if a lefty went to a restaurant, ordered the same meal

ViolaLass

captainhindsight wrote: »

To the other person who says don't see it as a punishment, it is! It is not a negotiation it is enforced with out consultation.

Elections.

danothy

Generali wrote: »

Personally I'm more interested in how much richer or poorer I get rather than worrying about everyone else.

If I get a 10% pay rise and the idiot I sit next to at work gets an 11% rise then good luck to them. I'm richer, she's richer. Good for us both, right?

How can you not be concerned with how much money other people have? Next you'll be telling me that you don't think other people's sex lives are anything to do with you either!

Graham_Devon

Generali wrote: »

He'll go blind, all that thanking himself. It's so much nicer when someone else thanks you.

:grouphug:

Have you ever thought that if I had so many names the mods would have picked up on it?

As they have with so many who thank you?

gycraig_2

captainhindsight wrote: »

Well I went to a school of that now charges almost £35,000 a year then on to university then started a professional career before leaving and starting my own company.

Which one of my working class brothers am I selling out for?

this discussion isn't about when is enough enough or not considering the needs of the poor it is about why should some one who is rich be punished with higher taxes?

The argument 'because they can afford it' is not good enough, high taxes destroy asperation and ambition.

If that is how you want to change the world it seems verry odd!

No they don't I'm not gonna turn down a 15k promotion because i would pay some of it in tax. Maybe if billion pound corporations paid workers enough that they didn't have to top there wages up with tax payers money from housing benefit / child benefits etc we could look at tackling this problem. Fact is some people are paying nothing in tax while claiming money back.

The fact corporations get away with this is disgusting and one of the reasons for such high taxes

James_B.

captainhindsight wrote: »

The argument 'because they can afford it' is not good enough

It's also pretty poorly thought out. Anyone who ever has a meal out, a drink, a smoke, or a holiday "can pay more". Pointing to one group (normally the one I'm in, it seems), and saying that we can pay more because we can just makes no sense. Everyone can pay more, does that mean that everyone should pay more? You could tax me at 90% on everything I earn, and still, I could pay more.

Does that mean that 90% is too low?

The_White_Horse

Lefties tax out of bitterness and spite. Taxes should be to pay for the necessities the public needs ie roads, police, courts, army etc. The lefty see them as a way to redistribute wealth so Man A can get up at 6am, pay for travel, work hard all day and then have nearly half (if not more than half) of HIS money stolen so it can be given to Man B - who sits at home all day watching Jeremy Kyle on his flat screen in his free flat, drinking Stella.

Man B is the champion of the Lefty - because his dad left when he was young, or some other trash excuse.