WASPI ‘victory’

Qyburn

BlackKnightMonty said:

Perhaps a nice easy 40% flat tax across the board. No tax credits, no personal allowances. The more you earn the more you contribute on a totally level playing field.

I wonder how many people would vote for a fair system like that?

Rich people at a guess, who'd see a massive saving. The guy on £35k? Not sure many would be voting for a 34% cut in their take home pay.

Seriously if that's the Tory ambition they'd need to phase it over a few decades, allowing time for Britain to adjust to being a country where the gap between rich and poor (and between rich and average) widens every year.

BlackKnightMonty

Qyburn said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Perhaps a nice easy 40% flat tax across the board. No tax credits, no personal allowances. The more you earn the more you contribute on a totally level playing field.

I wonder how many people would vote for a fair system like that?

Rich people at a guess, who'd see a massive saving. The guy on £35k? Not sure many would be voting for a 34% cut in their take home pay.

Seriously if that's the Tory ambition they'd need to phase it over a few decades, allowing time for Britain to adjust to being a country where the gap between rich and poor (and between rich and average) widens every year.

Sounds fairer than a majority of households taking more than they give.

Malthusian

BlackKnightMonty said:

Sounds fairer than a majority of households taking more than they give.

Sounds better than a majority of households giving more than they take, which would mean the average person would be worse off. 

There are plenty of countries where the majority do put more into the system than they take out if that's your bag (because they are constantly at war, riddled with corruption, or both), but not many people want to move to them. War (outside self-defence) takes in resources while giving nothing out, and corruption means that the majority gives and a minority takes (how virtuous and Presbyterian).

In an unequal capitalist society where wealth and income are concentrated at the top, you would expect a minority to give more than they take because that's where the money is.

Troytempest

Pollycat said:

Hello?
The title of this thread is "WASPI 'victory'".

This discussion is going seriously off-topic.

The title is wrong anyway as it will only be a VICTORY if any serious compo is paid out and I cant see that ever happening. Giving them a grand each to go away is hardly a victory.......

Pollycat

BlackKnightMonty said:

Pollycat said:

Hello?
The title of this thread is "WASPI 'victory'".

This discussion is going seriously off-topic.

Getting back on topic; there isn’t any money left for massive payouts on dubious grounds that you weren’t informed.

And Jeremy Hunt personally told you that...?

Although I fit into the WASPI group, I've never supported their 'ask'.
So I'm not looking for any money.
And never have been.

I just want to read about people's opinions on the current WASPI situation.
Not pages of irrelevant (to the topic) opinions.

FTR:

Always be relevant and on-topic, or risk your posts being removed – we are all here to help one another and discuss MoneySaving matters only. This makes our Forum more useful for all.

BlackKnightMonty

Malthusian said:

BlackKnightMonty said:

Sounds fairer than a majority of households taking more than they give.

Sounds better than a majority of households giving more than they take, which would mean the average person would be worse off. 

There are plenty of countries where the majority do put more into the system than they take out if that's your bag (because they are constantly at war, riddled with corruption, or both), but not many people want to move to them. War (outside self-defence) takes in resources while giving nothing out, and corruption means that the majority gives and a minority takes (how virtuous and Presbyterian).

In an unequal capitalist society where wealth and income are concentrated at the top, you would expect a minority to give more than they take because that's where the money is.

What happens when the number of net contributors continues to fall?

Pollycat

Troytempest said:

Pollycat said:

Hello?
The title of this thread is "WASPI 'victory'".

This discussion is going seriously off-topic.

The title is wrong anyway as it will only be a VICTORY if any serious compo is paid out and I cant see that ever happening. Giving them a grand each to go away is hardly a victory.......

Perhaps that's why the OP put 'victory' in quotes in the title - on a thread started almost a year ago... before the ombudsman's report...