How is robbing the wealth of others to pay for lower paid people 'fair'?

WhiteHorse

We do actually need taxation. We need a civil service and so on. There are certain things that we as a society want and need. These have to be organised and paid for.

What we don't need however, is a monstrous empire populated by hordes of political fanatics and overpaid jobsworths.

Which is of course what we have got. All of which is paid for by spiralling taxation. What, I wonder, will they do when taxation approaches 100% and practically everyone works for the state?

WhiteHorse

Snooze wrote:

As usual though, the average leftie can't accept that some people have to suffer for the greater good ...

'The end justifies the means'.

Probably the most dangerous philosophy in the world.

nickmason

StevieJ wrote: »

I think that says more about that sibling relationship than the benefits system :eek:

Fair point, and I know, "the plural of anecdote is not data".

jimbms

PrivatisetheNHSnow wrote: »

that's rubbish - doctor, lawyer, accountant, surveyor, architect, professor etc involve hard work to train for the job and when they're working.

In a way you cannot really count people in this category. Many of us who have studied hard and worked hard to get a decent income have left to live in countries where the tax regimes are a little more reasonable and we don't have to pay half our income in tax so as to subsidise the bone idle and assorted detritus from the rest of the world.

nickmason

ninky wrote: »

there is nostatistical correlation between hard work and wealth. some people may have got richer through working harder. some people have worked hard and have actually ended up poorer. but statistically there is not consistent link. there are plenty of idle rich about.

i know this is difficult to believe for those who were brought up on the protestant work ethic but until we start turning away from almost religiously based concepts to the scientific truth we won't move forward.

This is absolute and utter tosh. There is a huge statistical correlation between hard work and wealth. Enormous. Vast. Which to be fair is me just playing with statistics -as you are. But your prosleytising "as science" is a bit hypocritical.

Now you might think it's not a perfect correlation - and you'd also be right. This is in part because of taxation - and the left-wing taxation policies, which I understand you like, make the correlation weaker. Saving (especially intergenerational saving) which I like as I see it as the flip side of investment, will distort it as well. And of course there are idle rich - but that doesn't disprove the correlation, just as one idle poor doesn't prove it.

But if you work through the principle that you're suggesting, that work doesn't correlate with wealth, then the logical extension, like the utterances of some French student philosopher in the 60s, is that no one should work (at least until we have "the revolution").

Again I wouldn't really mind that approach, if it wasn't that I end up paying for those silly or selfish enough not to work. We should be doing what we can to encourage people that they should work, rather than pointing out to them (fallaciously) that there's no point.

nickmason

jimbms wrote: »

In a way you cannot really count people in this category. Many of us who have studied hard and worked hard to get a decent income have left to live in countries where the tax regimes are a little more reasonable and we don't have to pay half our income in tax so as to subsidise the bone idle and assorted detritus form the rest of the world.

Just read something in the paper about the flood of people in financial services leaving for Australia - made me think of Generali....

Andy_L

Snooze wrote: »

I'm talking about non-skilled people in their bullet proof jobs, not people like docs. Sacking people that clean toilets and emptying bins for a living will be doing them a favour as it forces them to go and make something of their lives.

Already been done. Most of the "people that clean toilets and empt[y] bins" are now contractors.

LydiaJ

Snooze wrote: »

I'm talking about non-skilled people in their bullet proof jobs, not people like docs. Sacking people that clean toilets and emptying bins for a living will be doing them a favour as it forces them to go and make something of their lives. As usual though, the average leftie can't accept that some people have to suffer for the greater good and their solution to every problem is to run to the bathroom cabinet for another 10 rolls of cotton wool.

Firstly, if you are only talking about unskilled people, then say so. "All public sector workers" and "All unskilled public sector workers" are nowhere near being the same category.

Secondly, unless you want to live in a country where patients are treated in filthy hospitals and children are educated in filthy schools, then the people who clean the toilets and empty the bins are providing an important service, doing a job that almost nobody could enjoy, for a wage that many people wouldn't get out of bed for. I am grateful to them. Why do they inspire such animosity in you?

sjaypink

Blacklight wrote: »

A 'fairer' society where we basically take money by force from the wealthier people and use this to lower taxes for poorer people so they contribute a disproportionately smaller amount for the services they use.

talking about proportions or ratios there have been threads on mse before which discussed tax paid and income. it seems that in many cases the lower paid do actually pay a higher % of their income in taxes than someone on double their pay.

but i've just quoted the op, and not read on ...... sure this has been covered in the last 6 pages somewhere

kennyboy66_2

Snooze wrote: »

I'm talking about non-skilled people in their bullet proof jobs, not people like docs. Sacking people that clean toilets and emptying bins for a living will be doing them a favour as it forces them to go and make something of their lives.

Making our hospitals less clean and more infection ridden.

The NHS - safe in our hands !