A great day for Britain

[doodab]

So how many people do you employ then?

Currently just me, at my peak I was generating work for 2 other freelancers via plan B.

Regulations are not made to be equitable at all. They are made for political reasons and usually by people with their own agenda. ho for example is the figure of the minimum wage arrived at? If it was fair and equitable it would allow for differencies in living costs, areas of high/low unemployment, region etc.

It does to some extent. It varies with age and is higher in London (although the LLW isn't set by the government or obligatory so doesn't really count). I think there are limits to what you can do both in terms of imposing excessive bureaucracy and avoid accusations of subsidising one place over another.

Why is it you think that tax is spent wisely when it could instead be spent on wine women and boats?

A better question might be why you think I think that. I've already pointed out that I think the minimum wage is a mechanism to avoid state subsidy of employment. Surely you don't need me to join the dots and tell you that results in a reduction in the tax burden on everybody else. Not to mention a reduction in tax paid by companies who employ low wage staff because of their higher wage bills.

You clearly have a chip of presumably envy about really wealthy people. if you concentrate on your own game rather than hitting at people you cant touch anyway the world would be a better place.

Oh here we go. The old "envy" line. The last resort of the uncomprehending. No, dodgy, it's not envy. I don't want to be them. I just want to live in as nice a world as possible, and I think things like lower crime, better health, better education (all of which correlate with more equitable wealth distribution) are desirable. It's called thinking about the bigger picture. You should try it.

[doodab]

Ok so would you give up say 80% of your wealth in order that it can be distributed "more equitably"?

If the wealth were actually distributed more equitably he probably wouldn't have to.

[Old Greg]

Oh here we go. The old "envy" line. The last resort of the uncomprehending. No, dodgy, it's not envy. I don't want to be them. I just want to live in as nice a world as possible, and I think things like lower crime, better health, better education (all of which correlate with more equitable wealth distribution) are desirable. It's called thinking about the bigger picture. You should try it.

The envy line is hilarious. If people were envious, they would want to be rich. Instead, they want the rich not to be rich.

Underpinning all this is a profound lack of imagination. I think Dodgy is one of the proponents of the line that 'socialists just pretent to care about poor people but they don't really.'

Imagine it! People caring about poor people! The very idea.

[DodgyAgent]

You haven't heard me - I'm not looking for plain redistribution in wealth without systemic reform.

I would gladly see a significant reduction in my wealth and income within a cooperative system of production and distribution that tended to equalise incomes and wealth.

Oh so you are quite safe then. Your own position of low tax and high income is nicely protected and you can go around telling everyone that you have a social conscience. Good for you. Not only are you rich but without sacrificing any of your own money you can tut tut at who you like - welcome Bono.

Like a lot of people you have a sort of utopian ideal that like the Euro and the NHS computer system is never attainable without the pain and hard work needed at the detail level. Likewise in politics where socialist morality is expressed with grand ill founded and counter productive policies (minimum wage)

This is the attitude that has prevailed across Europe for the last 17 years and the chickens have come home to roost. High minded concepts like the minimum wage (we'll get those bast*rd exploitative employers) are having to be discarded - because they are killing jobs. The Euro is falling apart and countries are being forced back to the world of reality. The NHS computer system has now been found out.

Those with their self important so called "caring socialist ideals" are being forced to bow to reality and hard economics.

This country has gone bust twice because we have allowed it to be taken over by idiots who pretend that they know what is good for everyone else rather than be run by people with a sound understanding of economics. The word "fair" has been used to justify policies rather than "economically viable".

Times are changing - the do gooders will simply have to wait in their jobsworth boxes before we can afford to give them power again.

[sasguru]

I run one of those small hard working businesses who would like to see simplified regulation and a simpler more transparent tax system, .

You're a disguised employee or itinerant IT worker if you prefer, not a small business.
And therein lies your problem. Your value-added is puny. In other words you get the rewards of what you provide.

[doodab]

High minded concepts like the minimum wage (we'll get those bast*rd exploitative employers) are having to be discarded - because they are killing jobs.

This is twaddle. Even China has a minimum wage. So does Afghanistan, Brazil, Kazakhstan and Zambia.

[sasguru]

. If people were envious, they would want to be rich. Instead, they want the rich not to be rich..

Whyever not? Isn't that envy defined?
I don't care if my friend (this is a real case here) is a multimillionaire. He had a great idea, started a company and was successful. That company has, and will, provide thousands of joobs to people over the years, while he has retired to pursue other interests.

Underlying it all there seems to be some kind of psychological chip happening here: if I can't have it neither should they.

[DodgyAgent]

. I think Dodgy is one of the proponents of the line that 'socialists just pretent to care about poor people but they don't really.'

.

I absolutely and completely believe this. If socialists do care so much about people then they would act according to their consciences. many do and most of these people do so without moaning about the rich. Then at the other end of the spectrum we have the very rich who give much of their money away Gates, Carnegie all the great Philanthropists.
So then how many socialists who spend their lives preaching socialism and berating the rich are there who genuinely care for the poor?
If socialists really cared they would go out and earn a fortune and give it away. One thing is for certain anyone who has made it themselves would not want to let a government redistribute their wealth for them.

My wife has been to Aberdeen for a funeral today. Only one on her side of the family to turn up. her mother and aunt gave her such a hard time.. the former saying she was showing off and the latter who lives in edinburgh saying that the wind was too dangerous and she should'nt travel. Neither was motivated by duty or benevolence but simply did not want to be shown up as not bothering to turn up.

I am a great believer in actions speaking louder than words, and when someone tells me to pay up for the good of others I never believe that they actually care for "the others"

[doodab]

You're a disguised employee or itinerant IT worker if you prefer, not a small business.
And therein lies your problem. Your value-added is puny. In other words you get the rewards of what you provide.

Your very keen to blather on about the benefits of free markets, yet when people embrace them you mock them for it.

I provide a service, people pay for it. I have a few good customers and spend time touting for business when I have free capacity. How is that not a small business? Why is it that because the service is related to IT it's somehow qualitatively different than decorating, or plumbing, or accountancy? Is it because you find computers confusing?

[doodab]

Underlying it all there seems to be some kind of psychological chip happening here: if I can't have it neither should they.

Not at all. It's more a case of "if I can have a decent standard of living then why shouldn't everybody", and when you look at it objectively a system that works to concentrate wealth in the hands of the already wealthy is a big part of the problem.