Inequality

[Mudface]

18 minutes ago, Rico1304 said:

That’s not what it says. It says the

average worker, not ‘their average employee’ 

I'm a bit lost now, the article was about heads of companies earning far more than employees. PL footballers aren't heads of companies.

 

Not sure why you negged me later on either, I was referring to Gnasher blundering in and derailing the thread by spouting on about the EU/ Eurozone austerity when we were discussing an article about UK private sector pay.

[Rico1304]

2 minutes ago, Mudface said:

I'm a bit lost now, the article was about heads of companies earning far more than employees. PL footballers aren't heads of companies.

 

Not sure why you negged me later on either, I was referring to Gnasher blundering in and derailing the thread by spouting on about the EU/ Eurozone austerity when we were discussing an article about UK private sector pay.

The article says CEOs earn a lot more than the average full time employee (not someone who works for them). My point was a Prem League player earns more than a non league player -

both the prem player and CEO get paid a lot because they are at the top of their profession. That’s all. 
 

 

[Gnasher]

1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

You were wrong.

It wasnt addressed to you, you still cant seem to get to grips with the eu policy on austerity. 

[Gnasher]

1 hour ago, Mudface said:

I'm a bit lost now, the article was about heads of companies earning far more than employees. PL footballers aren't heads of companies.

 

Not sure why you negged me later on either, I was referring to Gnasher blundering in and derailing the thread by spouting on about the EU/ Eurozone austerity when we were discussing an article about UK private sector pay.

Erm I dudnt blunder in and derail your precious thread I responded to Angrys hypocrisy over pointing the finger at British austerity whilst hiding under the bed at the mention of the eu endorsement of the same strategy. 

 

As you were.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

"Good morning, Gnash."

"Hah! No mention of your beloved EU, I see!"

"Would you like a cup of tea?"

"I'd like you to admit you love EU austerity."

"Looks nice out there. I might go for a walk."

"There you go defending the EU attacks on Greek youth again. What have you got to say about this link to Neil Kinnock's comments on Baroness Warsi?"

"I might pick up a pint of milk while I'm out."

"Says it all, you hypocrite! Not a word of condemnation of EU austerity."

[Paulie Dangerously]

Edit it's in the poverty thread. 

[Section_31]

I mean, fucking hell.

 

"The combined wealth of 10 men increased during the coronavirus pandemic by $540bn (£400bn), Oxfam has found.

This amount would be enough to prevent everyone in the world from falling into poverty because of the virus, and pay for a vaccine for all, the NGO said."

[Creator Supreme]

21 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

I mean, fucking hell.

 

"The combined wealth of 10 men increased during the coronavirus pandemic by $540bn (£400bn), Oxfam has found.

This amount would be enough to prevent everyone in the world from falling into poverty because of the virus, and pay for a vaccine for all, the NGO said."

Fucks sake! As my ma says, they'll never spend it all if they live till doomsday.

[Strontium]

They'll never "spend" it because the overwhelming bulk of it is not liquid money.

[Jairzinho]

That's a creative use of the word "because".

[Creator Supreme]

2 minutes ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

They'll never "spend" it because the overwhelming bulk of it is not liquid money.

Fair point, but you get my meaning!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

The pandemic isn't all bad news for everyone. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-55793575?__twitter_impression=true&s=09

 

[Section_31]

...get the papers.

[VladimirIlyich]

27 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The pandemic isn't all bad news for everyone. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-55793575?__twitter_impression=true&s=09

 

Nobody in power gives a shit any more. They used to have to find creative ways to make profits without being found out by media outlets.Now they own the media outlets,and politicians of course,so there is no need to hide it as there is nobody with any clout to pull them up on it. So many people,particular the older generation,still believe that what goes into newspapers and on telly is actual truth.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

26 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Nobody in power gives a shit any more. They used to have to find creative ways to make profits without being found out by media outlets.Now they own the media outlets,and politicians of course,so there is no need to hide it as there is nobody with any clout to pull them up on it. So many people,particular the older generation,still believe that what goes into newspapers and on telly is actual truth.

I think the headlines are often the most pernicious part of the newspapers: even people who don't particularly read the papers or (claim to) believe what they read are left with a vague sense that, for example, there are too many benefits scroungers, immigration is bad, Muslims are scary, the EU is ruining our life, austerity is a necessary and communal effort, etc.  It keeps us pointing fingers at each other, angry and suspicious of people worse off than ourselves.  All of this benefits the tax-dodging billionaires, including, of course, the newspaper's owners.

[SasaS]

Elon Musk owns 25% of Tesla. Tesla's share price went up 800% in 2020 because investors now believe Tesla is poised to become the next GM or Ford, only in electric cars, or they believe others will believe that at least for a while. There were also investors who didn't believe that and who shorted Tesla's shares and lost a lot of money, universally hated hedge funds among them. They may on the other hand be proven right in the longer term.

So the problem is either that Musk owns a quarter of the company he founded, or that this company, according to popular belief, seems to be very well positioned to profit from the world switching away from carbon based fuel.

[Section_31]

The thing that baffles me about extreme wealth, with the likes of Trump and Gillette and Hicks, is that they're always actually skint when you look under the floorboards. They've always got long histories of bankruptcies, being sued etc. It's as though if you keep your money and debt moving around quick enough nobody stops to check if you've actually got any real wealth. Like mini microcosms of the credit crunch itself.

[sh#t waffle]

3 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

The thing that baffles me about extreme wealth, with the likes of Trump and Gillette and Hicks, is that they're always actually skint when you look under the floorboards. They've always got long histories of bankruptcies, being sued etc. It's as though if you keep your money and debt moving around quick enough nobody stops to check if you've actually got any real wealth. Like mini microcosms of the credit crunch itself.

Yeah, with people like that it always seems to be only one step from a Ponzi scheme.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, SasaS said:

So the problem is either that Musk owns a quarter of the company he founded, or that this company, according to popular belief, seems to be very well positioned to profit from the world switching away from carbon based fuel.

Or, that in the absence of a Wealth Tax, there is no way to redress the grotesque inequality created by a badly skewed system. 

 

Even if a person is doing quite well, they may have net assets worth $100, 000. There's no way that someone like Musk or Bezos is a million times brainier or works a million times harder than that person. There comes a point where you have to admit that the bulk of their wealth comes from dumb luck; this is especially true of those whose wealth has boomed as a direct result of the pandemic.  They accumulate vast fortunes because our economic and political systems are skewed that way. Fair taxation would help to redress that skew.

[ZonkoVille77]

19 hours ago, Section_31 said:

I mean, fucking hell.

 

"The combined wealth of 10 men increased during the coronavirus pandemic by $540bn (£400bn), Oxfam has found.

This amount would be enough to prevent everyone in the world from falling into poverty because of the virus, and pay for a vaccine for all, the NGO said."

 

The solution is to let women take over. They are fundamentally wired to be nurturing and less sociopathic. 

[Jairzinho]

7 minutes ago, ZonkoVille77 said:

 

The solution is to let women take over. They are fundamentally wired to be nurturing and less sociopathic. 

The leaders of Finland and New Zealand should run everything. 

 

And let me bum them. 

 

 

[SasaS]

26 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Or, that in the absence of a Wealth Tax, there is no way to redress the grotesque inequality created by a badly skewed system. 

 

Even if a person is doing quite well, they may have net assets worth $100, 000. There's no way that someone like Musk or Bezos is a million times brainier or works a million times harder than that person. There comes a point where you have to admit that the bulk of their wealth comes from dumb luck; this is especially true of those whose wealth has boomed as a direct result of the pandemic.  They accumulate vast fortunes because our economic and political systems are skewed that way. Fair taxation would help to redress that skew.

No, problem is that people don't understand the origin and actual manifestation of inequality. For example, you cannot impose a wealth tax on Musk, because most of his wealth is not in liquid assets. He is 8 times richer than 12 months ago because of the market value of his stake in the company is 8 times higher. After the next 12 months, it may go back. You can only tax him if he starts selling some of that shares, or you can tax whatever he buys with it, a yacht, luxury home etc. 

[Bobby Hundreds]

17 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Or, that in the absence of a Wealth Tax, there is no way to redress the grotesque inequality created by a badly skewed system. 

 

Even if a person is doing quite well, they may have net assets worth $100, 000. There's no way that someone like Musk or Bezos is a million times brainier or works a million times harder than that person. There comes a point where you have to admit that the bulk of their wealth comes from dumb luck; this is especially true of those whose wealth has boomed as a direct result of the pandemic.  They accumulate vast fortunes because our economic and political systems are skewed that way. Fair taxation would help to redress that skew.

Its also that fact that luck can be present for lots of people to take advantage of and many dont. The right place, the right time and taking that jump, lots of people can be in the right place and right time but be scared to take the risk or theyre risk takers at the wrong time or the right idea in the wrong place and every other variable. Hardwork doesn't equal wealth at the very least but I doubt there is many lazy self made millionaires in business the emphasis on "self"

 

There's people who'd be broke now if it wasn't for a slight change in law or rich. Like that couple who owned over 1000 properties using mortgages, they were about to lose everything and then some law changed enabled them to sell up and now they're worth millions.  

 

The wealth of the likes of Bezos doesn't bother me as much as the fact his company could pay good wages with great conditions and that would be thousands and thousands of peoples lives all improved alongside his own huge success. The scrimping for every ounce of profit possible is whats pulling us downwards. Trains used to have guards that welcomed you aboard, setting a standard of quality used to be the norm, now everything is stripped bare, companies are owned by shareholders who want only profit as a result everything is a bit shitter from the taste and size of chocolate bars to the services provided. Theres no pride or quality in anything it seems.

[SasaS]

The more I think about it the more convinced I am that the only way is to make share ownership of a company you work for mandatory - worker compensation through wages plus shares. That way everybody working for Amazon is well rewarded for the success of the company, because it is ultimately them who are responsible for that success or failure. Imposing wealth tax  as a form of expropriation and then putting that under the control of some public entities, along the lines Picketty et al are suggesting will just create big politically controlled and most likely inefficient segments of the economy. Again. You can also look at preventing the emergence of behemoths like Apple, Microsoft and so on, and if you cannot, so be it. Wealth tax on productive assets will mostly just be punishing economic success. Focus on extraction never did any society much good, throughout history.

[Bruce Spanner]

11 minutes ago, SasaS said:

The more I think about it the more convinced I am that the only way is to make share ownership of a company you work for mandatory - worker compensation through wages plus shares. That way everybody working for Amazon is well rewarded for the success of the company, because it is ultimately them who are responsible for that success or failure. Imposing wealth tax  as a form of expropriation and then putting that under the control of some public entities, along the lines Picketty et al are suggesting will just create big politically controlled and most likely inefficient segments of the economy. Again. You can also look at preventing the emergence of behemoths like Apple, Microsoft and so on, and if you cannot, so be it. Wealth tax on productive assets will mostly just be punishing economic success. Focus on extraction never did any society much good, throughout history.

 

Or Co-op's as they were known before they were run out of town...