Toynbee - Plan C for public sector workers

Masomnia

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Au contraire.

My first thought was to be a little amazed that the government is actually ahead of the curve in pruning the public sector.

How about taking a leaf out of Socialist Bob Mugabe's book and throw all the wealthy white farmers off their land as well, then we could let the people all have little organic market gardens.


I wonder how she got a scholarship at Oxford despite getting only one A level ?

Could it be connected to the fact that daddy and grandad taught at Balliol ?

It is kind of ironic that she's the great grand-daughter of one of our most famous economic historians

Graham_Devon

While I do not in any way agree with the article, I am getting tired of protecting the wealth of the super rich.

Ask them to pay a living wage in this country and they would be up in arms. The taxpayer is supporting them through benefits, as the government knows the wages the super rich often pay are simply not enough to live on.

FTBFun

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Its the only system we have. By your logic pot noodles are the best thing to buy from a shop that only sells pot noodles.

Its time for a change, its time for radical, hardcore, Socialism.

Name a single country where this has actually worked.

ruggedtoast

FTBFun wrote: »

Name a single country where this has actually worked.

Name a single country where it has actually been tried.

And oligarchical kleptocracies don't count.

FTBFun

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Name a single country where it has actually been tried.

And oligarchical kleptocracies don't count.

Right, so you're proposing replacing a system which although not perfect, is adopted by every developed country in the world and where although there is relative poverty, absolute poverty is minimal; with an untried economic theory which might not actually work?

ILW

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Name a single country where it has actually been tried.

And oligarchical kleptocracies don't count.

They are quite difficult to treat

Conrad

I'm Tory but I have long argued wealthy folk out to be asked to volunteer to chip in a big proportion of thier assets, otherwise what is the point of thier lives where they simply cling to a mass overshare, what is the meaning in it?

I argued someone like Tony Benn with millions in property equity could give away all but say a million in property and still enjoy ma very comfortable MP's and Lords pension, slaray plus all those book and speach rights.

It's on my view backward and uncivilised to cling to a resource overshare. People worth millions that simply exist to indulge themselves are utterly pointless shallow lives.

ffacoffipawb

The_White_Horse wrote: »

stupid lefties.

Is there any other kind?

Conrad

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I am getting tired of protecting the wealth of the super rich.

Ask them to pay a living wage in this country and they would be up in arms.

Increasing wages would merely push up costs - all you MSE'rs bargain hunters hate cost rises don't you?
It would also lead to captial flight to areas of lower cost - no one invests for a lower return if they can help it - your Mum wont buy shares unless the reward / risk balance is correct.

Conrad

ruggedtoast wrote: »

The problem with you lot is that you are so blinded by greed that you cant see you are merely hamsters running in a wheel of futility, trying to chase the nut of riches.

But the system is so rigged that the faster you spin your wheels the further away that nut gets. But someone else is getting that nut, oh yes.

That is basically what capitalism is.

Mate I was hearing this in the 6th form and it still sounds infantile. FORCING high taxes on the rich will only lead to more wealth flowing abroad, meaning less jobs, less tax all round.

I agree with you on prinicple the rich ought to pay more but the way to bring this about is the Buffett / Gates example - a gradual change in the national tone such that we stop admiring wealth (for example when you applaud say guests of a chat show host - why would you want to applaud already very rich celebs when these people cling to wealth?).

So we expect Macca not to cling to £750m but to establish a national expectation that such greed is appauling and undermines the person. He could be quite comfortable with £3m.

ALL OF YOU I URGE YOU TO STOP ADMIRING WEALTHY FOLK SUCH AS BILLY CONNOLY OR FRANK SKINNER unless they give away much of thier wealth.