Relative Wealth

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

cryrst The garden of England 22 Feb 18 8.14am
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow I don't really understand this point - I was certainly ignorant to the fact I'm in the top 1% because I earn over £30k, so what? Do you think that because someone earns £30k a year, they're a hypocrite to march against wealth inequality? If you yourself are suffering then no it's not hypocrisy. If you're doing it for some sort of pat on the back then yes. Remember you only get dead heroes. Never put yourself in the cross hairs if you're not sure who you do it for, would do the same!
Alert a moderator to this post

cryrst

The garden of England 22 Feb 18 8.14am

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

I don't really understand this point - I was certainly ignorant to the fact I'm in the top 1% because I earn over £30k, so what?

Do you think that because someone earns £30k a year, they're a hypocrite to march against wealth inequality?

If you yourself are suffering then no it's not hypocrisy.
If you're doing it for some sort of pat on the back then yes.
Remember you only get dead heroes.
Never put yourself in the cross hairs if you're not sure who you do it for, would do the same!

Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow SE19 22 Feb 18 8.18am
Originally posted by cryrst If you yourself are suffering then no it's not hypocrisy. If you're doing it for some sort of pat on the back then yes. Remember you only get dead heroes. Never put yourself in the cross hairs if you're not sure who you do it for, would do the same! So you should only object to something if you directly suffer from it? The world would be a damn sight worst off if everyone followed this mantra. I'm not suffering by any means, but I think the levels of wealth inequality across the globe are sickening - why is that not a valid viewpoint?
Alert a moderator to this post

EverybodyDannsNow

SE19 22 Feb 18 8.18am

Send a Private Message to EverybodyDannsNow

Originally posted by cryrst

So you should only object to something if you directly suffer from it?

The world would be a damn sight worst off if everyone followed this mantra.

I'm not suffering by any means, but I think the levels of wealth inequality across the globe are sickening - why is that not a valid viewpoint?

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 22 Feb 18 10.29am
Originally posted by becky So how come so many people with their benefits capped at £26,000 are screaming 'poverty'? Noted, that's addressed in the thread. Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2018 10.29am) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 Feb 18 10.29am

Originally posted by becky

So how come so many people with their benefits capped at £26,000 are screaming 'poverty'?

Noted, that's addressed in the thread.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2018 10.29am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 22 Feb 18 10.33am
Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow I don't really understand this point - I was certainly ignorant to the fact I'm in the top 1% because I earn over £30k, so what? Do you think that because someone earns £30k a year, they're a hypocrite to march against wealth inequality? If someone is earning significant amounts and feels badly about income equality then maybe instead of marching they should be giving away more of their money to those with less. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 Feb 18 10.33am

Originally posted by EverybodyDannsNow

I don't really understand this point - I was certainly ignorant to the fact I'm in the top 1% because I earn over £30k, so what?

Do you think that because someone earns £30k a year, they're a hypocrite to march against wealth inequality?

If someone is earning significant amounts and feels badly about income equality then maybe instead of marching they should be giving away more of their money to those with less.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 22 Feb 18 1.03pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays If someone is earning significant amounts and feels badly about income equality then maybe instead of marching they should be giving away more of their money to those with less. Giving away money doesn't change a system. COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 22 Feb 18 1.03pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

If someone is earning significant amounts and feels badly about income equality then maybe instead of marching they should be giving away more of their money to those with less.

Giving away money doesn't change a system.

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 22 Feb 18 1.06pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman Giving away money doesn't change a system. Then why do we have an foreign aid budget? It most definitely has an impact on the lives of those you give it too. Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2018 1.08pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 Feb 18 1.06pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Giving away money doesn't change a system.

Then why do we have an foreign aid budget?

It most definitely has an impact on the lives of those you give it too.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2018 1.08pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 22 Feb 18 1.11pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Then why do we have an foreign aid budget? It most definitely has an impact on the lives of those you give it too. Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2018 1.08pm) Good point on foreign aid. Managing the projects would be better. Giving away your money doesn't change a tax and banking policy. Some will and won't give to charities with this opinion. (Stating the obvious) COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 22 Feb 18 1.11pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Then why do we have an foreign aid budget?

It most definitely has an impact on the lives of those you give it too.

Edited by Stirlingsays (22 Feb 2018 1.08pm)

Good point on foreign aid. Managing the projects would be better.

Giving away your money doesn't change a tax and banking policy. Some will and won't give to charities with this opinion. (Stating the obvious)

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 22 Feb 18 1.30pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman Good point on foreign aid. Managing the projects would be better. Giving away your money doesn't change a tax and banking policy. Some will and won't give to charities with this opinion. (Stating the obvious) Systems don't create income inequalities on their own....they allow them to widen. Income equality will always exist in systems that allow meritocracy and inheritance to exist. Income equality is the enemy of meritocracy in a literal sense. Going on marches doesn't change a 'tax and banking policy'. It is pure virtue signalling.....not a bad example of virtue signalling perhaps but it's VS all the same. Giving away money to charities does far more. All those that complain about income inequality who are well paid are hypocrites if they do not manage their own budgets to take account of their vocalized principles. Hence, my contempt for champagne socialists......those who benefit from a system they despise. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 Feb 18 1.30pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Good point on foreign aid. Managing the projects would be better.

Giving away your money doesn't change a tax and banking policy. Some will and won't give to charities with this opinion. (Stating the obvious)

Systems don't create income inequalities on their own....they allow them to widen. Income equality will always exist in systems that allow meritocracy and inheritance to exist.

Income equality is the enemy of meritocracy in a literal sense.

Going on marches doesn't change a 'tax and banking policy'. It is pure virtue signalling.....not a bad example of virtue signalling perhaps but it's VS all the same.

Giving away money to charities does far more. All those that complain about income inequality who are well paid are hypocrites if they do not manage their own budgets to take account of their vocalized principles.

Hence, my contempt for champagne socialists......those who benefit from a system they despise.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550 Shirley 22 Feb 18 1.40pm
Originally posted by the.universal Many people that have marched against the 1% are actually in that 1%, in world terms at least. At worst hypocrites, at best ignorant. As with most protesters, they do it for self worth rather than the cause itself. Most will be content with walking a mile or two blowing a whistle as long as they can retire in the evening in their lounge with a glass of wine; feeling better about themselves and the fact they've 'made a stand' The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World
Alert a moderator to this post

Lyons550

Shirley 22 Feb 18 1.40pm

Originally posted by the.universal

Many people that have marched against the 1% are actually in that 1%, in world terms at least. At worst hypocrites, at best ignorant.

As with most protesters, they do it for self worth rather than the cause itself. Most will be content with walking a mile or two blowing a whistle as long as they can retire in the evening in their lounge with a glass of wine; feeling better about themselves and the fact they've 'made a stand'

The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 22 Feb 18 1.56pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Systems don't create income inequalities on their own....they allow them to widen. Income equality will always exist in systems that allow meritocracy and inheritance to exist. Income equality is the enemy of meritocracy in a literal sense. Going on marches doesn't change a 'tax and banking policy'. It is pure virtue signalling.....not a bad example of virtue signalling perhaps but it's VS all the same. Giving away money to charities does far more. All those that complain about income inequality who are well paid are hypocrites if they do not manage their own budgets to take account of their vocalized principles. Hence, my contempt for champagne socialists......those who benefit from a system they despise. Then what of high earners that want higher income tax for all high earners and not just those who are forthcoming with their payments/contributions? COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 22 Feb 18 1.56pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Systems don't create income inequalities on their own....they allow them to widen. Income equality will always exist in systems that allow meritocracy and inheritance to exist.

Income equality is the enemy of meritocracy in a literal sense.

Going on marches doesn't change a 'tax and banking policy'. It is pure virtue signalling.....not a bad example of virtue signalling perhaps but it's VS all the same.

Hence, my contempt for champagne socialists......those who benefit from a system they despise.

Then what of high earners that want higher income tax for all high earners and not just those who are forthcoming with their payments/contributions?

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 22 Feb 18 3.01pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman Then what of high earners that want higher income tax for all high earners and not just those who are forthcoming with their payments/contributions? I want doughnuts for lunch. We all want things. What we want for others doesn't stop us doing it for ourselves. Hence, high earners should give away the money they think they should be paying in higher taxes and vote for parties they think will implement it for others. However, I suspect most of them don't give away that money. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

22 Feb 18 3.01pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Then what of high earners that want higher income tax for all high earners and not just those who are forthcoming with their payments/contributions?

I want doughnuts for lunch. We all want things.

What we want for others doesn't stop us doing it for ourselves.

Hence, high earners should give away the money they think they should be paying in higher taxes and vote for parties they think will implement it for others.

However, I suspect most of them don't give away that money.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk Top half 22 Feb 18 3.02pm
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman Giving away money doesn't change a system. Nor does walking around while waving a placard and shouting. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 22 Feb 18 3.02pm

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Giving away money doesn't change a system.

Nor does walking around while waving a placard and shouting.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Relative Wealth

Site Map

Sponsors