Bazj Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Obs and Legion... you obviously have a problem with people who earn more money than the average so answer me this.... what would you class as poorly paid? What would you set a tax hike to in order to claim enough extra revenue to let "the poor" pay no tax? By increasing the level of tax on someone who is already living to their means with mortgages, scandalous energy price rises, scandalous petrol price rises you then surely jeopordise the very existance of those people? If someone earning 39k a year is suddenly hit with an additional 2 or 3k a year in tax rises that can't be right can it? Just because someone earns a fair bit of cash doesn't mean he has anymore disposable income than someone who earns 20k a year... everyone lives to their salaries at the time. The country can't be run like a bloody Robin Hood movie because someone will always end up suffering one way or another Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 With respect Baz; I'm not sure your aware of how "the other half (or rather tenth)" live. Without checks; the rat race will produce, is producing, a gulf between rich and poor, which is ultimately destabilising. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 What a completely daft comparison (with all respect of course) the Beckhams aren't anything to do with this kind of discussion. We are talking about taking people out of tax and I asked how you would do it without putting other peoples lives into turmoil. Footballers make up a smaller percentage of taxpayers than the M.E.N arenas floor polishers do.... Beckham and his like are a product of the depressed working classes because it is they who continue to support these multi-millionaire prima donnas and pay ?30+ a ticket every week, buy the replica kits and then bang on about having no money! or is that disposable income for someone on low wages? Does Victoria Beckham need another million pound ring to go with the other 6? No. Does Fred Smith need another Man Utd replica shirt to go with his other 6? NO You can't take people out of tax altogether without damaging someone else in the process. People may rattle on about taxing the rich and god knows what else, but the biggest problem now is what would the European Court of Human Rights say if the likes of these big company directors were to be taxed at 80% and the people who work for them get taxed at 20%? I would say either "you can't do that because it is a breach of human rights to allow a government to exploit a particular section of its working population" or "Move to France.... they will only tax you at 25%"... now isn't that what happened the last time? [ 08.02.2008, 22:25: Message edited by: BazJ ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 8, 2008 Report Share Posted February 8, 2008 Ermm, I thought we'd been discussing taxation generally, and the fair application of same? As for the necessary threshold, I personally havn't access to the overall earnings tables that would enable an informed position. The rat race is a pyramid in profile, untaxed and unregulated it becomes steeper; taxation can be used to flatten it out and maintain a modicum of socio-economic cohesion. [ 09.02.2008, 23:20: Message edited by: observer ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 I thought the discussion was about class and society???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Originally posted by observer: The rat race is triangular in profile, untaxed and unregulated it becomes steeper; taxation can be used to flatten it out and maintain a modicum of socio-economic cohesion. With statements like that...I'd say that you've been watching too many Monty Python films mate! [ 09.02.2008, 09:57: Message edited by: BazJ ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 "A stratified society is one marked by inequality, by differences among people that are regarded as being higher or lower... it is logically possible for a society to be stratified in a continuous gradation between high and low without any sharp lines... in reality... there is only a limited number of types of occupations... People in similar positions... grow similar in their thinking and lifestyle... they form a pattern, and this pattern creates social class. ? ?Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Actually no Baz; the two Ronnies - " I look down on him etc"! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Originally posted by Mary: "A stratified society is one marked by inequality, by differences among people that are regarded as being higher or lower... it is logically possible for a society to be stratified in a continuous gradation between high and low without any sharp lines... in reality... there is only a limited number of types of occupations... People in similar positions... grow similar in their thinking and lifestyle... they form a pattern, and this pattern creates social class. ? ?Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998 I like that. Sums things up. As I said, it will always be there. Also, each class has sub-classes. ie. 1,2,3 car families. Camping holidays, foreign holidays. Latest gadget households. The haves and the have-nots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 So what does it make me Peter.... I own 4 Corsairs and 2 Scorpios... mind you the total value doesn't add up to my wifes car!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Egbert Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Actually, class has nothing to do with earnings. I know a scrapdealer, nice enough chap, nothing against him. He probably earns about 20 times more than I do and probably doesn't pay all the tax he should. But I regard him as in a lower class than myself, irrespective of his wealth and his Merc. He has no quality of life because he doesn't appreciate music, art, literature, fine wines, etc. He has nothing to spend his money on other than big flash cars, foreign holidays (probably lying burning himself on the beach) and drinking beer and backing horses. If he had any sense he might be spending his money giving his son a decent education so that he might move up a class or two. But he hasn't, so his son will probably end up with no class either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Originally posted by BazJ: So what does it make me Peter.... I own 4 Corsairs and 2 Scorpios... mind you the total value doesn't add up to my wifes car!! Rich? A 7 car family? However, your admission doesn't tell the whole story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Presume Egg; that the scrapdealer earns his money and enjoys spending it on himself? Such folk may be tacky and tastless, but they may actually enjoy life, doing what low brow folk do?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 So, Obs, if a "poor" "lower class" person were to win a million on the lottery you would immediately class them as a rich B and tax them at, say, 95% to reduce them to their natural level as a pleb with no money. Taxation under this government has become more unfair than it ever was under the Tories because of the way GB has used it as a way of building a dependency culture in the poorer and work shy members of society. And before anyone kicks off look around and count how many people you know who are unemployed but would really, honestly, give up their life of leisure for a job. Personally I would be so bored I would do anything rather than sit at home watching daytime TV but thats just me. Rant over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 9, 2008 Report Share Posted February 9, 2008 Originally posted by Peter: Originally posted by BazJ: So what does it make me Peter.... I own 4 Corsairs and 2 Scorpios... mind you the total value doesn't add up to my wifes car!! Rich? A 7 car family? However, your admission doesn't tell the whole story. True enough... only two are currently on the road and the others are for spares... do you know how hard it is to find spares for a 40 year old car!!?? Oh, and skint most of the time buying bits off EBay for the cars! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 10, 2008 Report Share Posted February 10, 2008 As I understand it; income tax is graduated; so earners are allowed various sums being taxed at different rates: so presumably the lottery winner would pay super-tax on super-amounts. The big fish are harder to catch, so tax inspectors tend to trawl for the minnows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 in reply to questions asked of me a while back in the thread. 1. figures were googled on national average. 2. wolfie, as you quoted of me but misinterpreted...I did not say "Poor" workers I said "poorer" workers, the diffrence being that the Gordon Brown is "poorer" than JK rowling, however that does not make him poor. Since I was refering to "poorer workers" as you can see, the fact they are workers (hopefully) would take them at least above the level of what I would class as poor, although depending on income there is a fine line for some. Obs, I don't have a problem with people who earn more money than average...I earn more money than average, and my class system is not based on earnings, anyone who makes good however they do it is good with me, my real beef is with the "old money" people, an outdated fuedal way of enslaving the general populous (see Ive gone pythonesque now). my point was to highlight that the poorer you are the more significant the detriment of lifestyle taxes are. so therefor the system in its current state is unfair. I class no person as more entitled than I, no man is my superior or is inferior I call no-one sir and given the same opertunities in life all is fair. However some people get preferential treatment due to the fact that 700 years ago some king got his ear waxed by some goon thus the goon gets given land and a title...no problem...but all these years later we are still renting the land, seeing their heirs in stately homes, seeing them elected into running the country...primarily to continue the system...viva la revolution..is what I say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Originally posted by legion: However some people get preferential treatment due to the fact that 700 years ago some king got his ear waxed by some goon thus the goon gets given land and a title... "How do you become King then"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 The lady of the lake... of course.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 You fight a battle at Hastings, winner takes all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonymaillman Posted February 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Originally posted by legion: I class no person as more entitled than I, no man is my superior or is inferior I call no-one sir and given the same opertunities in life all is fair. However some people get preferential treatment due to the fact that 700 years ago some king got his ear waxed by some goon thus the goon gets given land and a title...no problem...but all these years later we are still renting the land, seeing their heirs in stately homes, seeing them elected into running the country...primarily to continue the system...viva la revolution..is what I say. Good post legion ........ unfortunately the 'feudal' system will always remain in place. Land, titles, etc were gained by the hierarchy by force and theft, taking things they were not entitled to ! pathetically nowadays people look up to the so called gentry as though they were of better stock ....... down the line all that they were is thieves ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 11, 2008 Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Tony, what do you mean "WERE THIEVES" they still bloody well are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonymaillman Posted February 11, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2008 Yes I agree BazJ ....... let's just say I was talking in 'past' tense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 17, 2008 Report Share Posted February 17, 2008 Arn't we still classified in the UK as soon as we utter a word? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 21, 2008 Report Share Posted February 21, 2008 Oh I say! I don't know what would make you think that old chap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.