Socialism is easy when you're rich

torontoboy45

champagne socialism has always struck me as being a bit odd; wealthy people joining (or expressing an empathy for) a political party with a tradition of tax n' spend policies, with an inclination to hit high-earners more readily than the cons. do these people actually enjoy paying higher taxes? is there any evidence that they protect their wealth from tax policies that they endorse?

some would argue that a willingness to commit to a party that will rack up your tax bill is a sign of sincerity.

I've just skimmed wiki for the latest m/ship figures. at end of 2010 the no. given is 190 000 +. how many of these are multi-millionaires with offshore accounts?

just asking.

GeorgeHowell

Labour supporters tend to fall into four categories :- chips-on- the-shoulder, the client state, do-gooders, and champagne socialists, and there are of course overlaps.

The latter term is widely used to describe those who enjoy a very comfortable income/wealth/lifestyle, often similar to the wealthy individuals whom they purport to despise, and who have no qualms about minimising the amount of tax that they pay, yet still describe themselves as lefties (or words to that effect). It stems from a combination of some or all of :- attempting to assuage middle/upper class and/or post-colonial guilt; wanting to appear morally superior, more sophisticated, enlightened, modern, progressive, compassionate etc etc; or sheep-like observance to the conventional-wisdom political leaning within their peer group, especially in the case of media, the arts, education, the civil service.

Essentially they are all t***p**s.

torontoboy45

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

Labour supporters tend to fall into four categories :- chips-on- the-shoulder, the client state, do-gooders, and champagne socialists, and there are of course overlaps.

The latter term is widely used to describe those who enjoy a very comfortable income/wealth/lifestyle, often similar to the wealthy individuals whom they purport to despise, and who have no qualms about minimising the amount of tax that they pay, yet still describe themselves as lefties (or words to that effect). It stems from a combination of some or all of :- attempting to assuage middle/upper class and/or post-colonial guilt; wanting to appear morally superior, more sophisticated, enlightened, modern, progressive, compassionate etc etc; or sheep-like observance to the conventional-wisdom political leaning within their peer group, especially in the case of media, the arts, education, the civil service.

Essentially they are all t***p**s.

an interesting take - and certainly true of some 'lefties' I've met; their intellectual superority was something to behold and the sneering condescension toward people who just didn't 'get it' was amusing (challenged on a point, they either yawned with feigned disinterest or huffed with a 'whatever' attitude). it's partly due to this attitude that the 'workers' don't always see labour as the natural consituency.

plenty of others, though, come across as thoughtful, considerate types, who view raw capitalism in practise as grossly unfair to and exploitative of the majority (I know a few tories who take a similar view).

but to ask: are you saying that the controlling 'lefties' are on some collective guilt trip, want to 'fit in' with the 'group', do the 'compassion' stuff and are prepared to pay* higher taxes for the privilege?

*and evidence that the labour-controlling liberal elite 'minimise the amount of tax they pay'?. how? who? how much? provide this and I'll know you're being more serious than Dave Down The Pub.

I really am interested.

princeofpounds

evidence that the labour-controlling liberal elite 'minimise the amount of tax they pay'?. how? who? how much?

Well a quick google got me the list below. I couldn't be bothered to do the whole shadow cabinet or something like that, but everyone I searched came up with something apart from Ed Balls (who I hate for other reasons, and to be honest I didn't go past the first google page).

The thing I find interesting about the situation is that it isn't a case of some tax avoiders here and there, it really seems to be totally systematic.

I note that I don't believe tax avoidance is wrong, but I do think it is wrong that the avoidance loopholes that stay open are mostly accessible only to asset-owning wealthy. I also think hypocrisy is wrong.

And for the record, I'm sure many conservative and lib dem MPs are doing similar things.

It was also fascinating to discover how many of the labour 'dynasties' are rich without anyone actually having held a real job. I really do wonder how they pick it all up (Peter Mandelson's inexplicable wealth, the milibands being millionaires despite no real job and so on)

David Miliband:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tobyyoung/100082402/david-milibands-clever-little-tax-avoidance-scheme/


David and Ed Miliband (and their dad)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/09/ed-miliband-journalists-in-glass-houses

Harriet Harman (and her dad)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/election/article-1270905/Hypocrite-Harman-familys-inheritance-tax-dodge.html

Labour Party

http://order-order.com/2012/07/03/labour-tell-donors-how-to-dodge-tax-too/

Gordon Brown

http://mrnonnymouse.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/gordon-brown-is-tax-avoiding-non-tycoon.html

Tony Blair

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083827/The-12m-tax-mystery-Tony-Blairs-earnings-soar-42--pays-315-000-HMRC.html

Chuka Umunna

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2058132/Tax-haven-riddle-British-Obama-familys-1m-home.html

Ken Livingstone

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100149607/ken-livingstone-tax-avoidance-what-has-he-actually-paid/

Jonbvn

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

The latter term is widely used to describe those who enjoy a very comfortable income/wealth/lifestyle, often similar to the wealthy individuals whom they purport to despise, and who have no qualms about minimising the amount of tax that they pay, yet still describe themselves as lefties (or words to that effect). It stems from a combination of some or all of :- attempting to assuage middle/upper class and/or post-colonial guilt; wanting to appear morally superior, more sophisticated, enlightened, modern, progressive, compassionate etc etc; or sheep-like observance to the conventional-wisdom political leaning within their peer group, especially in the case of media, the arts, education, the civil service.

If you just said "typical guardian reader", we would have understood;)

GeorgeHowell

Jonbvn wrote: »

If you just said "typical guardian reader", we would have understood;)

You know that and I know that, but perhaps for some it needed spelling out ? Or am I being too patronising ... rather like a Guardian reader ?

By the way I am not a regular Daily Mail reader but when 'accused' of it I take it as a compliment. I wonder whether Guardian readers are the same ?

GeorgeHowell

torontoboy45 wrote: »

but to ask: are you saying that the controlling 'lefties' are on some collective guilt trip, want to 'fit in' with the 'group', do the 'compassion' stuff and are prepared to pay* higher taxes for the privilege?

I really am interested.

I wasn't really talking about the controlling group but about Labour's voter base. They are the ones that I believe largely fall into those four categories.

Gracchus_Babeuf

Wookster wrote: »

Well well well...

Ed Milliband's property investments have been revealed in the telegraph.





After all those comments on being moral and paying your share of tax it seems that Ed is using a basic (but legal) means of reducing his tax liabilities.

It would also seem that he has done quite well out of booming property prices in London:



Socialism is easy when you're spending other folks money!

So what? What's your point? That you need to be a flat capped manual worker who lives in a dilapidated terraced house in the north of England to be a socialist?

He has money - big deal. So do Cameron, Osborne, Boris J and many, many other leading Tory politicians, as do Clegg, Huhne and Cable from the Lib Dems.

YoungBusinessman

That Tony Blair article is shocking!!! £12 million income and only £315k to HMRC!!

chewmylegoff

Not really that shocking is it. £12 million of turnover and £11 million expenses equals £1 million profit... As a businessman you will know that you get taxed on profit not turnover.