Inequality

[Stu Monty]

Dog, for some reason I can't quote but I really can't be arsed with another debate where you act the clown and want to toss around with what you perceive to be cleverly worded sentences that just about leave enough room to then come back and argue about later on.

 

There are many, many people who argue to vastly reduce taxation. There are whole fucking organisations that are well funded by very rich people who have that as their objective.

 

The continued increase in wealth inequality is not because "simple wealth redistribution" is "not working", it is because it is not happening in the direction it should if it is to be called progressive. By design.

 

Because, as has been pointed out to you on a number of occasions, there is no will for it to happen from those who hold the wealth and the power. If there was a will then all the tools have been available for decades for it to be dealt with. They haven't been used out of choice. This laughably naïve idea that very wealthy and powerful people have been trying ever so hard to sort out inequality over the last couple of decades but the task has been just too much for their herculean efforts is religious in the levels of self-delusion it requires to be believed.

[Stu Monty]

Also, just to point out, you've once again deliberately made this party political and then insinuated that people that might disagree with you hate the rich.

 

You'll no doubt wonder why people then take a specific tone with you in replies. And claim to just want a civilised discussion. As if it's never anything to do with your tone.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

[quote name="Strontium Dog" post="4341318"

 

 

I'd prefer to provide greater equality of opportunity by improving the education of the less well off than of hamstringing the more well off, like. Probably because I'm not motivated by a hatred of the wealthy.

 

Investing in early years education is essential, but if the children of the wealthy are still getting unfair advantages of better-resourced (and better connected) private schools, then inheritance-driven inequality will inevitably persist.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I can't say I've heard many calls recently for an end to progressive taxation, but I'm open to be persuaded by evidence.

 

Higher rates of income tax for the higher paid are progressive. You recognise that inheritance is the engine of inequality, so you surely recognise the progressive nature of inheritance tax.

 

Have you really never heard any calls against those taxes?

 

Meanwhile, regressive VAT remains at an obscene high of 20%.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

Surely people who have loads have just worked extra hard for it and deserve it, no?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Surely people who have loads have just worked extra hard for it and deserve it, no?

True.  It's well known that in companies where the average worker does 38 hours a week, the CEO does 6,954 hours.

[Rick Sanchez C-137]

If they've invented a time machine they clearly deserve it.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

If they've invented a time machine they clearly deserve it.

What if they've just stolen one, like Donald Trump?

 

[Rico1304]

True.  It's well known that in companies where the average worker does 38 hours a week, the CEO does 6,954 hours.

A CEO has probably never done a 38 hour week. That argument is so fucking lame it's untrue.

[Stu Monty]

A CEO has probably never done a 38 hour week. That argument is so fucking lame it's untrue.

Are you just pretending that you don't understand the point was about the multiples involved? Bit daft Rico.

[Jairzinho]

They could do a 168 hour week, every week, and they'd still be getting paid a disgusting amount of money compared to those at the bottom of most companies.

[Stu Monty]

They could do a 168 hour week, every week, and they'd still be getting paid a disgusting amount of money compared to those at the bottom of most companies.

It's not just that though, is it? It's that they don't feel that's enough and many then also have to do whatever they can to pay the minimum possible back into the system.

 

The people cleaning their shit from the toilet unfortunately can't minimise their taxes in the same way.

[Jairzinho]

It's not just that though, is it? It's that they don't feel that's enough and many then also have to do whatever they can to pay the minimum possible back into the system.

 

The people cleaning their shit from the toilet unfortunately can't minimise their taxes in the same way.

 

Politics of envy, mate. The toilet cleaners should just work harder. Sub Saharan Africa, why don't you just fucking work harder?

 

I also love the idea that inequality is simply a problem of logistics. Everyone at the very top of the food chain is really REALLY trying to solve this issue, just they haven't quite concluded their master plan.

 

"We all want the same things". No, otherwise we'd fucking have them.

 

I genuinely would love to see all private education fucked off. I find the idea that your chance of a decent education, in fact your chance of a decent start in life full stop, can be dictated by how much money your parents have to be utterly repugnant. What a beautiful seismic shift we would see in society. Every part of society represented by every part of society.

[Rico1304]

The should all be paying the appropriate level of tax, chuck the cunts inside if they aren't. Should keep the rest honest.

 

But there's a reason they are paid more than the toilet cleaners. Pretending it's any different is the kind of leftist lunacy that makes you all seem a bit...daft.

[Jairzinho]

Where has anyone said they should be paid the same as toilet cleaners?

[Rico1304]

Where has anyone said they should be paid the same as toilet cleaners?

Where did I claim anyone had?

[Jairzinho]

So who was the "left lunacy" aimed at? Be a bit odd if you mentioned it and it wasn't actually aimed at anyone on here.

[Rico1304]

I said there were reasons, which there are. I'd take it that anyone on here who isn't a cleaner thinks they are more important and therefore should be paid more than the cleaner.

[Mook]

I said there were reasons, which there are. I'd take it that anyone on here who isn't a cleaner thinks they are more important and therefore should be paid more than the cleaner.

I don't think I'm more important than anyone.

 

There should definitely be more parity in the salaries between a poorly paid cleaner and me (I don't get paid an awful lot by the way) and a lot more between the cleaner and a CEO.

[Stu Monty]

I said there were reasons, which there are. I'd take it that anyone on here who isn't a cleaner thinks they are more important and therefore should be paid more than the cleaner.

Stop pretending to be a retard because it suits your point.

 

There will never be a point where I think I'm worth 150 times what the cleaner is. That was the point. Obviously. Stop talking bobbins all around it and just accept that it was a sound point to make.

 

They don't work 150 times harder. Which was the point. End of debate.

[Rico1304]

Stop pretending to be a retard because it suits your point.

There will never be a point where I think I'm worth 150 times what the cleaner is. That was the point. Obviously. Stop talking bobbins all around it and just accept that it was a sound point to make.

They don't work 150 times harder. Which was the point. End of debate.

I'm being a retard? Are you switching the argument to hours worked or value to the business.

 

You might not be, but it doesn't mean someone else can't be. The person in charge gets paid the most, simple. If it's twice as much or 250 times as much then that business decides. If it's wrong the business will fail, if the shareholders don't like it they'll change it, if it's a private company it's got fuck all to do with anyone else.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

.

[Mook]

I'm being a retard? Are you switching the argument to hours worked or value to the business.

 

You might not be, but it doesn't mean someone else can't be. The person in charge gets paid the most, simple. If it's twice as much or 250 times as much then that business decides. If it's wrong the business will fail, if the shareholders don't like it they'll change it, if it's a private company it's got fuck all to do with anyone else.

I fucking hate that post.

 

This is why I can't have a drink with a tory, you seem like a decent person Rico but you're just wired a bit wrong, like everyone else who votes for those cunts.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

A CEO has probably never done a 38 hour week. That argument is so fucking lame it's untrue.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

I'm being a retard? Are you switching the argument to hours worked or value to the business.

 

You might not be, but it doesn't mean someone else can't be. The person in charge gets paid the most, simple. If it's twice as much or 250 times as much then that business decides. If it's wrong the business will fail, if the shareholders don't like it they'll change it, if it's a private company it's got fuck all to do with anyone else.

 

You big daft mentalist.

 

Go and read some economics.  Or take a visit to the real world.