Forum home Road cycling forum The bottom bracket

To those that dislike the idea of wanting more

VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
edited April 2014 in The bottom bracket
Watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FA4Ce1qOSXw


Too many people waste. To me its about making the best of what you have, doing everything you can to make the most of that one chance you have.
Maybe this will explain better than words from me.
Living MY dream.
«134567

Posts

  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,795
    I take your point but to be honest if I knew someone was going to give me 86,000 dollars every day I probably wouldn't be too fussed about spending it all, analogy apart though I'm sure their philosophy is the right one although not necessarily related just to wealth creation.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    I take your point but to be honest if I knew someone was going to give me 86,000 dollars every day I probably wouldn't be too fussed about spending it all, analogy apart though I'm sure their philosophy is the right one although not necessarily related just to wealth creation.

    I agree, but imagine the good that could be done if someone handed out 86,000 a day ?
    Likewise, imagine the good a man can do if he used all of his time for the good of everyone around him ?
    Living MY dream.
  • team47bteam47b Posts: 6,424
    Any suggestions for what you would do that would be "for the good of everyone around" you?
    my isetta is a 300cc bike
  • MatthewfalleMatthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    It's not about wanting more or less, its about doing the morally correct thing with that which you have - I can't see Rooney making holistic moral decisions with his £300,000 a week but at least Bill Gates et al are doing something with their masses.

    But that's just me ....
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • slowmartslowmart Posts: 4,182
    It's not about wanting more or less, its about doing the morally correct thing with that which you have - I can't see Rooney making holistic moral decisions with his £300,000 a week but at least Bill Gates et al are doing something with their masses.

    But that's just me ....

    Doesn't Rooney support OAP's by supplementing their pensions by paying them for sexual services?
    “Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to cycle and he will realize fishing is stupid and boring”

    Desmond Tutu
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    Rooney helps several charities.

    It amazes me how people attack those who seemingly earn vast sums. Why not be happy for them and think "what if ehh!"

    It's not the same thought process in other countries as it is here. We as a nation despise people who excell. We prefer those who fail. Look at sporting stars etc.

    As for what I do, I do enough to enable me to sleep easy at night. I could stream off a list of what I think helps others but we all know what would be posted after I did that so let's leave it as I am happy with what I do.
    Living MY dream.
  • slowmartslowmart Posts: 4,182
    VTech wrote:
    Rooney helps several charities.

    It amazes me how people attack those who seemingly earn vast sums. Why not be happy for them and think "what if ehh!"

    It's not the same thought process in other countries as it is here. We as a nation despise people who excell. We prefer those who fail. Look at sporting stars etc.

    As for what I do, I do enough to enable me to sleep easy at night. I could stream off a list of what I think helps others but we all know what would be posted after I did that so let's leave it as I am happy with what I do.


    Don't get me wrong on this. Talent, hard work and brains provide the platform and level of remuneration and best wishes to anyone to who wants to get on. I agree on the perception of successful people in this country which is illuminating and rather sad.

    However Rooney is a shellfish censored who needs his viewpoint realigning. So what he does his bit for charity? Countless people do so every week.

    Apart from the light hearted comment about paying older ladies for sexual services I find his comments reprehensible regarding being booed for a poor team performance during the last world cup. He forgets that the majority of supports scrimped and saved for years to go. They witnessed and abject and lacklustre performance from players who lacked pride, courage and commitment and then criticised the fans for booing the team.

    If he was a bloke in a factory he would still be a censored . Because he has money he still is a censored . You can be a censored regardless of income.
    “Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and feed him for a lifetime. Teach a man to cycle and he will realize fishing is stupid and boring”

    Desmond Tutu
  • MatthewfalleMatthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    Does he really do his bit for charity? Really?

    Everyone thought that Beckham did through his footy schools and film financing until they realised that they were tax schemes set up by a firm in Jersey who also did Ferdinand and Jimmy Carr's planning.

    There's a difference between being a Drogba (inordinate amounts of money but donates shedloads and does hands on work as well in the Ivory Coast) and Rooney who, errr doesn't. And I can't see Collette (sic) being a grand donator as well.

    No one is attacking him per se for earning vast sums (trust me, throw me £300k (post tax) a week and after about 3 weeks I'd probably have run out of things to spend it on): we have an unlimited amount of bankers to attack on that front) - what people are disgusted about is the amount of money to the level of work ethic ratio.
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • pliptrotpliptrot Posts: 582
    We live in a world where a majority of the population live precarious and difficult lives, and -for some of those unfortunates- it is not uncommon for grinding poverty to force people to sell their children into indentured servitude. Where itinerant and poorly paid workers struggle for long hours and in difficult and unsafe conditions to build stadiums where Rooney and his pals will soon run around for a bit. Not a world most decent and sentient people would choose. Getting more invariably means others getting less. So some of us don't want more.
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    Does he really do his bit for charity? Really?

    Everyone thought that Beckham did through his footy schools and film financing until they realised that they were tax schemes set up by a firm in Jersey who also did Ferdinand and Jimmy Carr's planning.

    There's a difference between being a Drogba (inordinate amounts of money but donates shedloads and does hands on work as well in the Ivory Coast) and Rooney who, errr doesn't. And I can't see Collette (sic) being a grand donator as well.

    No one is attacking him per se for earning vast sums (trust me, throw me £300k (post tax) a week and after about 3 weeks I'd probably have run out of things to spend it on): we have an unlimited amount of bankers to attack on that front) - what people are disgusted about is the amount of money to the level of work ethic ratio.


    Can I ask where you get that information from ?
    It's comments like that that spread poor humanity.

    Rooney does a lot for charities. Several in fact as do most premiership footballers and David beckham has done huge amounts. To say it's simply a tax break is appalling and your making someone out to be something he isn't which is one of he lowest forms I could think of a man.

    Millions. Millions and millions the beckhams a have raised. He doesn't pay tax in jersey like you suggest. He actually paid in France in the early days and them I the USA at 8% like most LA citizens.

    Spreading wrongs about people who do a lot of good isn't called for in such a thread. It isn't called for anywhere !!
    Living MY dream.
  • MatthewfalleMatthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    It's a well known fact amongst the offshore tax planners that the film financing industry was an offshore based tax planning route: the loophole was closed (I think offhand) in the last Budget (or thereabouts) much to the chagrin of those involved.

    The footy schools were closed once Beckham's days per annum in the US were getting too close to making him US res/dom (his wife's success there and their constant statements saying that they would never leave the US invariably led them into res/dom status although their multiple home ownership in the UK, Monaco and a few other places was intended to show multiple domicillary status).

    They were also falling foul (no pun intended) of the IRS' and HMRC's worldwide asset tax regime - although Beckham does pop up to the opening of an envelope in both a)an attempt to keep the fantastically well organised and succesful brand Beckham machine going and b)spread his worldwide days in residence around he came unstuck with a change in the loopholes.

    Don't worry about him: his advisors (he uses Farrers for Law amongst others) are brilliant and he will come out of this exceptionally wealthy: his tax advisors just have to stay on step ahead of HMRC. His bankers (Coutts - you may have heard of them) are also pretty good at what they do (although they aren't tax advisors/lawyers etc but they do point you in the right direction).

    Most of his charitable work is merely showing a face/name to it all - although he'll forego image rights but through very, very tightly wording contractual terms the asset addition of this to brand Beckham is beyond numbers.
    I think that, with all due respect, you are rather viewing the convivially nicknamed Wazza in a brighter light than is the reality: the media does have a knack of papering over the parts that they know the average man in the street won't either read or understand but I'd say, nah, he's not actually clued up on the charitable aspects of it all.

    I know the guy who wrote the white and green papers re the closure of the film financing loopholes (I had a beer with him last night) and a few of the Offshore guys so have a pretty good idea of whats going on.
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • pdstsppdstsp Posts: 1,264
    V-Tech - Regarding David Beckham - Why do you say he pay tax in France in "the early days"? In the early days he played for Man U, then Madrid etc. As far as I know he only went to LA in 2007 and spent part of the time in Milan on loan. Also why pay 8% in LA when the Californian state tax is 12.3% and there are federal taxes on top. Where are you getting your information from? I do know he said he would donate his salary from PSG to charity and I don't doubt he does some good work, by the way. However no-one is naive enough to think that charitable giving sometimes attracts a tax advantage and that these guys will take advantage of this?
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    That's very odd as I am fully aware of the loophole used I. Jersey by setting up a new company and offering services to that company etc etc. this is what I was offered and rejected.

    Beckham wasn't part of this. He was paying a lower rate in France as per Mrs Beckham until they moved to the USA.
    He isn't listed on an IRS site at all and why would he not want to pay the 8% there ?

    Also he rarely offers public appearances outside of charity. That's a fact !
    They are a private family and do what they can to remain that way but please understand that he does huge amounts and rarely, very rarely does it appear in the news because that's not what they want.

    I am aware of coutts. I bank there and it's not as people suggest either, the fact is that they understand banking rather than the main high street guys who come and go within a working system.


    I think this comes down to the fact that people will always dislike those who get on. More so when it seems unfairly (I.e footballers) but that's life I'm afraid.
    Living MY dream.
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    pdstsp wrote:
    V-Tech - Regarding David Beckham - Why do you say he pay tax in France in "the early days"? In the early days he played for Man U, then Madrid etc. As far as I know he only went to LA in 2007 and spent part of the time in Milan on loan. Also why pay 8% in LA when the Californian state tax is 12.3% and there are federal taxes on top. Where are you getting your information from? I do know he said he would donate his salary from PSG to charity and I don't doubt he does some good work, by the way. However no-one is naive enough to think that charitable giving sometimes attracts a tax advantage and that these guys will take advantage of this?

    When the slice girls were making £2m a month they were advised to but property in France and pay tax there. David married Victoria and became an employee of his company therefor lowering liability legally.
    In the USA you don't have to bank in the state you live and high net worth companies can reason with the irs to do deals on taxation. Again, he worked for his company !

    This system should be used here. It is far superior to the standard system we use and would almost certainly net the IR more capital.
    Living MY dream.
  • pdstsppdstsp Posts: 1,264
    So Mrs Beckham told you her husband's marginal rate of tax?
  • pdstsppdstsp Posts: 1,264
    But as he played in UK for Man U he would pay UK tax and be given credit under the double taxation treaty for any French tax paid. And you haven't answered the question about federal taxes.
  • Has the Bullshyte'O'Meter gone off the scale again?
    I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles
  • finchyfinchy Posts: 6,686
    VTech wrote:
    Rooney helps several charities.

    So? That doesn't mean that he deserves £300k/week for kicking a football. He earns more in 3 weeks than you would get for winning the Nobel Prize. He earns as much in a week as a nurse would earn in 15 years. Can you not see why people see this as getting priorities completely wrong?
    VTech wrote:
    It amazes me how people attack those who seemingly earn vast sums. Why not be happy for them and think "what if ehh!"

    Because the concentration of wealth into a few hands means less for everyone else. Can you really not see that?
    VTech wrote:
    It's not the same thought process in other countries as it is here. We as a nation despise people who excell. We prefer those who fail. Look at sporting stars etc.

    Yeah, sure. That's why the England '66 team is so reviled, as are our cyclists. That's why David Attenborough, Steven Hawking and Peter Higgs can't leave their houses without being spat upon. That's why nobody ever asks celebrities for their autographs or photos. It's because everybody here hates success. :roll: :roll: :roll:
    VTech wrote:
    As for what I do, I do enough to enable me to sleep easy at night. I could stream off a list of what I think helps others but we all know what would be posted after I did that so let's leave it as I am happy with what I do.

    Come on then, tell us what you do. For my sins, I'm a translator, but I'm studying Geology with the Open University in hope of a career change. I don't expect to get mega-wealthy in my life, but I think I'll do OK and I'll get the feeling of knowing that I'm doing something worthwhile.
  • pdstsppdstsp Posts: 1,264
    VTech wrote:
    They are a private family and do what they can to remain that way but please understand that he does huge amounts and rarely, very rarely does it appear in the news because that's not what they want

    Is this the same private family who sold the rights to their wedding to some sh1tty celeb rag?
    VTech wrote:
    He isn't listed on an IRS site at all and why would he not want to pay the 8% there ?

    What does this mean?

    I'm really sorry but I can't help feeling you've fallen for some celebrity story here.
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    I'm not interested in celebrity rags. I work with a lot of celebs and footballers so see a different side.
    Living MY dream.
  • pdstsppdstsp Posts: 1,264
    :D Nice side-step. :D
  • pinnopinno Posts: 45,326
    We can't blame Wooney or Beckham for earning such sums of money. I am sure these highly paid footballers would not say "No, I don't want these wages. Give me £250 a week".
    The celebrity and commercially driven culture is driving the excesses. All top clubs are now in the entertainment business and operate as PLC's. We are the mugs that buy the tickets, the merchandise and the SKY packages.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,667
    Speak for yourself. I only have 1-ply cardboard for my box and the screws to hold the dish up keep ripping out, regardless of how much scented wax I put around them.
  • pinnopinno Posts: 45,326
    coriordan wrote:
    Speak for yourself. I only have 1-ply cardboard for my box and the screws to hold the dish up keep ripping out, regardless of how much scented wax I put around them.

    Hang the dish from the ceiling of the flyover using the straps from rucksacks of dead hitch hikers.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • AnonymousAnonymous Posts: 79,667
    Where I'm from they can't afford flyovers. We do want them though, to hang the satellite dish from. So in that vein I'd say I am in the camp that wants more. More 'ply' in my cardboard and flyovers.

    I hope I'm not sounding ungrateful. Our box does support a wire coathanger and now we get channel 5.
  • nathancomnathancom Posts: 1,567
    Rayne Wooney is a grasping disloyal censored who has shafted his club to force high pay deals. No wonder Ferguson wanted him gone.

    I am definitely not going to be advising my kids to look to hi as a role model, thanks!

    Did we really need another thread in which we could name-drop celebrities, I thought that was the purpose of the rich and vulgar thread.

    As to "grabbing every second". I don't think the universe really cares whether you grab those seconds or not but if you feel that whatever you are doing with your time is better than the alternative then I guess that is fine. Still I am not sure that posting on a bikeradar forum counts as living life to the full that they meant in the video, but it seems a reasonable way to spend some of my time, along with eating, working, sleeping, washing and pooping.
  • MatthewfalleMatthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    VTech wrote:

    I am aware of coutts. I bank there and it's not as people suggest either, the fact is that they understand banking rather than the main high street guys who come and go within a working system.

    quote]

    Pre or post 2007?

    And anyway, it doesn't exactly have the kudos it used to have. Personally, I bank at C. Hoare & Co. as its the family's bankers. It's a bit more discreet and less footballerists go there. They also serve proper coffee not Nescafe.

    I once wrote a policy paper on the banking rules for the FSA and Coutts were involved - I spent a lot of time at the Strand branch and its all really a bit tatty behind the scenes. Very nice guys though, the majority of them. But not for me really.
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • MonkeypumpMonkeypump Posts: 1,528
    nathancom wrote:
    Rayne Wooney...

    ...I am definitely not going to be advising my kids to look to him as a role model, thanks!

    This underlines the sad element of youth these days - so many kids DO see footballers as role models. There are few, if any, that really deserve that adoration - certainly off the field, even if they are gifted with world class sporting skills.

    Like you, I hope I can steer my kids clear of this (when I have some) and help them find better role models.
  • MonkeypumpMonkeypump Posts: 1,528
    What people are disgusted about is the amount of money to the level of work ethic ratio.

    This is the nub of the issue. I'm all for sportsman earning high wages, as their careers are short. On a broader scale, I have no problem with anyone earning whatever salary they can negotiate.

    But how about a little humility from idiots such as Rooney? A little appreciation for the supporters who, as previously mentioned, scrimp and save for tickets and kit that now cost a pretty penny (plus all the other costs associated with being a 'fan').

    Okay, these guys appear at a few charity events, a few dinners, a few TV fundraisers. But as a percentage of their free time? I can't see it being that high, apart from a few exceptions.

    I do a bit of charity work (could do much more, of course), primarily for injured young sportspeople. One of the guys I know through that work has a disabled daughter, a wife who has been seriously ill, and all the other challenges any family man has. What does he choose to do for a job? Work tirelessly running a charity helping other disabled kids, which obviously doesn't put him in the HNWI bracket. In his (little) spare time? More fund raising activities for related causes. Compare him to Rooney, and I know which one 'does loads for charity' and which one doesn't.
  • The easiest way to make most peoples lives better is for the government to increase the minimum wage to the living wage. If EVERYBODY has a living wage then this can only be a good thing for the economy surely? Can someone tell me why this wouldnt work? If more people had more disposable income then that would mean businesses could flog more stuff thus increasing their profits. Cameron doesnt see it like this because he has a face like an elephants pooper, which I imagine is very off putting.
This discussion has been closed.