An Evening With... Jeremy Corbyn

westernpromise

Thrugelmir wrote: »

A more fundamental question is what makes you worth that much.

Perhaps I am global head of compliance at a bank and my skillset is fending off money-laundering sanctions from regulators.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bnp-paribas-settlement-sentencing-idUSKBN0NM41K20150501

Someone able to avoid or reduce $9 billion fines to, say, nothing would easily be worth £300k a year.

So. How much of that person's salary should be confiscated by the state and given to Toastie?

Thrugelmir

westernpromise wrote: »

So. How much of that person's salary should be confiscated by the state and given to Toastie?

I have no idea. Tax collection isn't driven at the micro level but the macro. For the Chancellor of the day it's a juggling act. While trying to balance the books.

BobQ

westernpromise wrote: »

Perhaps I am global head of compliance at a bank and my skillset is fending off money-laundering sanctions from regulators.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-bnp-paribas-settlement-sentencing-idUSKBN0NM41K20150501

Someone able to avoid or reduce $9 billion fines to, say, nothing would easily be worth £300k a year.

So. How much of that person's salary should be confiscated by the state and given to Toastie?

I imagine Toastie would say 95% now that you have outed this character as a banker who contributes nothing of value to society. But I think that is a tad harsh:)

Moby

This capitalism v socialism 'discussion' is a tad crude imo. The list of countries above is pretty random ......all of them have their own political and social traditions......and how do we explain China......which is using tightly controlled state capitalism to control the market, (ask the steel workers in Port Talbot). As Bob says the issue is the degree to which the state should intervene in the market place to ensure fairness. Hugo Chaves went a tad far but remember he and Castro before him were a backlash reaction to capitalism at its worst. They are always potrayed as mad dog rabid socialists who destroyed their countries... People forget though that the shining light of freedom, (the USA) had turned Cuba into a den of prostitutes and thieves through rampant capitalism and the connivance of the Batista regime.
Its all very well espousing how much tax you pay and the fact that its too much and why should you pay for the free loaders next door, (very Christian I must say)............but who defines a free loader? I PAYE ......... my much richer, (none PAYE) 'businessman' neighbour offered to do some work for me....just couldn't understand why he wasn't happy to receive a cheque as payment though;)
No ...........whingers about taxes should try living in those wonderful examples of capitalism...... India or Nigeria. A very good life can be had providing you bribe the correct public officials who are usually very poorly paid and use extortion to make up 'the difference'. I mean why would a true capitalist vote for Brexit, surely they would be perfectly happy with cheap labour coming to the UK from Poland because that's the remorseless logic of the market place in action;) We can't have socialist state regulation through immigration control and tarrifs can we because that's unfair intervention.....or is it? Does that mean state intervention is good if it protects my interests?

The safest most civilised countries I have been to are those in which capitalism is regulated by the state and yes people pay high taxes for good services provided by well paid public servants. Neither pure socialism or pure capitalism work. It's the mix of the social democrat tradition which works best. Hugo Chaves was out of touch but so was Winston Churchill when he complained about the introduction of'socialistic medicine' for the masses. We can argue the toss over where the balance should lie but lets try not to be too subjective about that and use Jeremy Corbyn as a crude cover to mask self centredness!
I look forward to all the thanks;)

CLAPTON

Moby wrote: »

This capitalism v socialism 'discussion' is a tad crude imo. The list of countries above is pretty random ......all of them have their own political and social traditions......and how do we explain China......which is using tightly controlled state capitalism to control the market, (ask the steel workers in Port Talbot). As Bob says the issue is the degree to which the state should intervene in the market place to ensure fairness. Hugo Chaves went a tad far but remember he and Castro before him were a backlash reaction to capitalism at its worst. They are always potrayed as mad dog rabid socialists who destroyed their countries... People forget though that the shining light of freedom, (the USA) had turned Cuba into a den of prostitutes and thieves through rampant capitalism and the connivance of the Batista regime.
Its all very well espousing how much tax you pay and the fact that its too much and why should you pay for the free loaders next door, (very Christian I must say)............but who defines a free loader? I PAYE ......... my much richer, (none PAYE) 'businessman' neighbour offered to do some work for me....just couldn't understand why he wasn't happy to receive a cheque as payment though;)
No ...........whingers about taxes should try living in those wonderful examples of capitalism...... India or Nigeria. A very good life can be had providing you bribe the correct public officials who are usually very poorly paid and use extortion to make up 'the difference'. I mean why would a true capitalist vote for Brexit, surely they would be perfectly happy with cheap labour coming to the UK from Poland because that's the remorseless logic of the market place in action;) We can't have socialist state regulation through immigration control and tarrifs can we because that's unfair intervention.....or is it? Does that mean state intervention is good if it protects my interests?

The safest most civilised countries I have been to are those in which capitalism is regulated by the state and yes people pay high taxes for good services provided by well paid public servants. Neither pure socialism or pure capitalism work. It's the mix of the social democrat tradition which works best. Hugo Chaves was out of touch but so was Winston Churchill when he complained about the introduction of'socialistic medicine' for the masses. We can argue the toss over where the balance should lie but lets try not to be too subjective about that and use Jeremy Corbyn as a crude cover to mask self centredness!
I look forward to all the thanks;)

why do you confuse 'corrupt' people and states with 'capitalism'

westernpromise

BobQ wrote: »

I imagine Toastie would say 95% now that you have outed this character as a banker who contributes nothing of value to society. But I think that is a tad harsh:)

Now that's an interesting idea. So rather than having tax rates that apply simply to income perhaps they should be based on the virtues of the person earning that income?

So if someone is popular and worthwhile, such as a footballer, racing-pigeon breeder or angling supplies merchant, then at the 45% band he should pay only say 5%. But if he is an evil monster such as a banker, Tory or other affront, he should pay 150%.

So my hypothetical person on £330k a year would pay more tax on that than would, say, a doctor or a judge on the X Factor, because the latter are more virtuous.

Would that be an idea?

CLAPTON

westernpromise wrote: »

Now that's an interesting idea. So rather than having tax rates that apply simply to income perhaps they should be based on the virtues of the person earning that income?

So if someone is popular and worthwhile, such as a footballer, racing-pigeon breeder or angling supplies merchant, then at the 45% band he should pay only say 5%. But if he is an evil monster such as a banker, Tory or other affront, he should pay 150%.

So my hypothetical person on £330k a year would pay more tax on that than would, say, a doctor or a judge on the X Factor, because the latter are more virtuous.

Would that be an idea?

I'm sure toxic toastie would approve of such value judgements although he would join Corbyn, McDonnell , Abbott is favouring the more direct approach of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot.

Moby

CLAPTON wrote: »

why do you confuse 'corrupt' people and states with 'capitalism'

More confused by your comment actually but no suprise there.;)
Is a capitalist system incapable of corruption Clapton?

Moby

westernpromise wrote: »

Now that's an interesting idea. So rather than having tax rates that apply simply to income perhaps they should be based on the virtues of the person earning that income?

So if someone is popular and worthwhile, such as a footballer, racing-pigeon breeder or angling supplies merchant, then at the 45% band he should pay only say 5%. But if he is an evil monster such as a banker, Tory or other affront, he should pay 150%.

So my hypothetical person on £330k a year would pay more tax on that than would, say, a doctor or a judge on the X Factor, because the latter are more virtuous.

Would that be an idea?

That's it.. twist the argument......produce the straw man and then ridicule it...well done! Too hard to engage with what he actually said was it?:rotfl:

N1AK

BobQ wrote: »

Actually if we did re-nationalise them, the power of the trade unions to affect the service is much less, and would be even less if the trains were converted to being automatic and so driverless.

The current issues with Southern have strong connections with Southern's efforts to do something which might possibly one day mean there's need for less conductors.

One of the reasons the Tory's like breaking up nationalised industry is that it also breaks up the power of the Unions. Currently the union anger at southern rail is contained to a small part of the network, I can think of no reason to expect strikes to be anything less than devastating if the railways were re-nationalised and the government started taking action to make trains driver-less.

Just look at TFL London Underground to see the power of the unions there. Drivers are paid double the salary of a bus driver, work fewer hours than just about every person who travels on the tube (and other transport workers) and get a frankly bonkers level of holiday. Surely they must be counting there lucky stars and be grateful? No, they just wait for any major event, like the Olympics, where they can brazenly threaten to cause chaos until they are bribed to do their job.

I don't care how bad privatised railways may seem, the behaviour of rail unions has completely persuaded me that we can't rely on government to control them if they were nationalised.