This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
cryrst The garden of England 30 Jun 18 9.44pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by .TUX.
Not at all. I can cherry pick any line from a statement. That's metaphorical.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Penge Eagle Beckenham 30 Jun 18 10.08pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by .TUX.
Any good economy is driven by it's largest participants, the middle/working classes. The 'rich' add little in comparison to this group (despite the rants of the blinkered). OK, who are the rich you referring to? A salary of £70,000 in the UK puts you in the top 5 per cent of earners. The top 1% pay over a quarter of all the income tax the government gets. If these people did not exist then everyone else has to match that amount or the govt income reduces significantly. The top 1% already pay more than their fair share. Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich!
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
leifandersonshair Newport 30 Jun 18 10.40pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
OK, who are the rich you referring to? A salary of £70,000 in the UK puts you in the top 5 per cent of earners. The top 1% pay over a quarter of all the income tax the government gets. If these people did not exist then everyone else has to match that amount or the govt income reduces significantly. The top 1% already pay more than their fair share. Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich! Technically true- but this is for Income tax only, which makes up just a quarter of the total tax revenue. It should be noted that the top 1% have benefited disproportionately from, for example, the cuts in corporation tax, property taxes etc. Oh, and the old "Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich" line? Lazy. Here's another equally broad and lazy line- 'capitalism privatises profits and socialises losses'.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 30 Jun 18 10.58pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by leifandersonshair
Technically true- but this is for Income tax only, which makes up just a quarter of the total tax revenue. It should be noted that the top 1% have benefited disproportionately from, for example, the cuts in corporation tax, property taxes etc. Oh, and the old "Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich" line? Lazy. Here's another equally broad and lazy line- 'capitalism privatises profits and socialises losses'. Yes they have benefited from corp tax cuts etc but that's not the point really.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Penge Eagle Beckenham 30 Jun 18 11.39pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by leifandersonshair
Technically true- but this is for Income tax only, which makes up just a quarter of the total tax revenue. It should be noted that the top 1% have benefited disproportionately from, for example, the cuts in corporation tax, property taxes etc. Oh, and the old "Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich" line? Lazy. Here's another equally broad and lazy line- 'capitalism privatises profits and socialises losses'. And NI accounts for about 20% of total tax revenue, which combined with income tax is 45%. What happens when corporation tax goes down? Companies invest the savings into the business by employing more staff, buying more product and investing into more innovation, plus wages go up. It's a waste of time explaining economics to a socialist. To cut to the chase, just show me some countries that are thriving economically under socialism. It does not work otherwise everyone would be doing it. Edited by Penge Eagle (30 Jun 2018 11.43pm)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
Stirlingsays 30 Jun 18 11.58pm | |
---|---|
The only countries that remain socialist are dictatorships. The proof is in the eating.....the only democratic countries that elect socialist governments are ones that haven't had them for decades.....enough time for youth, who have never experienced a socialist government to get to voting age. They are easily fooled and believe the promises socialists put out. Enough of them are ignorant of history so they actually believe it. There is actually hope for socialism in the future once automation has radically changed the workforce enough for the capitalist system to have to consider a change. But it will have to be a part of the new system....not the actual system itself.......both traditional capitalism and socialism will be outmoded solutions in of themselves. But for now....it's the last thing any sane country votes for. Edited by Stirlingsays (01 Jul 2018 2.16am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
YT Oxford 01 Jul 18 6.55am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by leifandersonshair
Technically true- but this is for Income tax only, which makes up just a quarter of the total tax revenue. It should be noted that the top 1% have benefited disproportionately from, for example, the cuts in corporation tax, property taxes etc. Oh, and the old "Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich" line? Lazy. Here's another equally broad and lazy line- 'capitalism privatises profits and socialises losses'. Please name some UK property taxes and explain which ones have been cut. Genuine request, as I dont know the answer.
Palace since 19 August 1972. Palace 1 (Tony Taylor) Liverpool 1 (Emlyn Hughes) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
.TUX. 01 Jul 18 7.46am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
OK, who are the rich you referring to? A salary of £70,000 in the UK puts you in the top 5 per cent of earners. The top 1% pay over a quarter of all the income tax the government gets. If these people did not exist then everyone else has to match that amount or the govt income reduces significantly. The top 1% already pay more than their fair share. Socialists would rather everyone be poor than some people be rich! As a percentage of your(my) income, you(i) pay far far more in tax than 'the rich' ever will........yet you talk about ''fairness''? As for Socialism (zzzzzz), you live in that world whether you choose to accept it or not. Bank bail-outs/ins, Working Tax Credits etc etc are all paid for by YOU for the benefit of those wealthier than YOU. "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled".
Buy Litecoin. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
cryrst The garden of England 01 Jul 18 8.16am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by .TUX.
As a percentage of your(my) income, you(i) pay far far more in tax than 'the rich' ever will........yet you talk about ''fairness''? As for Socialism (zzzzzz), you live in that world whether you choose to accept it or not. Bank bail-outs/ins, Working Tax Credits etc etc are all paid for by YOU for the benefit of those wealthier than YOU. "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled". But in cash that's still a ton more than me and I'm ok with that.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Penge Eagle Beckenham 01 Jul 18 12.10pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by .TUX.
As a percentage of your(my) income, you(i) pay far far more in tax than 'the rich' ever will........yet you talk about ''fairness''? As for Socialism (zzzzzz), you live in that world whether you choose to accept it or not. Bank bail-outs/ins, Working Tax Credits etc etc are all paid for by YOU for the benefit of those wealthier than YOU. "It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled". I really can't see how this is the case. So in order to answer you, who exactly are "the rich" and what are they earning? Can you give me example figures of the tax paying differences of a rich vs poor person? Would LOVE to know your ideal tax brackets. As for the bailouts, a true capitalist would have let the banks go to the wall and new banks come in to take their place. If the banks knew the government would step in to save them, would they have been so reckless? The government was supposed to keep the banks in check and failed and you want the government to control your finances under socialism? I know how the capitalist and socialist systems work and don't need a rich person to tell me which is the better system. Again, give me a list of countries thriving under socialism.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator |
.TUX. 01 Jul 18 8.04pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by cryrst
But in cash that's still a ton more than me and I'm ok with that.
I never doubted it.
Buy Litecoin. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
.TUX. 01 Jul 18 8.23pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Penge Eagle
I really can't see how this is the case. So in order to answer you, who exactly are "the rich" and what are they earning? Can you give me example figures of the tax paying differences of a rich vs poor person? Would LOVE to know your ideal tax brackets. As for the bailouts, a true capitalist would have let the banks go to the wall and new banks come in to take their place. If the banks knew the government would step in to save them, would they have been so reckless? The government was supposed to keep the banks in check and failed and you want the government to control your finances under socialism? I know how the capitalist and socialist systems work and don't need a rich person to tell me which is the better system. Again, give me a list of countries thriving under socialism. Socialism, Socialism, Socialism............zzzzzzz. If you can't see that i'm far from that then best we end this conversation as friends bud.
Buy Litecoin. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.