Why Labour's high tax plan is stupidity

[DodgyAgent]

I mean playing ones part in society in a responsible manner.

To some extent that means making ones contribution to the public purse, but it also means taking responibilty for the effects of ones actions on society, and choosing to act in a way which balances ones own lifestyle with the collective good.

How does someone who earns lots of money "take social responsibility" exactly? Do they walk around with placards saying "I'M sorry for being rich"?

You are full of left wing envy cliches that mean absolutly nothing. Please start defining what you say. We have been listening to these tired cliches from socialists for an awful long time.

[Mich the Tester]

And they thought that they had managed to get away from you!

, but you have a point. I always fought with them at home, especially my father, but these days get on fine with them and do the occasional bit of IT work for their business. I wonder if that relationship would be strained by seeing more of each other!

[Mich the Tester]

When rich people get a bit less rich or leave the country, the people who suffer aren’t the rich people. The people who suffer are the low wage earners who serve them meals in restaurants or clean their houses, and the medium wage earners who sell them their clothes, service their cars and build their gazebos.

[DimPrawn]

When rich people get a bit less rich or leave the country, the people who suffer aren’t the rich people. The people who suffer are the low wage earners who serve them meals in restaurants or clean their houses, and the medium wage earners who sell them their clothes, service their cars and build their gazebos.

Don't matter, they is just sign on 'innit?

Socialists.

[doodab]

How does someone who earns lots of money "take social responsibility" exactly? Do they walk around with placards saying "I'M sorry for being rich"?

A rich person takes responsibility in much the same way as someone who isn't rich. I'm certainly not suggesting they should feel sorry or guilty for their good fortune and success in life. What I object to, and believe the UK will be better off without, is the attitude of those that say "we'll bugger of and you'll be sorry", rather than taking their share of the pain that they helped to create. They seem to think the rest of society owes them a huge favour, and quite frankly, I don't think we do. I think British society as a whole will be better off without those sort of people. Not rich people, but selfish people who don't take responsibiliy for the consequences of their actions.

It's really not about how much money they earn. There are plenty of poor arseholes who we could do without as well, but unfortunately they aren't offering to leave of their own accord.

[TimberWolf]

When rich people get a bit less rich or leave the country, the people who suffer aren’t the rich people. The people who suffer are the low wage earners who serve them meals in restaurants or clean their houses, and the medium wage earners who sell them their clothes, service their cars and build their gazebos.

An unregulated economy would probably result in a King, a Royal family, some Lords and Knights, lots of bloodshed and a nation of surfs though, so there must be some kind of balance in between.

[Mich the Tester]

An unregulated economy would probably result in a King, a Royal family, some Lords and Knights, lots of bloodshed and a nation of surfs though, so there must be some kind of balance in between.

Of course, but one of the most important balances is the balance of government revenues and expenditure; that’s what helps create the economic basis for a decent society and it’s exactly the thing that Gordon’s buggered up.

[TimberWolf]

Of course, but one of the most important balances is the balance of government revenues and expenditure; that’s what helps create the economic basis for a decent society and it’s exactly the thing that Gordon’s buggered up.

Actually, I'm not so sure medieval times weren't better anyway.

[Mich the Tester]

Actually, I'm not so sure medieval times weren't better anyway.

It was very much dependent on the estate and the prevailing economic climate. Many serfs actually had a pretty decent life, paying only a small tax of a couple of chickens per month, while others were probably quite downtrodden. As a culinary aside, it’s thought that the classic dish ‘coq au vin’ was created for Burgundian landlords who had specified that serfs must give them a set number of hens or cocks each year, but didn’t specify the age or quality. The serfs paid their tax of a couple of tough, ageing cocks that had wandered around the farmyard eating scraps, and they were anything but tender, so the cooks found that stewing them slowly in the local wine turned the tough, rather bitter meat into a delicacy.

The serfs kept the fresh spring chickens for themselves.

[DodgyAgent]

A rich person takes responsibility in much the same way as someone who isn't rich. I'm certainly not suggesting they should feel sorry or guilty for their good fortune and success in life. What I object to, and believe the UK will be better off without, is the attitude of those that say "we'll bugger of and you'll be sorry", rather than taking their share of the pain that they helped to create. They seem to think the rest of society owes them a huge favour, and quite frankly, I don't think we do. I think British society as a whole will be better off without those sort of people. Not rich people, but selfish people who don't take responsibiliy for the consequences of their actions.

It's really not about how much money they earn. There are plenty of poor arseholes who we could do without as well, but unfortunately they aren't offering to leave of their own accord.

If you got offered a job in another country paying much more than you earn now and then took the job, would you expect people to regard you in the same way?