Top 1% of Britons own 24% of nation's assets

Stevo_666

Frank the tank wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

There's a thread for this type of discussion...

BTW Frank, I've already voted for Corbyn

I really hope you live to regret it.

I don't think I will Frank.

Apart from the point that I've only got marginally less chance of seeing Elvis riding the Loch Ness Monster than I have of seeing Corbyn running the country, even if he did win, what do you think would happen to the demand for someone with my skill set? Now that would be a good time to negotiate a FBPR*

* F****** Big Pay Rise

Frank the tank

Stevo 666 wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

There's a thread for this type of discussion...

BTW Frank, I've already voted for Corbyn

I really hope you live to regret it.

I don't think I will Frank.

Apart from the point that I've only got marginally less chance of seeing Elvis riding the Loch Ness Monster than I have of seeing Corbyn running the country, even if he did win, what do you think would happen to the demand for someone with my skill set? Now that would be a good time to negotiate a FBPR*

* F****** Big Pay Rise

I have no idea what your skill set is Stevo.
What I would say though is, if I had a chance to dictate things society would be a whole lot fairer than it is now and I don't think any fair minded person would argue with that.

Stevo_666

Tax...

meanredspider

What I love is that China's top 1% own a considerably greater percentage according to the figures I've seen. Gotta love communism.

Frank the tank

Stevo 666 wrote:

Tax...

Shock horror

Frank the tank

meanredspider wrote:

What I love is that China's top 1% own a considerably greater percentage according to the figures I've seen. Gotta love communism.

I have always said politics is like a clock face, starting at 12, if you go far left or far right you end up in the same place 6
It's just a case of what sort of oppressor you want, the result is the same.
Whether Hitler or Stalin ran the show, if you were a worker you remained a worker.

Frank the tank

Slowmart wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

Wallace and Gromit wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

The major hit was through having to bail out the banks to save millions of ordinary people from having their livelihoods destroyed. That's a different debate that has been done to death though.

So why do you want to burn a Tory? That was on Brown and Darling's watch!

I wouldn't, obviously. I don't particularly carry a torch for the Blair administration (Tories with red rosettes).
Those on here that know my political views know I have a deep seated hatred of tory politics. Some may say totally irrational, but we are all entitled to our opinion.

OK. I guess we're unlikely to agree on political matters, but at least your position is logical.

So which UK political party of the last few decades meets with your approval?

Probably.....

Robert Lindsey lived 10 miles from where I was born.

ballysmate

Frank the tank wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

What I love is that China's top 1% own a considerably greater percentage according to the figures I've seen. Gotta love communism.

I have always said politics is like a clock face, starting at 12, if you go far left or far right you end up in the same place 6
It's just a case of what sort of oppressor you want, the result is the same.
Whether Hitler or Stalin ran the show, if you were a worker you remained a worker.

You must be a 7 then Frank.

Stevo_666

6.01?

bompington

Frank the tank wrote:

if I had a chance to dictate things society would be a whole lot fairer than it is now and I don't think any fair minded person would argue with that.

Errr, have you spotted the massive contradiction in that? Clue: look at the words "dictate" and "fairer".

That's the problem which every version of socialism has to overcome: essentially, to bring about more equal wealth you will always end up taking wealth away from some people with some degree of compulsion. The role of "blood-sucking elite" then just passes to those with the power to decide who gets what redistributed, i.e. the politicians: fine if you have the chance to vote them out, but you ask e.g. the Cubans about that. At least the blood-sucking capitalists are accountable - the essence of the free market is that they only make money if they have something that people want to buy.

ballysmate

So there you have it, Frank. You aspire to being the elite.
As regards "blood sucking", I'm prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt.

mamba80

bompington wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

if I had a chance to dictate things society would be a whole lot fairer than it is now and I don't think any fair minded person would argue with that.

Errr, have you spotted the massive contradiction in that? Clue: look at the words "dictate" and "fairer".

That's the problem which every version of socialism has to overcome: essentially, to bring about more equal wealth you will always end up taking wealth away from some people with some degree of compulsion. The role of "blood-sucking elite" then just passes to those with the power to decide who gets what redistributed, i.e. the politicians: fine if you have the chance to vote them out, but you ask e.g. the Cubans about that. At least the blood-sucking capitalists are accountable - the essence of the free market is that they only make money if they have something that people want to buy.

But they are not are they? bush and blair, Green or Fred the shred, the numerous directors who ve shafted their company pension schemes whilst awarding themselves financial gain, or who pay their workers peanuts but themselves/shareholders generously and the state allows it by giving out wtc.

inequality is too great to be sustainable, unlike it times pasts we can all see how great it has become.

Capitalism has failed millions in the US and in Europe and thats why many are voting in the far right, just like after the financial crashes in the 1920's europe moved to the right also.

just listened to Stephen Kinnock, he really can 't see what is happening to labour or the htreat from ukip, TMay with her 2k trousers and £300 trainers, these people live in a parallel universe.

slowmart

mamba80 wrote:

bompington wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

if I had a chance to dictate things society would be a whole lot fairer than it is now and I don't think any fair minded person would argue with that.

Errr, have you spotted the massive contradiction in that? Clue: look at the words "dictate" and "fairer".

That's the problem which every version of socialism has to overcome: essentially, to bring about more equal wealth you will always end up taking wealth away from some people with some degree of compulsion. The role of "blood-sucking elite" then just passes to those with the power to decide who gets what redistributed, i.e. the politicians: fine if you have the chance to vote them out, but you ask e.g. the Cubans about that. At least the blood-sucking capitalists are accountable - the essence of the free market is that they only make money if they have something that people want to buy.

But they are not are they? bush and blair, Green or Fred the shred, the numerous directors who ve shafted their company pension schemes whilst awarding themselves financial gain, or who pay their workers peanuts but themselves/shareholders generously and the state allows it by giving out wtc.

inequality is too great to be sustainable, unlike it times pasts we can all see how great it has become.

Capitalism has failed millions in the US and in Europe and thats why many are voting in the far right, just like after the financial crashes in the 1920's europe moved to the right also.

just listened to Stephen Kinnock, he really can 't see what is happening to labour or the htreat from ukip, TMay with her 2k trousers and £300 trainers, these people live in a parallel universe.

Its going to get a lot worse before it gets better. The Tories currently have a 16pt lead over labour.




Let that sink in. Labour have achieved biblical proportions of ineffective opposition under their last two leaders




I doubt we can find anyone to suggest that the Tories are currently doing a good job in either managing themselves or the countries interests which means Labour have achieved biblical proportions of ineffective opposition under their last two leaders


So why can't Labour capitalize on the disjointed Tories?

The Best of British? I sincerely hope not.






It looks like we are stuck with these cretins for a while now

ballysmate

mamba80 wrote:

bompington wrote:

Frank the tank wrote:

if I had a chance to dictate things society would be a whole lot fairer than it is now and I don't think any fair minded person would argue with that.

Errr, have you spotted the massive contradiction in that? Clue: look at the words "dictate" and "fairer".

That's the problem which every version of socialism has to overcome: essentially, to bring about more equal wealth you will always end up taking wealth away from some people with some degree of compulsion. The role of "blood-sucking elite" then just passes to those with the power to decide who gets what redistributed, i.e. the politicians: fine if you have the chance to vote them out, but you ask e.g. the Cubans about that. At least the blood-sucking capitalists are accountable - the essence of the free market is that they only make money if they have something that people want to buy.

But they are not are they? bush and blair, Green or Fred the shred, the numerous directors who ve shafted their company pension schemes whilst awarding themselves financial gain, or who pay their workers peanuts but themselves/shareholders generously and the state allows it by giving out wtc.

inequality is too great to be sustainable, unlike it times pasts we can all see how great it has become.

Capitalism has failed millions in the US and in Europe and thats why many are voting in the far right, just like after the financial crashes in the 1920's europe moved to the right also.

just listened to Stephen Kinnock, he really can 't see what is happening to labour or the htreat from ukip, TMay with her 2k trousers and £300 trainers, these people live in a parallel universe.

Heard Kinnock junior getting his Y fronts in a twist on R2 this dinnertime at the suggestion that Daddy had got him his job. Perish the thought. Next, people will be be suggesting that Neil got Glenys onboard the gravy train.

As for TM wearing trainers worth 300 quid being an example of her living in a parallel universe, I have to chuckle at such a post on here, where members will spend many times more than that on bling for their bikes.

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Capitalism has failed millions in the US and in Europe

Assuming that is right, what's the alternative?

rick_chasey

According to Trump, mercantilism.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Capitalism has failed millions in the US and in Europe

Assuming that is right, what's the alternative?

ultimately, capitalism serves us well, yet at the same time, its needs to be reigned in and a social intervention element introduced, we can see it in the NHS, education or lack of affordable housing, the free market just doesn't provide and if we leave things as they are, we ll have more Trumps or worse.

Mays attempts on director pay? like asking an addict to cut back, needs teeth, probably via the tax system (i m sure you could figure out a suitable scheme?) and not another fuggin league table.

ballysmate

Slowmart wrote:

So why can't Labour capitalize on the disjointed Tories?

The Best of British? I sincerely hope not.






It looks like we are stuck with these cretins for a while now

No not the best front bench put forward by the Tories, I agree.

As for why Labour can't capiltalise, I give you

slowmart

Ballysmate wrote:

Slowmart wrote:

So why can't Labour capitalize on the disjointed Tories?

The Best of British? I sincerely hope not.






It looks like we are stuck with these cretins for a while now

No not the best front bench put forward by the Tories, I agree.

As for why Labour can't capiltalise, I give you

Which begs the question, where will the disaffected labour vote go? Will it mirror Scotland and go nationalist, in which case Nutjob of UKIP will be smiling or it be the Tories.

That's if you believe the opinion polls which frankly have been shown to be in need of a new model.

Moonbiker

If america can elect a trump & france have Marie le Penn as serious contender what quasi-facist could be the future for briton PM?

Poltics seems to be shifting to generally too the right which makes it hard for labour unless they have a new charasmatic tory-lite leader like blair.

Also bearded PM last one was Lord Salisbury, Tory leader 1885-1902.

Corbyn would have to be amazing to overcome the beard penalty :roll:

mr_goo

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

Capitalism has failed millions in the US and in Europe

Assuming that is right, what's the alternative?

ultimately, capitalism serves us well, yet at the same time, its needs to be reigned in and a social intervention element introduced, we can see it in the NHS, education or lack of affordable housing, the free market just doesn't provide and if we leave things as they are, we ll have more Trumps or worse.

Mays attempts on director pay? like asking ian addict to cut back, needs teeth, probably via the tax system (i m sure you could figure out a suitable scheme?) and not another fuggin league table.

Tax system won't work. My MD gets round the high tax rate by having a salary under £90k and loaning the company money, which is then paid back at 2% above the Base or Current Lending rates. Brilliant if you can do it I'm quite sure. But sucks.
I'm sure there are many other ways of swizzing the IR but the majority of the tax paying population will always be enslaved to the system.

rick_chasey

Not entirely sure that is allowed Goo.

rick_chasey

https://www.gov.uk/directors-loans/you- ... pany-money

He'll still pay some tax. Marginally less.

kingstongraham

Rick Chasey wrote:

https://www.gov.uk/directors-loans/you-lend-your-company-money

He'll still pay some tax. Marginally less.

Isn't it risky unless they are the only shareholder? What happens if the place goes belly up?

rick_chasey

You take that risk on don't you?

That's what you charge the interest for.

surrey_commuter

Rick Chasey wrote:

You take that risk on don't you?

That's what you charge the interest for.

That is doing my head in... is he actually lending money? If so he would have to lend £1m to get circa £25k on which he would pay 20% tax and not circa 60% so meaning he is £10k better off.

Unless I have missed something then he is mad or a crook

Stevo_666

Not really an effective arrangement. He will pay tax on the interest at his top marginal rate. Possibly some savings around NI but could be caught by anti avoidance rules if abusive.

It may be a decent way of earning a respectable rate on your savings but also the company may get caught by the related party rules.

mamba80

Stevo 666 wrote:

Not really an effective arrangement. He will pay tax on the interest at his top marginal rate. Possibly some savings around NI but could be caught by anti avoidance rules if abusive.

It may be a decent way of earning a respectable rate on your savings but also the company may get caught by the related party rules.

hmrc could change the rules? they have on salary sacrifice so why not on this, any reason not too steve?

apparently by 2020 the top 1.5% of earners will be paying 20% more tax than currently, So May obviously thinks its a good idea lol!
though is the Telegraph a reliable source?

Stevo_666

mamba80 wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Not really an effective arrangement. He will pay tax on the interest at his top marginal rate. Possibly some savings around NI but could be caught by anti avoidance rules if abusive.

It may be a decent way of earning a respectable rate on your savings but also the company may get caught by the related party rules.

hmrc could change the rules? they have on salary sacrifice so why not on this, any reason not too steve?

apparently by 2020 the top 1.5% of earners will be paying 20% more tax than currently, So May obviously thinks its a good idea lol!
though is the Telegraph a reliable source?

Why do they have to change the rules if it's taxable?

Best route is look at shareholder powers on this matter. After all it is a matter for the shareholders.

surrey_commuter

Stevo 666 wrote:

Not really an effective arrangement. He will pay tax on the interest at his top marginal rate. Possibly some savings around NI but could be caught by anti avoidance rules if abusive.

It may be a decent way of earning a respectable rate on your savings but also the company may get caught by the related party rules.

As an employee I would be doing my expenses on a hourly basis and getting my CV up to date