How wealthy?

[First Aspect]

Althiugh TBF Chasey was mid to late thirties IIRC. At what age do you think someone should drop the 'yet'?

Younger than me, but Henr is harder to pronounce.

 

[Stevo 666]

Younger than me, but Henr is harder to pronounce.

I suppose it's better than being Low Earning Forever Troubled Incensed and Envious.

 

[Beebo]

I suppose it's better than being Low Earning Forever Troubled Incensed and Envious.

A lot of the lefties I know are doing very well thank you very much.
They aren’t envious of anyone, as they have enough already but wish the ones with too much would share it out a bit.

I suspect the “troubled incensed and envious” would better describe a Reform voter.

To answer your question ‘Yet’ question.
I suspect most people don’t start seeing a growth in their wealth until mid forties / early fifties. Once children have grown, mortgages paid and partners returning to full time employment.

 

[Pross]

I worked in the charity sector for years where a 35hr week was more like 50 for no extra pay as it was all in the name of doing good!

They misunderstood the idea of a charity sector! To be fair that's pretty much anywhere that you are salaried in my experience. The only place I've worked where I got anything back for working extra hours was when I was at the Council and got flexitime or where agreed in advance TOIL or (very occasionally) paid overtime. Everywhere else has been you do the hours needed to get the work out which inevitably gets abused by not recruiting enough people to do the work in your contracted hours, it's why I get annoyed by teachers, doctors etc. going on about their unpaid hours as though they are somehow unique. It's a cheek when they advertise the job with attractively short hours like 35 per week though knowing that even advertising it as 40 hours would put people off.

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

They misunderstood the idea of a charity sector! To be fair that's pretty much anywhere that you are salaried in my experience. The only place I've worked where I got anything back for working extra hours was when I was at the Council and got flexitime or where agreed in advance TOIL or (very occasionally) paid overtime. Everywhere else has been you do the hours needed to get the work out which inevitably gets abused by not recruiting enough people to do the work in your contracted hours, it's why I get annoyed by teachers, doctors etc. going on about their unpaid hours as though they are somehow unique. It's a cheek when they advertise the job with attractively short hours like 35 per week though knowing that even advertising it as 40 hours would put people off.

Yes, I think that is true to be fair, most sectors will expect you to go above and beyond to get the work done. I never did really mind doing extra as you tend to pick charities where you believe in the cause, and generally speaking everyone pitches in. I worked in a Uni once where there were quite a lot of strict 9-5ers and not one minute more, which is where it tends to cause friction!

 

[Stevo 666]

A lot of the lefties I know are doing very well thank you very much.
They aren’t envious of anyone, as they have enough already but wish the ones with too much would share it out a bit.

I suspect the “troubled incensed and envious” would better describe a Reform voter.

To answer your question ‘Yet’ question.
I suspect most people don’t start seeing a growth in their wealth until mid forties / early fifties. Once children have grown, mortgages paid and partners returning to full time employment.

I'm sure there are quite a few of them. Out of interest, how many of those you know count themselves as having 'too much'? Or is it always someone else? - which seems to be a common leftie viewpoint when it comes to tax.

 

[monkers]

I'm sure there are quite a few of them. Out of interest, how many of those you know count themselves as having 'too much'? Or is it always someone else? - which seems to be a common leftie viewpoint when it comes to tax.

https://patrioticmillionaires.uk/

 

[Beebo]

I'm sure there are quite a few of them. Out of interest, how many of those you know count themselves as having 'too much'? Or is it always someone else? - which seems to be a common leftie viewpoint when it comes to tax.

Most would happily pay more tax if asked to.

Since you didn’t ask. My definition of too much would be incomes over £1million pa, tax at 50% and assets other than one main residence in excess of £10million. Beyond that it becomes taxable at 1% per annum.

 

[briantrumpet]

Most would happily pay more tax if asked to.

Since you didn’t ask. My definition of too much would be incomes over £1million pa, tax at 50% and assets other than one main residence in excess of £10million. Beyond that it becomes taxable at 1% per annum.

Remember, greed is good, if you're already wealthy. It's really bad when it's Other People with not much money.

 

[Stevo 666]

View attachment 9413


https://patrioticmillionaires.uk/

It's a free country and turkeys can vote for Christmas if they want. Although I was talking about taxes that exist in this country.

 

[Stevo 666]

Most would happily pay more tax if asked to.

Since you didn’t ask. My definition of too much would be incomes over £1million pa, tax at 50% and assets other than one main residence in excess of £10million. Beyond that it becomes taxable at 1% per annum.

So their answer appears to be 'someone else' unless you know some very wealthy/ high earning lefties.

It's quite an amusing claimthat people who have generally fought hard for their money will just turn around to HMRC and say 'Go on mate, take as much as you like'.

 

[Stevo 666]

Remember, greed is good, if you're already wealthy. It's really bad when it's Other People with not much money.

I think the distinction is more about how you get more wealthy. It's better to make wealth than to confiscate it....

Although I think you've burnished you leftiebollox credentials enough now to take your foot off the gas a bit.

 

[Shortfall]

Most would happily pay more tax if asked to.

Since you didn’t ask. My definition of too much would be incomes over £1million pa, tax at 50% and assets other than one main residence in excess of £10million. Beyond that it becomes taxable at 1% per annum.

Presumably they could donate an equivalent amount to charities and good causes whilst they're waiting for Labour to put their taxes up? I suspect the money would end up doing a lot more good than if it went into the black hole of government spending too.

 

[monkers]

I think the distinction is more about how you get more wealthy. It's better to make wealth than to confiscate it....

Although I think you've burnished you leftiebollox credentials enough now to take your foot off the gas a bit.

Which just another way of saying that you think that only people who recognise the importance of collective responsibility should pay tax. You are just trying to carve out an exemption for the greediest people.

 

[First Aspect]

I'm sure there are quite a few of them. Out of interest, how many of those you know count themselves as having 'too much'? Or is it always someone else? - which seems to be a common leftie viewpoint when it comes to tax.

I don't think you really understand the lefty position Stevo (or at best yountbink all lefties are Sultanas). It is not a case of saying someone has too much, rather that some pay too little tax.