• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "One in ten UK households are now millionaires"

Collapse

  • Paddy
    replied
    High property values are an excuse to tax people. If you are the ten percent who are property millionaires; it is the equivalent of having Old Kent Road in Monopoly, the one percent have Mayfair, Park Lane , Bond Street Waterworks, unities jail and are constantly re-writing the community chest and chance.

    Leave a comment:


  • vetran
    replied
    But there is also a great wealth disparity among households. In the 55-64 age group, one in ten households have less than £29,000 in assets.
    "This figures includes their furniture, their clothes and their car," said Prof Hills. "It means that really they are approaching retirement with virtually nothing to rely on except the state pension."
    question is are these the long term unemployed, the low paid or people who spent the lot?

    Leave a comment:


  • OwlHoot
    replied
    Originally posted by TheFaQQer View Post
    You should read Boomsday - the idea is that when people hit a certain age, they can opt to be euthanised, in return for certain tax breaks and incentives for their family.
    In 50 or 100 years wrinklies will be incentivised one way or another (including the threat of impoverishment and fatal neglect) to volunteer for manned missions to places like the Moon or Mars or even further afield.

    Although robots will get smarter humans will still be needed on the ground, to claim territory in the name of their countries of origin, and oldies will benefit from the lower gravity. Also it won't matter so much if their DNA is shot to b*ggary by cosmic radiation during the journey, or for that matter if they die of old age en route.

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    Are there enough colour pictures in it to keep CUK General readers interested for more than 5 minutes?
    Some very grey graphs.

    Leave a comment:


  • d000hg
    replied
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    Hey Dim, on a completely different subject, you should get Nate Silver's "The Signal and the Noise".
    In it he addresses 2 of your biggest interests: Climate change and Stock Markets from a statistical point of view. No maths required, it's a popular book for the general reader

    Don't say I'm never helpful ...
    We get to blame the bankers for climate change? Sound's like Milliband's wet dream.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    Hey Dim, on a completely different subject, you should get Nate Silver's "The Signal and the Noise". No maths required, it's a popular book for the general reader
    Are there enough colour pictures in it to keep CUK General readers interested for more than 5 minutes?

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by istvan View Post
    Now I know why I feel like nine-in-ten... bummer.
    Nothing Quantitative Easing can't fix...

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Hey Dim, on a completely different subject, you should get Nate Silver's "The Signal and the Noise".
    In it he addresses 2 of your biggest interests: Climate change and Stock Markets from a statistical point of view. No maths required, it's a popular book for the general reader

    Don't say I'm never helpful ...

    Leave a comment:


  • istvan
    replied
    Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
    Now I know why I feel like nine-in-ten... bummer.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheFaQQer
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    You are probably worth more dead to the Govt than alive
    You should read Boomsday - the idea is that when people hit a certain age, they can opt to be euthanised, in return for certain tax breaks and incentives for their family.

    Leave a comment:


  • SimonMac
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    You are probably worth more dead to the ClientCo than alive

    Leave a comment:


  • NorthWestPerm2Contr
    replied
    Originally posted by AtW View Post
    You are probably worth more dead to the Govt than alive
    Perhaps the govt should open up a new assassination dept to help bring the deficit down by bringing in more tax revenue through inheritance etc.

    Leave a comment:


  • AtW
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    Paper wealth though innit, on paper I am worth a fortune, dead even more!
    You are probably worth more dead to the Govt than alive

    Leave a comment:


  • DodgyAgent
    replied
    Originally posted by SimonMac View Post
    Paper wealth though innit, on paper I am worth a fortune, dead even more!
    Sorry Mac we love you dearly but business is business

    Leave a comment:


  • SimonMac
    replied
    Paper wealth though innit, on paper I am worth a fortune, dead even more!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X