw ?

Hell, Ernie, I didn't think I'd ever have to explain something to you. You should have noted my use of the phrase "to allow us". The implication is that we don't currently utilise it properly. I don't think we do.

It has everything and nothing to do with "Tories behaving like Tories".

Everything because the Tories feel in thrall to the global corporations, so have to toe their line.

Nothing because Labour will spout the usual rhetoric about being on the side of the people, before toeing the corporate line and doing 99% of what the Tories are doing, because they have no alternative.

Adapt or die. We are ailing because we are living on past glories. I don't think we should race to the bottom against countries whose populations will work for a pittance. I think we should seek to be world leaders in technology and services, but we are being usurped now by 'developing' economies, most of whose graduates can speak better English than most Brits and add two and two together and get four.

Yes I'd say he did sound peeved.

On another note

A lot of stupidly rich people don't get rich by working hard, they get rich by making other people do the work or through investing family money.

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.

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.

Adapt or die. We are ailing because we are living on past glories. I don't think we should race to the bottom against countries whose populations will work for a pittance. I think we should seek to be world leaders in technology and services,[b] but we are being usurped now by 'developing' economies, most of whose graduates can speak better English than most Brits and add two and two together and get four.[/b]

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.

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.

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. That's the reality not a few gazzillionaires who went to Harrow.

I've known or known of plenty of people who got to places purely because they were good at selling themselves, delegating and dodging blame, social climbing managerial types etc.

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.

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.

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) [b]are the ones who have the labour for digging stuff up, melting it into shape and hammering it together.[/b]

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 ****ed 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.

He sounds peeved.

Peeved?

I'm ****ing 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 ****ing 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.

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

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?

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.

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.

🙂

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?

Deleted as uneccessary.
Sorry.

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?

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.

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?

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 [i]fair.[/i]

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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'.

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.

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 😐

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.

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