Should billionaires exist?

[Ross.]

45 minutes ago, Aufc said:

At the end of the day, i work hard to help my kids and i wouldnt want all my hard work to be lost once i pass on. This is the same for my parents. I have no issue with some of it being paid in tax but just seems a bit excessive that we pay taxes all of our life and you then want everything else to be paid in tax when we die.

Regarding your point about the media, do you have any evidence for that? I genuinely dont have a clue. I have no doubts that it does happen in some jobs but i think you are making a sweeping generalisation

Spend it on them while you are still alive. Helps the wider economy... Though I actually agree with you on this. I think most people want to leave something behind for their kids/grandkids to try and get them as much of a head start as possible.

Can't comment on the media but it is certainly the case in finance. Last place I worked before leaving Scotland the guy in the top job chose his successor, who happened to have gone to the same school and then university as him at the same time. When that guy chose the successor for the job he was promoted from, he chose someone else who had been at the same school and uni at the same time. During the last reshuffle which happened around the time I left, there were two senior management who had been there pretty much since the start and knew the set up inside out. Both were easily more than qualified to step into the shoes of any of the above, but their positions were phased out and both paid off. Neither of them were fortunate enough to be educated into the right connections.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Ross.

[Jacksgranda]

22 minutes ago, Ross. said:

Spend it on them while you are still alive. Helps the wider economy... Though I actually agree with you on this. I think most people want to leave something behind for their kids/grandkids to try and get them as much of a head start as possible.

Can't comment on the media but it is certainly the case in finance. Last place I worked before leaving Scotland the guy in the top job chose his successor, who happened to have gone to the same school and then university as him at the same time. When that guy chose the successor for the job he was promoted from, he chose someone else who had been at the same school and uni at the same time. During the last reshuffle which happened around the time I left, there were two senior management who had been there pretty much since the start and knew the set up inside out. Both were easily more than qualified to step into the shoes of any of the above, but their positions were phased out and both paid off. Neither of them were fortunate enough to be educated into the right connections.

That quote isn't mine.

I was self employed for about half my working life - I got recommended to new clients through former work mates, or by word of mouth from one client to another , or got new clients foisted on me by former workmates who were too busy to accommodate them, don't know if that counts as the old boy network. One client I acquired in this way I've had for 20 years.

. Or through advertising in Yellow Pages. That worked, too.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Jacksgranda

[Ross.]

3 minutes ago, Jacksgranda said:

That quote isn't mine.

Entschüldigung, good sir!

[Aufc]

Spend it on them while you are still alive. Helps the wider economy... Though I actually agree with you on this. I think most people want to leave something behind for their kids/grandkids to try and get them as much of a head start as possible.
Can't comment on the media but it is certainly the case in finance. Last place I worked before leaving Scotland the guy in the top job chose his successor, who happened to have gone to the same school and then university as him at the same time. When that guy chose the successor for the job he was promoted from, he chose someone else who had been at the same school and uni at the same time. During the last reshuffle which happened around the time I left, there were two senior management who had been there pretty much since the start and knew the set up inside out. Both were easily more than qualified to step into the shoes of any of the above, but their positions were phased out and both paid off. Neither of them were fortunate enough to be educated into the right connections.

Yeah i reckon people want to do both though?

Regarding the second bit, as i said, i can imagine it does happen. However, is that anything to do with wealth? That is purely down to connections. That could happen in any job and at any level. I am not saying it is right but it happens. It is not solely linked to someone having money. I went for a job before and they thought i was great but gave it to someone that they knew from before.

[Jacksgranda]

2 minutes ago, Ross. said:

Entschüldigung, good sir!

I wouldn't want to have to apologise too often in Switzerland! 

[Ross.]

1 minute ago, Aufc said:

Yeah i reckon people want to do both though?

Regarding the second bit, as i said, i can imagine it does happen. However, is that anything to do with wealth? That is purely down to connections. That could happen in any job and at any level. I am not saying it is right but it happens. It is not solely linked to someone having money. I went for a job before and they thought i was great but gave it to someone that they knew from before.

I'd say most of the time those connections being made do come down to having the money to send the kids to whatever school they went to. That being said, you get parents out there who will sacrifice all they can in order to cover the fees. They won't be old money or particularly big earners, they will simply save whatever they can, where they can to try and give their kids a better chance. The three folk I am talking about all had a similar background however, and it is fair to say they hadn't exactly come from a traditional Scottish background.

Just now, Jacksgranda said:

I wouldn't want to have to apologise too often in Switzerland! 

I usually settle for "Sorry pal". The accent scares off any challenges.

[Aufc]

What is a "certain amount"? £5,000 p/a more than you are currently earning? £100,000 p/a? What rate would this extra tax be paid at? Why not raise the amount earned before tax is paid to say £15,000 per year?

I have a (daft) theory regarding tax increases. Using data from HMRC (this wont be up to date but gives a general view) i thought the following tax increases would work (based in salary brackets)

£30-50k a year - extra £10 a month
£50-70k - extra £50 a month
£70-100k - £100 a month
£100-150k - £150 a month
£150-200k - £200 a month
£200-300k - £250 a month
£300-500k - £350 a month
£500-1m - £500 a month
>1m - £1,000 a month

Based on the number of tax payers taken from
HMRC then this equates to about an extra £5-6bn a year which could be ploughed into helping people in poverty.

I realise this is a bit simplified and probably seems daft.

[Jacksgranda]

4 minutes ago, Aufc said:

 

I have a (daft) theory regarding tax increases. Using data from HMRC (this wont be up to date but gives a general view) i thought the following tax increases would work (based in salary brackets)

£30-50k a year - extra £10 a month
£50-70k - extra £50 a month
£70-100k - £100 a month
£100-150k - £150 a month
£150-200k - £200 a month
£200-300k - £250 a month
£300-500k - £350 a month
£500-1m - £500 a month
>1m - £1,000 a month

Based on the number of tax payers taken from
HMRC then this equates to about an extra £5-6bn a year which could be ploughed into helping people in poverty.

I realise this is a bit simplified and probably seems daft.

 

 

That actually seems fairly reasonable to me - there must be a flaw in it somewhere! 

[parsforlife]

1 hour ago, Aufc said:

 

Regarding your point about the media, do you have any evidence for that? I genuinely dont have a clue. I have no doubts that it does happen in some jobs but i think you are making a sweeping generalisation
 

 

Does this cover it?   https://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2018/apr/29/journalism-class-private-education

16 minutes ago, Aufc said:

 

Yeah i reckon people want to do both though?

Regarding the second bit, as i said, i can imagine it does happen. However, is that anything to do with wealth? That is purely down to connections. That could happen in any job and at any level. I am not saying it is right but it happens. It is not solely linked to someone having money. I went for a job before and they thought i was great but gave it to someone that they knew from before.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Ross. said:

I'd say most of the time those connections being made do come down to having the money to send the kids to whatever school they went to. That being said, you get parents out there who will sacrifice all they can in order to cover the fees. They won't be old money or particularly big earners, they will simply save whatever they can, where they can to try and give their kids a better chance. The three folk I am talking about all had a similar background however, and it is fair to say they hadn't exactly come from a traditional Scottish background.

I usually settle for "Sorry pal". The accent scares off any challenges.

Aye Ross pretty much covers it, where cronyism is involved people rarely move in the social ladder, working class people help their working class mates getting working class jobs, privileged people help their privileged mates get high paid jobs.  Regardless of the actual abilities if the people involved.

[Guest JTS98]

1 hour ago, Aufc said:

At the end of the day, i work hard to help my kids and i wouldnt want all my hard work to be lost once i pass on. This is the same for my parents. I have no issue with some of it being paid in tax but 1) just seems a bit excessive that we pay taxes all of our life and you then want everything else to be paid in tax when we die.

2) Regarding your point about the media, do you have any evidence for that? I genuinely dont have a clue. I have no doubts that it does happen in some jobs but i think you are making a sweeping generalisation
 

1) No offence mate, but once you pass on, you're gone. Enjoy your hard work now. I'd turn your point round on you and ask what right your kids have to that cash ahead of any other kid. There's nothing special about your kids compared to anybody else's, so why should they get a completely arbitrary head start?

Especially when you factor in the benefit your kids will already have had connected to being brought up in a relatively wealthy household. The studies on this are numerous and the fact that your kids will probably live in a household where getting a decent diet is no problem, where one or more parents probably aren't drug addicts, where they probably don't need to be major carers for their siblings, where they don't go to school knackered or hungry, where they are encouraged to study and do their homework, where they are encouraged to explore and can afford to indulge in extra-curricular hobbies will help them socially, emotionally academically and maybe even professionally is almost certainly plenty to set them up for a good shot at life.

What more exactly do you think your kids should have?

Again, consider the helping hand you've had in building your wealth. I don't doubt you're a hard-working and smart guy. But you've had the benefit of a state run by the rule of law with a functioning police force ensuring nobody extorts or steals your wealth from you. You've had a government-subsidised private education where you were probably taught by teachers trained for but then taken out of the state system, exacerbating the problem of struggling state schools at the expense of those less fortunate than yourself. You've had the benefit of the infrastructure in Britain making it a place where business is safe and easy to work and do business. Maybe you've made use of the NHS. Or maybe you've made use of private healthcare with doctors trained for but taken out of the public system.

What price do you put on this?

I don't want to sound like I'm picking on you, it's really nothing personal.

2) It's been quite well covered even by media types themselves. The Guardian has recently made a fuss of stopping unpaid internships and trying to make others do the same. Rife in the media. Also know from my own experience when leaving uni that it's rife in politics. Plenty of opportunities for 'gaining worthwhile experience' working for politicians. Without mummy and daddy, you're not getting in the door.

Edited November 5, 2019 by JTS98

[Aufc]

1) No offence mate, but once you pass on, you're gone. Enjoy your hard work now. I'd turn your point round on you and ask what right your kids have to that cash ahead of any other kid. There's nothing special about your kids compared to anybody else's, so why should they get a completely arbitrary head start?

Especially when you factor in the benefit your kids will already have had connected to being brought up in a relatively wealthy household. The studies on this are numerous and the fact that your kids will probably live in a household where getting a decent diet is no problem, where one or more parents probably aren't drug addicts, where they probably don't need to be major carers for their siblings, where they don't go to school knackered or hungry, where they are encouraged to study and do their homework, where they are encouraged to explore and can afford to indulge in extra-curricular hobbies will help them socially, emotionally academically and maybe even professionally is almost certainly plenty to set them up for a good shot at life.

What more exactly do you think your kids should have?

Again, consider the helping hand you've had in building your wealth. I don't doubt you're a hard-working and smart guy. But you've had the benefit of a state run by the rule of law with a functioning police force ensuring nobody extorts or steals your wealth from you. You've had a government-subsidised private education where you were probably taught by teachers trained for but then taken out of the state system, exacerbating the problem of struggling state schools at the expense of those less fortunate than yourself. You've had the benefit of the infrastructure in Britain making it a place where business is safe and easy to work and do business. Maybe you've made use of the NHS. Or maybe you've made use of private healthcare with doctors trained for but taken out of the public system.

What price do you put on this?

I don't want to sound like I'm picking on you, it's really nothing personal.

2) It's been quite well covered even by media types themselves. The Guardian has recently made a fuss of stopping unpaid internships and trying to make others do the same. Rife in the media. Also know from my own experience when leaving uni that it's rife in politics. Plenty of opportunities for 'gaining worthwhile experience' working for politicians. Without mummy and daddy, you're not getting in the door.

 

I totally get what you are saying and doesnt come across as picking on me. Just a reasoned debate. My kids are not different to anyone else. The state will already get 40% (after allowances) but just don’t think they should get everything. All about opinions though

 

Edited to add. As mentioned im all for paying more tax to help the individuals you have highlighted above

[Aufc]

That actually seems fairly reasonable to me - there must be a flaw in it somewhere! 

Haha aye. Obviously that is just me thinking off the cuff and the amounts could change but seems so simple. Clearly there will be selfish c***s in there that moan about paying tax (generally the higher earners) but i think the percentages work out to ensure the lowest salary has the smallest percentage increase.

[Guest JTS98]

2 minutes ago, Aufc said:

 

I totally get what you are saying and doesnt come across as picking on me. Just a reasoned debate. My kids are not different to anyone else. The state will already get 40% (after allowances) but just don’t think they should get everything. All about opinions though

 

Fair enough.

I'm well used to being disagreed with on this one

Still, after the revolution, remember that you should have negotiated with me before I got an army.

[Aufc]

Fair enough.
I'm well used to being disagreed with on this one [emoji846]
Still, after the revolution, remember that you should have negotiated with me before I got an army.

Let it be known that I suggested the above tax increases to save me from a shoeing

[Jacksgranda]

3 minutes ago, Aufc said:

 

Haha aye. Obviously that is just me thinking off the cuff and the amounts could change but seems so simple. Clearly there will be selfish c***s in there that moan about paying tax (generally the higher earners) but i think the percentages work out to ensure the lowest salary has the smallest percentage increase.

 

I did a quick check and that seems to be the case.

[Guest JTS98]

1 minute ago, Aufc said:

 

Let it be known that I suggested the above tax increases to save me from a shoeing

 

You will, of course, be given the chance to state your capitalist pig case in the people's court.

[Aufc]

I did a quick check and that seems to be the case.

That was just me doing a quick calculation on paper. Glad my sums work out. It does seem too simple eh?

[Aufc]

 

Now I am back at a computer. I did a calculation that showed my earlier thoughts. Played around with the figures to ensure fairness for everyone earning above £50k whereby they are all getting the same % of their salary taken in extra tax. An extra £6.7bn in tax which can be ploughed into helping bring the many people out of poverty. Im away to put my cv into holyrood. The number of tax payers is based on figures from 2017. It has increased since then so the amount may actually be more.