Labour & the Conservatives

PaulF81

Moby wrote: »

By the way.... define sloth!

Anyone who votes labour... Want something for nothing wasters... Top tip to them all... Get a job!

PaulF81

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

That's because they own all the wealth!

Since the richest 10% own 40% of the wealth in the UK and the wealthiest 20% own a massive 84% of Britain's wealth. And the highest earning 10% of households have a total wealth of nearly 100 times the bottom 10%.....

then it's no surprise that the poorest pay no tax.

So, I would say that the rich are currently not paying too much...and you've been hoodwinked...

You could just 'encourage' the lazy to work more and strive to become the top 20% instead of socialism disincentivising work... I managed to do it (grew up and educated in the naaaaath) no reason why any other individual from a working class background can't do the same.

Unfortunately, I remember them all smoking and dossing at school, nothing to do with intelligence, all to do with attitude and a sense of over entitlement. Screw em. The strivers shouldn't be bled dry to support them, oxygen thieves the lot of them

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

PaulF81 wrote: »

You could just 'encourage' the lazy to work more and strive to become the top 20% instead of socialism disincentivising work... I managed to do it (grew up and educated in the naaaaath) no reason why any other individual from a working class background can't do the same.

The bottom 50% of households in Britain have just £4,400 of cash, property and pensions compared to the £1.2m held by the top 10%, according to an Office for National Statistics report .

Half of UK households have just £400 in net cash at hand, compared to the £123,200 in cash balances typically held by the top 10% of households.

The bottom 50% of households have no net property wealth and just £4,000 in pension savings.

The ONS report puts the total wealth of the UK, including pensions, property and savings, at £10.3tn. But the bottom 50% of households own less than one tenth of that, compared to the wealthiest 10% who own 43.8% of the country's assets.

David Cameron's person wealth is at least £30 million (and he is yet to inherit from both sides of his family.) George Osborne has wealth of at least £4million and is the beneficiary of a trust fund from his father.

So, yes I can see how you must have reached the conclusion that it is half the population that are lazy and workshy and that if they all just worked a bit harder then everything would come good .....'cos after all the rich have worked so hard to get where they are...

BACKFRMTHEEDGE

PaulF81 wrote: »

Unfortunately, I remember them all smoking and dossing at school, nothing to do with intelligence, all to do with attitude and a sense of over entitlement. Screw em. The strivers shouldn't be bled dry to support them, oxygen thieves the lot of them

Wow. Just wow.

Rich conservatives look down on the poor with contempt because they are are raised in a culture and class where they have certain ideas inculcated into them. These ideas include the belief that the poor are responsible for their own suffering and that if only they would just work harder they would be able to come out of it. They love to preach about "personal responsibility" but seem to forget that there is also a communal responsibility as well. Amazingly, many of the "not rich" seemed to have been brain washed into thinking the same. And it's what keeps people poor.

It's a fantasy that "anybody can make it if they try" thus if somebody doesn't make it under this myth it means that person was lazy. Most "self-made businessmen" at least in the 20th century grew up middle class. Warren Buffett and Bill Gates were upper middle class, Steve Jobs lower middle class, etc. Self made businessmen who become wealthy did not grow up poor, most of them grew up in relatively stable middle class homes, they were not poor children of single parents living in public housing. Some libertarian types will obviously point out some person who pulled themselves out of the slums but the bottom line is that among wealthy people those are the outliers.

By the way my assessment is also backed up by the statistics, it is extremely difficult to change one's class. The way that the conservatives use the class mobility myth is how they keep people poor and "in their place". It ties into the whole nonsense that they bring about about "personal responsibility", which is all about convincing the working class and the middle class that anything that goes wrong in the country is "because they aren't working hard enough".

Anyway, I'm not anti rich. There are wealthy people who support progressive taxation and increases in their own taxes because they understand that government revenue is used to create a foundation on which other people can thrive.

ess0two

Dreadzone wrote: »

Can someone please explain to me why David Milliband who talks of reforming the public sector, addressing the deficit and the global competition is referred to as a radical and a great thinker, yet a Conservative who says the same is nasty or governing only for the rich?

Welcome back Wookster,were'nt you PPr'd for peddling this cr8p before?

JACKBLACK

neverdespairgirl

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

In the 1750s social investigator Jonas Hanway discovered that the death rate amongst workhouse children in London was over 90%.

Without a doubt, I'm sure you'd find that some of your ancestors lived in a workhouse.

Probably not - they'd have died.

mildredalien

PaulF81 wrote: »

Anyone who votes labour... Want something for nothing wasters... Top tip to them all... Get a job!

Wow, all those 'wasters' (I assume you mean unemployed people) just sitting their twiddling their thumbs wondering what to do when they answer was staring them in the face all along! You should go and let them know that they can solve all their problems by Getting A Job :T:j

You should be an MP.

p.s. this article will probably be right up your street
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-poor-spend-all-the-money-isnt-it-obvious-8553643.html

LauraW10

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

Probably not - they'd have died.

Not necessarily - the mortality figures were not so high in a Victorian workhouse for example. Also, people tended to end up workhouses when they were old and they'd already reproduced.

StevieJ

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

So, yes I can see how you must have reached the conclusion that it is half the population that are lazy and workshy and that if they all just worked a bit harder then everything would come good .....'cos after all the rich have worked so hard to get where they are...

I think the population fell for that one in the 80's, we all know where that ended up don't we?