Poundland Girl Wins Forced Labour Ruling
- Thread starter CosmicClown
- Start date
nah you don't want the majority failing... though having a portion unemployed prob helps keep wages down
crack down on trust funds, tax havens, ramp up inheritance tax
I don't have an issue with people accumulating excessive wealth within their lifetime... I do have an issue with excessive wealth being accumulated and then concentrated among a select few due to an accident of birth.
Is it just the "pampered spawn" that don't get anything or do we all just start that monopoly game of yours from the beginning every time parents die (for example prematurely)?
that would just encourage wealth transfer during life... unless of course you also plan on dicating how money is spent all the time...
"Lefties hate families" - Dolph.
Everyone but me is responsible for the consequences of my choices. - Biohazard.
A cap on minimum and maximum wealth on the entire spawn would be a much fairer and better system instead of a reset.Anything surplus at the top end goes to the bottom end as a top up.
Its not far off what we already have it just lacks the maximum cap.If the spawn of bill gates or carlos slim or the rothchilds can keep using the family wealth to generate profit theres no real knowing how far things could go.If they started buying up land and houses in the recession putting half of thier wealth in how many people would be reliant on thier good will for shelter? And talking about the recession i would bet with thier combined wealth they could start a recession or war anytime they wanted and make a large profit.
Can i have some more sir?
Its not far off what we already have it just lacks the maximum cap.If the spawn of bill gates or carlos slim or the rothchilds can keep using the family wealth to generate profit theres no real knowing how far things could go.If they started buying up land and houses in the recession putting half of thier wealth in how many people would be reliant on thier good will for shelter? And talking about the recession i would bet with thier combined wealth they could start a recession or war anytime they wanted and make a large profit.
Can i have some more sir?
Last edited:
Inequality is a necessary part of any form of meritocracy. that is why the relative poverty measure is so terrible.
Inequality isn't a bad thing, poverty is. not having as much as someone else isn't a sign of failure.
Thing is, that's just another one of your assumptions that you couldn't actually quote me on.
You actually said what I quoted, albeit slightly longer winded.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
The funny thing is, people moan about the "1%", not realising that globally speaking everyone in the UK is in the 1%.
The human mind only tends to think of people higher than us in the chain whilst ignoring everyone below us and we judge ourselves by our immediate surroundings. Someone on £40k a year who lives in a village where everyone else is on £100k feels the same sense of unfairness as someone living on the breadline on an East London estate.
As the saying going the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
The human mind only tends to think of people higher than us in the chain whilst ignoring everyone below us and we judge ourselves by our immediate surroundings. Someone on £40k a year who lives in a village where everyone else is on £100k feels the same sense of unfairness as someone living on the breadline on an East London estate.
As the saying going the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence.
But I am sure you would argue that giving someone more is a way to reward success yes?
Thing is, that's just another one of your assumptions that you couldn't actually quote me on.
You actually said what I quoted, albeit slightly longer winded.
so I didn't say what you quoted then, and given your habit of wilful misrepresentation, I doubt that is what I said when actually taken in context...
indeed, that is what happens in a meritocracy. but poverty is absolute, not relative.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
It's one way, but that doesn't prove what Dolph said was incorrect. Awards, recognition, self satisfaction, personal enjoyment etc There's far more ways to reward success than just a higher pay cheque.
What we have now is not a meritocracy, it is anything but. Right now you are more likely to succeed due to the terms of your birth than what you have done or capable of.
In our current society, lack of material wealth is THE sign of failure. You only need to look at the threads here, and almost every one of your posts to see that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Well quite. Wasn't James Caan caught out preaching that more jobs should be awarded on merit only for it to be revealed that he's employed both his daughters in high positions in his companies?
We have it where I work too. My team consists of 7 people, one of whom is our boss' boss' daughter. She been there the shortest time and is already on the highest grade you can get for the department, and is constantly being given training that isn't offered to anyone else. Last month they let her employ a couple of temps which she 'managed'.
It's bleeding obvious she is being fast-tracked into management and that when our direct boss retires in 8 years, she'll be head of the queue for that job.
I wonder how many of you who think that the work programme is "slave labour" due to the low incomes offered from doing such work for JSA are quite happy to purchase goods from Primark made in India or electricals from China on the basis that they're cheaper? Also consider, if the world over were paid £6.31 an hour equivalent for even the lowest jobs, how much more those goods would cost? Effectively cancelling out any pay rise you were hoping for.