MSE News: Super-rich must give more, says Nick Clegg

MobileSaver

temporary1 wrote: »

is ultimately damaging to the whole of the human race, and therefore society.

Riches, by definition, simply amounts to a level of selfishness;

Just admit that you're jealous of all the rich successful people out there and please stop this pompous claptrap.

Randvegeta

Indeed. That sounds awfully bitter. If you were rich, I'm sure you'de feel different. Why do the poor hate the rich so much?

grey_gym_sock

most rich ppl don't spend much time avoiding tax because they have accountants to do that for them. it's correct that there's a lack of political will to shut down the loopholes. but i'm afraid tax avoidance is not only common among donors to political parties (though they may be a slightly odd group of ppl in other respects). it's pretty much universal among the very wealthy. and extremely common among "middle" incomes, where avoiding tax by using a service company is regarded as routine.

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

How about the Benefit Classes taking out less to help pay off the deficit? After all, it's those taking out that caused the deficit in the first place, not those of us putting in.

I often wonder how many children I'm paying for with my taxes right now and how many would not have been born in the first place if all parents had to support their own children.

cepheus

chrismac1 wrote: »

This "tax the rich until the pips squeak" has already been tried. It was called Communism and most Russians, Poles, Bulgarians, Ukrainians, Latvians etc. would say it did not have a happy ending.

Britain had its own flirtation with it in the 1970s. Overall you'd think the left wingers would have learnt their lesson, all they achieved was 18 years of Tory rule and the collapse in Union membership and all the rest.

But no. The same tired old stuff is still getting trotted out. Most rich people are too busy making money to spend every waking hour on tax dodging. The problem is there is not much political will on either side to tackle the evaders and avoiders, because so many rich party doners and so forth are at it.

Oh dear not the old Communism card again. Why not try Scandanavia which has some of the highest taxes, and the highest quality of life? Why can't people accept that a sense of fairness motivates people? I don't believe it goes far enough though. Surely, no-one can work hard enough to justify more than 100k a year, so let's have an absolute cap on that.

Randvegeta

Surely, no-one can work hard enough to justify more than 100k a year, so let's have an absolute cap on that.

Which world do you live on. 100k is not that much. Sure it's a lot, especially for jealous poor people (I'm guessing you're one of them).

Let's take a hypothetical situation. A 100k earner works 40 hours per week. That means his 100k pay is the the same as 48/hr.

Are you saying it is impossible to be as productive as 48/hr?

How much do you pay your mechanic, electrician, plumber? (Yes I know most don't earn that much per hour, and even if they did they don't keep 100% as wages as there are other costs.) These are not even 'professional' jobs.

I work in I.T. so this is the best example I can think of. There are some really good programmers out there who 10x more productive than say, a fresh graduate doing the same job. And I really do mean 10x because they can get the same job done 10x faster. If a fresh grad is worth 10/hr, surely someone who gets the job done 10x faster is 10x more valuable?

Seriously, 100k too much? Are you insane? You're not even 'rich' on a 100k salary. Just well off. You should pick a BIG number like 10 million. Though I'm sure many can justify 10M salary, at least its a lot harder to argue for.

MobileSaver

cepheus wrote: »

Why can't people accept that a sense of fairness motivates people?

What a ridiculous statement!

The opportunity to better themselves motivates people. Where's the motivation if there's some arbitrary cap on maximum allowed earnings? Why would anyone work harder, grow their business or take any risks once they've hit that cap?

heyjohn

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu wrote: »

How about the Benefit Classes taking out less to help pay off the deficit? After all, it's those taking out that caused the deficit in the first place, not those of us putting in.

I often wonder how many children I'm paying for with my taxes right now and how many would not have been born in the first place if all parents had to support their own children.

After 17 yrs in Mechanical Engineering (Design &Development Technician) 3 redundancies under Maggie, I trained to become an Operating Department Practitioner / Technician. Over the years I have come across a number of work shy dole claimants and benefit scroungers to my disgust and was quite happy in my condemnation of them all. A few years back whilst assisting a post operative patient to sit up in bed I received a nasty back injury when she suddenly swung her arms round my neck and pulled herself up. As a result of this my employment was terminated just over a year ago on the grounds of ill health capability. I was told to claim Industrial Injury Benefit as it was my legal right as I had reports of 4 consultants, MRI scans added to which I can hardly walk or drive and take over 30 assorted drugs every day because of which I have become something of a legal junkie. After attending one of the fast becoming notorious “Atos Medicals” I was informed I was fit for work and given nothing after 46 years working in 2 highly skilled areas. I now consider my self to be a little wiser and now understand what it is like not only to be on the receiving end of government and media hype and hysteria but also the none consultant level or specialist standing of an Atos Doctor who is part of a £3bn government contract with Atos.:mad:

Eellogofusciouhipoppokunu

heyjohn wrote: »

After 17 yrs in Mechanical Engineering (Design &Development Technician) 3 redundancies under Maggie, I trained to become an Operating Department Practitioner / Technician. Over the years I have come across a number of work shy dole claimants and benefit scroungers to my disgust and was quite happy in my condemnation of them all. A few years back whilst assisting a post operative patient to sit up in bed I received a nasty back injury when she suddenly swung her arms round my neck and pulled herself up. As a result of this my employment was terminated just over a year ago on the grounds of ill health capability. I was told to claim Industrial Injury Benefit as it was my legal right as I had reports of 4 consultants, MRI scans added to which I can hardly walk or drive and take over 30 assorted drugs every day because of which I have become something of a legal junkie. After attending one of the fast becoming notorious “Atos Medicals” I was informed I was fit for work and given nothing after 46 years working in 2 highly skilled areas. I now consider my self to be a little wiser and now understand what it is like not only to be on the receiving end of government and media hype and hysteria but also the none consultant level or specialist standing of an Atos Doctor who is part of a £3bn government contract with Atos.:mad:

And yet I have worked alongside people sat in wheelchairs, people who are deaf and people who are blind. Let's not even consider how much tax Stephen Hawkins pays from the proceeds of his work.

What's interesting is that it seems people born with a disability strive towards overcoming it and having some measure of independance, whereas people who have injury's or illnesses during their working life are often content to sit back and be taken care of.

People who had a job they can no longer do because of an injury can retrain and do something that is not impacted by their disability. Where there is a will, there is a way.

YoungBusinessman

As said, £100k is not that much really when you narrow it down to an hourly rate on a 50 or 60 hour week. I aim to crack £100k barrier by 25. I am 21. Right now i wish we would concentrate on the folk who CHOOSE to be on the dole. There seems to be many people i know not willing to get a job. Sort out whats going out then we wont need to increase what comes in so much.