Snowflake "Thinking"

[original PM]

There's a good reason for inheritance/wealth taxes - it reduces inequality.
High levels of inequality are bad because:

1) It's unfair/immoral
2) Someone nicks your Porsche all the time

There's an in depth argument for them in Piketty's book, summarised here: https://www.economist.com/blogs/econ...omist-explains

It starts with one generation being skilled and lucky. Whatever you think, good luck does play a part in your success. Some people get bad luck.
You pass the money onto your kids as well as providing private education, a good network of contacts etc. This gives them privileges that make it more likely that they'll succeed, handing over even more to the next generation. And so on.

Eventually you end up with this guy Who is the new Duke of Westminster? - BBC News
How much inheritance tax do you think he paid on his £9 billion? Bugger all because when you have wealth you can protect it and avoid taxation.

Governments can reduce inequality by re-distributing wealth. This is a good thing because people with talents that would otherwise be submerged in a mire of poverty and crime can have the chance to contribute.

Note - I'm no communist. There needs to be a certain level of inequality to drive people to succeed. Too much is a bad thing though and it's looking pretty bad at the moment.

People rail against this - see the Tories abortive policy on social care and using your house to pay for your own care? Why not? Better that than the kids of the poor who'll never own their own home should pay so you can pass on that privilege to your kids?

We should think carefully about the world we want to live in and while 100% tax is extreme, we should ensure that a good chunk of wealth is taken from all on death to improve things for society in general.

You know when I was growing up and definitely when my parents were growing up here were the things we were 'lucky' enough to have.

1) An outside loo
2) Leftovers for tea most days of the week
3) A bath which had to be filled from the kettle if we were lucky
4) No Tv
5) A few radio stations
6) Power cuts/ no electricity
7) No double glazing
8) No central heating
9) No holidays abroad
10) No holidays at all
11) No loft insulation
12) Capital punishment in school
13) No computers
14) No calculators
15) No drive in's
16) No cars


I dunno maybe we had it easier than todays snowflakes when we were younger so we should give them all our money - you know the money we earned after sleeping in a cold room with ice on the inside of the window and the walking 4 miles to work after having cold oats and water for breakfast.

[OwlHoot]

Note - I'm no communist. There needs to be a certain level of inequality to drive people to succeed. Too much is a bad thing though and it's looking pretty bad at the moment. ...

Also some inequality is needed so competent people are more likely to have their own funds adequate to start and/or grow businesses, without having to rely on the often flawed, outdated, and overcautious judgement of banks and investors (or worst of all Government agencies!). It takes money to make money!

[barrydidit]

You know when I was growing up and definitely when my parents were growing up here were the things we were 'lucky' enough to have.

12) Capital punishment in school

You are all four Yorkshiremen and I claim my handful of hot gravel.

[BrilloPad]

Also some inequality is needed so competent people are more likely to have their own funds adequate to start and/or grow businesses, without having to rely on the often flawed, outdated, and overcautious judgement of banks and investors (or worst of all Government agencies!). It takes money to make money!

Indeed. Take Ronnie Barker. Left loads of money. To his son Adam. Who invested it in child p0rn.

There are plenty of competent people from poor backgrounds. And plenty of spoilt brats who deserve nothing.

[original PM]

You are all four Yorkshiremen and I claim my handful of hot gravel.

To an extent but a lot of what I posted was actually true for many people!

[SueEllen]

You know when I was growing up and definitely when my parents were growing up here were the things we were 'lucky' enough to have.

1) An outside loo
2) Leftovers for tea most days of the week
3) A bath which had to be filled from the kettle if we were lucky
4) No Tv
5) A few radio stations
6) Power cuts/ no electricity
7) No double glazing
8) No central heating
9) No holidays abroad
10) No holidays at all
11) No loft insulation
12) Capital punishment in school
13) No computers
14) No calculators
15) No drive in's
16) No cars


I dunno maybe we had it easier than todays snowflakes when we were younger so we should give them all our money - you know the money we earned after sleeping in a cold room with ice on the inside of the window and the walking 4 miles to work after having cold oats and water for breakfast.

How old are today's young snowflakes?

The reason I'm asking is some of my younger relations in their 20s lived in houses with no fitted carpets, double glazing and loft insulation when they were young children. Their parents subsequently got them around the time they started school.

In regards to the outside loos I know in the London area you could get grants to pay completely to have an inside loo added and grants to pay partially to generally make your house warmer e.g. loft insulation, central heating in the 80s and early 90s.

I did have a conversation recently with some family members and very few of those under 22 had ever used bars of soap to wash their bodies with in the shower or bath.

[OwlHoot]

There are plenty of competent people from poor backgrounds. And plenty of spoilt brats who deserve nothing.

That's true, but the "spoilt brats" or those lacking the skill or self discipline to preserve wealth they inherit (which is a different knack to making money) soon recycle it to others, which is what inheritance tax is designed for anyway.

"Clogs to clogs in three generations" as they say.

[original PM]

How old are today's young snowflakes?

The reason I'm asking is some of my younger relations in their 20s lived in houses with no fitted carpets, double glazing and loft insulation when they were young children. Their parents subsequently got them around the time they started school.

In regards to the outside loos I know in the London area you could get grants to pay completely to have an inside loo added and grants to pay partially to generally make your house warmer e.g. loft insulation, central heating in the 80s and early 90s.

I did have a conversation recently with some family members and very few of those under 22 had ever used bars of soap to wash their bodies with in the shower or bath.

It's a good question.

I always think 'under 30' but a snowflake is also defined by their actions and expectations not just their age.

[BrilloPad]

That's true, but the "spoilt brats" or those lacking the skill or self discipline to preserve wealth they inherit (which is a different knack to making money) soon recycle it to others, which is what inheritance tax is designed for anyway.

"Clogs to clogs in three generations" as they say.

100% inheritance tax would ensure the money gets recycled far more efficiently.

Or maybe the UK should support child p0rn?

[SueEllen]

Soap dodgers.

There's some of those around here.

You have to hold your nose if they get too close.

They use shower gel to wash their bodies with in a shower, liquid soap to wash their hands with after going toilet and bath gels if they have a bath.