This is one of those times i wish memes were allowed.
UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
- Status
“Don’t mess it up this time Richard, otherwise we’ll have to send Thornberry... and we’d really rather not have to do that. ”
But the reality is regardless of that.... if you are a billionaire, you live where you want to - either for work or just personal choice. When you have that much money, having a bit more or a bit less is not a significant factor in deciding where you choose to live.
I always find it amazing that well off people think they should defend the taxation of the super wealthy. You're not in the same club boys, just because you dislike paying taxes and they dislike paying taxes doesn't make you an aspirational billionare.
He's such an idiot i can't comprehend how he's allowed to do anything other than make the coffee.
There are so few of them, and if the amount of tax they pay will be negligible , what's all the fuss about. If what you say was true increasing their tax a bit won't pay for a great deal.
The gilets jaunes in France had a brilliant idea of halving the number of MPs until they realised everyone would be 20p better off a year and the MPs would be so busy they couldn't cope.
People know Corbyn's campaign. Boris has never had to sell anything as unpopular as Tory policy before. I doubt the Lib Dems will be in quite so good shape once folk get to know Swinson either.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html
And as a bonus predicted to get the lowest labour vote % in 100 years
Exceeding even my expectations of whats is possible
186... what an absolute boy... on course to decimate labours previous worst post ww2 result of 209
And as a bonus predicted to get the lowest labour vote % in 100 years
Exceeding even my expectations of whats is possible
Does this mean we agree on something?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Genuine question did you do this in 2017 as well ?
Negligible to them. Not necessarily negligible when you add it all together for the public purse.
Personally, I'm much less interested in taxing the mega rich... as I would be in fixing a broken system that allows them to accumulate such obscene wealth in the first place... whilst we have people working, yet still in poverty. The poorest would be able to contribute a greater % of the total tax pot if the levels of inequality weren't so ridiculous. Trickle down economics though eh...
Shadow Justice Secretary right there
I suspect the TV studios request him as much as possible - but I cant understand why the Labour PR people let him anywhere in the vicinity of a camera
But there are what 150 billionaires in the UK with most of their assets abroad.
I am certainly not against everyone paying their fair share of tax and not against increasing tax but there's no easy answer but when tax was so high in the 60s rich people and high earners started leaving the UK.
There has to be a workable solution and so far no-one has come up with one.
Just because a topic is sensitive does not mean you shouldn’t question it. I know people who work in this area and unfortunately it is a fact of life that there will always be people who cannot operate in a normal society. That doesn’t mean I don’t care or don’t want to help, I’m just accepting the reality of life.
Nobody needs nor deserves to be a billionaire. Every billionaire has acquired their fortune through the exploitation of others, they don’t deserve the money.
Won't somebody please think of the billionaires!
Can't send Kier every time.
Let's have a whip-round.
im not a huge fan of piddock - but shes better in front of a camera than burgon
even wrong daily is an upgrade on him
Thornbery - though of course she will go off script and say remain? (as might starmer)
They don't need sympathy. The point is that everyone should have the right to become one.
This is the problem though when wealth is articulated as a finite thing and assuming it therefore needs to be "redistributed". A billionaire having all the money when it could be distributed around to poorer people is of course a seductive argument, but it's a baseless one. Wealth is not finite, it's limitless.
Any system that has been thought of that includes eradicating billionaires, also eradicates huge swathes of wealth with it; resulting in poorer people being poorer also. The question therefore isn't "is it moral for someone to be a billionaire?", but "would eradicating billionaires make poor people wealthier". I've heard no evidence that this is the case and so it seems that people would be happy to eradicate very wealthy people, even if it made people poorer.
Isn't it strange that the more we're being taxed (in literal terms and as a % of GDP), the more poverty we're experiencing? It's almost as if it isn't a simple equation of more tax and spending = less poverty.
Nobody needs to. I’m sure there are billionaires out there who deserve it. I’m sure most of the rich hating from the left just comes from jealousy of some sort. Who gives a feck if someone is a billionaire seriously? Congratulations to them! Hopefully they pay their taxes, give to good causes but also fecking enjoy their wealth!
Why?
What you need to do is stop reading the DailyFail!Jo Swinson's 'white males' comment still getting a backlash.
I need to stop quoting the DM
nice!
I think the left have a far greater hold on the moral high ground if this thread is to be believed.
It isn't capitalism in and of itself. Every single measure of human welfare (life expectancy, birthrates, income per capita, absolute poverty) has improved over time due in no small measure to capitalism. Even in China they allow it to operate. The problem is that unregulated, it causes massive inequality. For me the problem is regulation and embracing a more compassionate approach. It is not, in my view, a case of capitalism has caused poor people and inequality therefore chuck it out for some society leveling regime that fundamentally flies in the face of human nature and will always struggle to contain it.
Yet you didn't question the fact there are billionaires ?
Look you are literally making things worse by voting tory
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/01/don-t-believe-tories-homelessness-isn-t-falling
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...may-light-touch-approach-policy-a7942261.html
Even tory minsters can hide away from this.
https://www.theguardian.com/society...-admits-tory-policies-blame-homelessness-rise
I know you have to think or say ''well it unfortunate part of life'' etc. As it makes it easier to justify the awful outcomes of your vote(I haven't even mentioned the awful damage aboard) but honestly as someone who stood in line at the dole and watched homeless people being denied the most basics of human interactions, it would be honestly better for everyone if you just admitted that your don't really care that much about the poor.
It's absolutely nothing to do with jealousy and everything to do with a broken system. The reason the left fixate on wealth is they reflect on the hardship of others rather than dismiss it with nonsense such as....well some can't be helped.
I really hate how the right misconstrue all arguments of wealth. It isn't the politics of envy, people don't want other peoples money. They just want a fair standard of living for all or at least as fair as possible. If people felt such earnings were fair and through hard work then there wouldn't be such a desire to redistribute but no one fairly accumulates such wealth without exploiting the rest of society. Limiting that exploitation has been the travel of direction for quite some time.
Last edited:
Strangely enough the more famous billionaires like Jim Ratcliffe, James Dyson, Mike Ashley etc are all avid Brexiteers, wonder why that is? If only there weren't Eurosceptics in the Labour Party.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
geniusThe same as everyone should have the right to become a doctor, lawyer, prime minister or president. If you cap aspiration then where does it stop? If we say that £1bn should be banned. Why not £100m? Why not £10m? Most people could probably survive quite well on £1m. This is goes against human aspiration. Tax it if you want at but don't say that you're not allowed to get there.
Wait do you actually not know how tax works?
The Torries have been killing people all this while. So that's alright I suppose.
The least we can do.
The correlation not causation fallacy present in your penultimate sentence is extraordinary.
And no, wealth is not limitless.
some of the arguments put forward by these libertarians.
no one talking about those off shore money those poor billionaires have put away that is not taxed.
- Status