Unpopular Opinions

Pross

Someone obviously hasn't realised that the only way flagging a post on this site gets any attention is if it because of someone trying to sell something or promote a website. Bally's post was about as mild as it gets but I suspect the flag on Coopster's borderline racism will be ignored.

Jeremy.89

I do wonder if some of the more trolling posts recently are due to an uptick on furlough related day drinking!

TheBigBean

There's been quite a strong reaction to the idea of providing a bit more to disadvantaged kids.

veronese68

TheBigBean said:

There's been quite a strong reaction to the idea of providing a bit more to disadvantaged kids.

Indeed, seems wanting a better lot for the underprivileged of the UK (and being prepared to pay for it) proves you are unworthy to be here in the eyes of some. Most odd.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

ugo.santalucia said:

coopster_the_1st said:

All your original unpopular suggestion is doing is further reducing the reward of working hard and risk taking.

People who earn good money are typically too smart to actually work hard... we'll suffer no hardship by handing some over to help the less fortunate.

From my experience of two decades of working for people who earn good money, I would say there is no reliable correlation.

Maybe they work smarter not harder?

Remuneration seems to be mostly down to what industry they are in, how much money is washing around that industry and how protectionist the industry bodies are.

ddraver

If nothing else working in a place full of rich people on holiday makes it very clear that talent, ability or common sense do not necessarily have anything to do with being stinking rich...

shortfall

veronese68 said:

TheBigBean said:

There's been quite a strong reaction to the idea of providing a bit more to disadvantaged kids.

Indeed, seems wanting a better lot for the underprivileged of the UK (and being prepared to pay for it) proves you are unworthy to be here in the eyes of some. Most odd.

There doesn't seem to be a clear correlation between high levels of personal income tax and the plight of disadvantaged children. Were that it was so simple. As has been previously said, anyone who feels undertaxed and wants to make more of a contribution is free to send a regular payment to the taxman or a children's charity of their choice until such time as a tax regime comes along that meets their approval.

ballysmate

ddraver said:

If nothing else working in a place full of rich people on holiday makes it very clear that talent, ability or common sense do not necessarily have anything to do with being stinking rich...

So a complete tool can land a job paying £40k+ ?
I bet he doesn't have to work hard either.
Thought so.

Stevo_666

shortfall said:

veronese68 said:

TheBigBean said:

There's been quite a strong reaction to the idea of providing a bit more to disadvantaged kids.

Indeed, seems wanting a better lot for the underprivileged of the UK (and being prepared to pay for it) proves you are unworthy to be here in the eyes of some. Most odd.

There doesn't seem to be a clear correlation between high levels of personal income tax and the plight of disadvantaged children. Were that it was so simple. As has been previously said, anyone who feels undertaxed and wants to make more of a contribution is free to send a regular payment to the taxman or a children's charity of their choice until such time as a tax regime comes along that meets their approval.

Given the lack of response to a perfectly practical suggestion, I think when someone said that we should pay more to help underprivileged children, what they really meant was 'other people' rather than 'we'.

ddraver

ballysmate said:

ddraver said:

If nothing else working in a place full of rich people on holiday makes it very clear that talent, ability or common sense do not necessarily have anything to do with being stinking rich...

So a complete tool can land a job paying £40k+ ?
I bet he doesn't have to work hard either.
Thought so.

40k..? maybe not

400K..? oh yeah!

Stevo_666

ballysmate said:

ddraver said:

If nothing else working in a place full of rich people on holiday makes it very clear that talent, ability or common sense do not necessarily have anything to do with being stinking rich...

So a complete tool can land a job paying £40k+ ?
I bet he doesn't have to work hard either.
Thought so.

If all these high earners are idiots, it makes you wonder about the standard of those who can't make good money when apparently it's so easy

Pross

ddraver said:

ballysmate said:

ddraver said:

If nothing else working in a place full of rich people on holiday makes it very clear that talent, ability or common sense do not necessarily have anything to do with being stinking rich...

So a complete tool can land a job paying £40k+ ?
I bet he doesn't have to work hard either.
Thought so.

40k..? maybe not

400K..? oh yeah!

To be fair, they're probably the kids or grandkids of the ones who actually made the money. The ones that made it initially probably worked hard for it.

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

rjsterry said:

ugo.santalucia said:

coopster_the_1st said:

All your original unpopular suggestion is doing is further reducing the reward of working hard and risk taking.

People who earn good money are typically too smart to actually work hard... we'll suffer no hardship by handing some over to help the less fortunate.

From my experience of two decades of working for people who earn good money, I would say there is no reliable correlation.

Maybe they work smarter not harder?

Remuneration seems to be mostly down to what industry they are in, how much money is washing around that industry and how protectionist the industry bodies are.

Not necesarily so in my experience.

kingstongraham

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

orraloon

That you lot shouldn't just ignore the Botster's feeble attempts to wind people up but respond to the troll wannabe. Is what it wants, it really really wants...

So how far up the Unpopular out of 10 do I score?

ugo.santalucia

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

God point... here's another unpopular opinion... inheritance shouldn't exist at all. When you pass, everything goes back to the state.

And this has nothing to do with the fact that my dad passed just before the pandemic and only left shares...


... and another one (although this might actually be popular): in order to acquire dogs in built up areas, individuals should get a licence

nickice

ugo.santalucia said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

God point... here's another unpopular opinion... inheritance shouldn't exist at all. When you pass, everything goes back to the state.

And this has nothing to do with the fact that my dad passed just before the pandemic and only left shares...


... and another one (although this might actually be popular): in order to acquire dogs in built up areas, individuals should get a licence

How could it pass 'back to the state' when the state never owned it in the first place?

ballysmate

ugo.santalucia said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

God point... here's another unpopular opinion... inheritance shouldn't exist at all. When you pass, everything goes back to the state.

And this has nothing to do with the fact that my dad passed just before the pandemic and only left shares...


... and another one (although this might actually be popular): in order to acquire dogs in built up areas, individuals should get a licence

Get to 67 and spend like a sailor and then get the state to look after you?
Another winner!

Pross

ugo.santalucia said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

God point... here's another unpopular opinion... inheritance shouldn't exist at all. When you pass, everything goes back to the state.

And this has nothing to do with the fact that my dad passed just before the pandemic and only left shares...


... and another one (although this might actually be popular): in order to acquire dogs in built up areas, individuals should get a licence

Not sure how that's going to achieve your previous aim of helping young people move up in the world. A lot of younger people only get the opportunity to get their own home thanks to a boost from a relatively modest inheritance.

As for dog licencing, we had that until the 1980s although the amount was pathetically small. As a dog owner I'd have no issue as long as it was properly enforced but as ever the irresponsible owners would be the ones who wouldn't bother (plus there's probably be thousands of dogs abandoned if the cost was set at a level to make it worthwhile).

bompington

nickice said:

ugo.santalucia said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

God point... here's another unpopular opinion... inheritance shouldn't exist at all. When you pass, everything goes back to the state.

And this has nothing to do with the fact that my dad passed just before the pandemic and only left shares...


... and another one (although this might actually be popular): in order to acquire dogs in built up areas, individuals should get a licence

How could it pass 'back to the state' when the state never owned it in the first place?

I mean, really, why wait until you die? Ugo is essentially arguing for communism: the idea that the state owns everything.

Currently socialism / communism - there are differences but they're pretty much the same thing - seems to be quite a popular opinion. Except, of course, in the countries where it's already caused poverty, misery, oppression and death, i.e. basically everywhere it's already been tried.

ballysmate

We would also have the thorny question of enforcement. There isn't the manpower to enforce face masks never mind dog licences. Will people have to produce a dog licence at the supermarket checkout in order to buy Winalot?

surrey_commuter

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Inheritance tax is already too high - see our old friend Laffer

Make it 20% on everything with no exemptions.

TheBigBean

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Yes.

Should also apply to gifts from living parents.

ballysmate

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Yes.

Should also apply to gifts from living parents.

https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax/gifts

surrey_commuter

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Yes.

Should also apply to gifts from living parents.

Policing that will solve the unemployment problem and make Xmas more exciting

TheBigBean

ballysmate said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Yes.

Should also apply to gifts from living parents.

https://www.gov.uk/inheritance-tax/gifts

Yes, I know, with a seven year limit. My argument is that it should be treated as income for the beneficiary at any age. I know that won't be popular.

TheBigBean

surrey_commuter said:

TheBigBean said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Yes.

Should also apply to gifts from living parents.

Policing that will solve the unemployment problem and make Xmas more exciting

It's not that easy to launder money.

kingstongraham

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Inheritance tax is already too high - see our old friend Laffer

Make it 20% on everything with no exemptions.

It's only 0.7% of all tax take, so not overwhelmingly a tax raising measure.

kingstongraham

surrey_commuter said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

Inheritance tax is already too high - see our old friend Laffer

Make it 20% on everything with no exemptions.

It's only 0.7% of all tax take, so not overwhelmingly a tax raising measure.

Stevo_666

ballysmate said:

ugo.santalucia said:

kingstongraham said:

Inheritance tax should be very high indeed.

God point... here's another unpopular opinion... inheritance shouldn't exist at all. When you pass, everything goes back to the state.

And this has nothing to do with the fact that my dad passed just before the pandemic and only left shares...


... and another one (although this might actually be popular): in order to acquire dogs in built up areas, individuals should get a licence

Get to 67 and spend like a sailor and then get the state to look after you?
Another winner!

That's the obvious problem - when everyone knows that whatever you have left will be confiscated, you may well piddle it up the wall and leave yourself destitute when old. Another really bad idea on the tax front.