Rich list
Frank the tank
Posts: 6,553
Top 1,000 richest in GB are worth £400billion and their wealth over the last year has increased by 20%.
But remember, we're all in this recession together. :roll:
But remember, we're all in this recession together. :roll:
Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.
0
Comments
-
I wonder how many of them pay income tax?0
-
Well done them I say.0
-
And, remember I'm sure there would be a lot more unemployed people out there without them.
Bit of a shame i didnt make the list :roll:Its Italian, its carbon.....and some lanky tool rides it.0 -
did mike ashley go up by £35m since last years list ?0
-
Homer J wrote:I wonder how many of them pay income tax?
All of them, otherwise they would be in prison/abroad.
They just generally have better tax planning, that's all. Generally a ) you can afford it and b ) you need it when you're worth mega bucks.
If you're earning £35,00 p.a. and living in a semi in Dulwich, I would humbly suggest that its not worth seeking out a private banker and specialist tax advisor to work out what's the most efficient tax planning for you and your family.
And before anyone goes on about offshore accounts, trusts, companies, etc, yes, you do pay tax on those as well - its all about declaring worldwide income.
And as Richard205 said above, they keep a lot of people employed.
The most surprising thing shouldn't be the amount they are worth, it should be that they are still in the UK ......0 -
Yossie wrote:Homer J wrote:I wonder how many of them pay income tax?
All of them, otherwise they would be in prison/abroad.
They just generally have better tax planning, that's all. Generally a ) you can afford it and b ) you need it when you're worth mega bucks.
The question is probably whether they pay as much income tax as you think they should morally, which is probably different from how much they have to legally.0 -
Just in case any of you were wondering. I'm not in the top 100. You can all sleep peacefully knowing that. :twisted:
0 -
100 people who work damn hard for their money. I wouldn't spend the time they do working or dealing with the pressure they do. Good on them.0
-
MrChuck wrote:Yossie wrote:Homer J wrote:I wonder how many of them pay income tax?
All of them, otherwise they would be in prison/abroad.
They just generally have better tax planning, that's all. Generally a ) you can afford it and b ) you need it when you're worth mega bucks.
The question is probably whether they pay as much income tax as you think they should morally, which is probably different from how much they have to legally.
Morally? I am sure they pay as much as they HAVE to. Why would they pay any more? Why would anyone on here, for example, pay any more than they should or need to?Ben
Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/0 -
Who cares?
Never got the obsession with the rich list.
Guys at work were practically nursing semis at the prospect of it coming out.0 -
And at the other end of camerons 'all it together' Frank...
Jobcentre staff 'sent guidelines on how to deal with claimants' suicide threats
you couldn't make it up.The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he resigns
momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:Who cares?
Never got the obsession with the rich list.
Guys at work were practically nursing semis at the prospect of it coming out.
I think Frank's point (which everyone seems to be missing) is that while the top earners are massively increasing their fortunes, ordinary people are faced with job losses and cuts in pay and working hours.0 -
johnfinch wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Who cares?
Never got the obsession with the rich list.
Guys at work were practically nursing semis at the prospect of it coming out.
I think Frank's point (which everyone seems to be missing) is that while the top earners are massively increasing their fortunes, ordinary people are faced with job losses and cuts in pay and working hours.
It's hardly representative of anything though. It's only 100 people, and they have enough cash to be able to speculate. They also are often in the business of speculation anyway, so they are particlarly good at it. Speculators can make money when everyone else loses money, if they make the most of choppy markets.0 -
The recession would normally flush out a lot of the chancers, but this time the government have attempted to prop everything up. Printing money, near zero interest rates, huge deficit, banking bailouts and a whole heap of schemes to keep people buying stuff.
The last government seem to decide that no-one should suffer when in reality the recession is the healing process from the decade of 'boom' beforehand.
While the new government continue with the same policies (there really are no cuts yet) then the rich will continue to get richer and the debt that our children need to repay will just get larger and larger ..... till state failure.
It's pure selfish greed.
0 -
0
-
Nothing new here.
The wealthy can afford to speculate when the markets crash and sell when things pick up. Buy low, sell high. Simple philosophy that has always happened. It would be highlighted even more if there had been a property crash into the bargain. AFAIK, the Rockerfellers made all their money by buying property on the cheap during the great depression.
Morality is a seperate issue but as has been said, they employ people, there are nicer (subjective) and cheaper places to live so don't knock them too much.None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
johnfinch wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Who cares?
Never got the obsession with the rich list.
Guys at work were practically nursing semis at the prospect of it coming out.
I think Frank's point (which everyone seems to be missing) is that while the top earners are massively increasing their fortunes, ordinary people are faced with job losses and cuts in pay and working hours.
That's exactly the point.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
The Mad Rapper wrote:MarcBC wrote:Well done them I say.
100% this. Bitterness is so last year.
Not bitter, just an observation.
I so wish greed and avarice were "so last year". Sorry, appearently they were. Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Somebody has to have that wealth, imagine how much they lost when it all went t!ts up a couple of years ago0
-
DCowling wrote:Somebody has to have that wealth, imagine how much they lost when it all went t!ts up a couple of years ago
You don't lose on investments when it all goes tits up, unless you sell at the bottom end.
My guess is that they sat tight and probably increased their investments when the markets crashed. That's how the rich get richer.None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
daviesee wrote:DCowling wrote:Somebody has to have that wealth, imagine how much they lost when it all went t!ts up a couple of years ago
You don't lose on investments when it all goes tits up, unless you sell at the bottom end.
My guess is that they sat tight and probably increased their investments when the markets crashed. That's how the rich get richer.
Correct, Im a relationship manager within private banking, and our general advise (depending on what asset types) will be for someone to increase their holdings in such a situation.
You never "loose" on an investment as long as you are in a position to hold on to it until markets rise again.
Plus most investments are in actively managed funds, that are heavily diversified, so it is very, very, very rare for one to loose a large portion of funds with no chance of recovery.0 -
Squillinossett wrote:daviesee wrote:DCowling wrote:Somebody has to have that wealth, imagine how much they lost when it all went t!ts up a couple of years ago
You don't lose on investments when it all goes tits up, unless you sell at the bottom end.
My guess is that they sat tight and probably increased their investments when the markets crashed. That's how the rich get richer.
Correct, Im a relationship manager within private banking, and our general advise (depending on what asset types) will be for someone to increase their holdings in such a situation.
You never "loose" on an investment as long as you are in a position to hold on to it until markets rise again.
Plus most investments are in actively managed funds, that are heavily diversified, so it is very, very, very rare for one to loose a large portion of funds with no chance of recovery.
Lose.0 -
Yeah!
Rick standing up for me. (We are usually at odds and he is just correcting an error but take it while you get it). Now to look for flying pigs or a blue moon
None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.0 -
I thought I corrected all my typos :oops:
I shall hang my head in shame
0 -
From what I've heard, the hedge funds and fund managers hardly got an easy ride, nor are they doing especially well now.
One can make money in that way during recessions, but it's not easy.
Naturally, with all rich lists, those who have done well rise to the top. A small percentage gain means an enormous absolute gain.
People very quickly forget those who lose money.0 -
Squillinossett wrote:I thought I corrected all my typos :oops:
I shall hang my head in shame
Corrected by a foreigner too! 0 -
Im contacting the daily mail about this :evil:0
-
What have morals got to do with paying tax ??MrChuck wrote:Yossie wrote:Homer J wrote:I wonder how many of them pay income tax?
All of them, otherwise they would be in prison/abroad.
They just generally have better tax planning, that's all. Generally a ) you can afford it and b ) you need it when you're worth mega bucks.
The question is probably whether they pay as much income tax as you think they should morally, which is probably different from how much they have to legally.
I've worked bl**dy hard to earn my bonus payment this month. It's a bonus because it's for work carried out over and above what is expected of me. As far as I can see, it's morally wrong for the government to say "well done, you've worked extra hard, now we're taking 40% of that" !!!Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved0 -
I'm complaining to Wiggle !!!Squillinossett wrote:Im contacting the daily mail about this :evil:Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved0
