Millionnaires have some more money

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

*can do little but sit back and marvel at SHM in full flow*

On form in this thread, fella

And bang on the (lack of) money as ever too.

The point about cutting tax for the uberrich but not upping benefits (or for that matter minimum wage) for us scum who fund their obscene wealth therefore allowing the cunts to skirt the system and pay fuck all back was very well made. We may not be hoping to recruit more dolescum but we could certainly do with offloading some actual scum from the "top" end.

I pay more fuckin' tax than pretty much every "chief executive cuntbag" (or whatever self-aggrandising bullshit title they give themselves at the moment) put together myself every year. And I'm on the sick. Fuck 'em. We'd be better off without 'em. Let the cunts live in their lil tax havens they fund so well if they're so very loyal and devoted to the economy there. Cos they certainly couldn't give a flying fuck about the country they were born in, ostensibly live in, and completely fail to pay even a token amount of tax in. And hope they get surburnt there too

PS: Despite being on the dole/sick for more years than not, the years I have worked I chose to pay 40% tax cos I knew damn well I'd likely be taking more outta the system than I put in over my lifetime. Doesn't matter how much you get paid - being a greedy prick is being a greedy prick.

They may well avoid tax, but the top 1% still pay 25% of all the income tax in the entire country (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...of-workers-pay-quarter-of-all-income-tax.html). Maybe if people tried saying 'thank you', instead of 'more more more', they might be more inclined to pay it? I know I would. It would seriously piss me off that so many people had an entitlement complex to my money just because I live on the same island as them. I honestly don't think that they could ever give enough or be taxed enough to satisfy moaners... At the end of the day I understand taxing them based on need, but not on want. People need to eat, and they need to have shelter. They don't need luxuries, they just want them.

I also think there is a psychological barrier at around the 50% tax mark. The best example that we have is when income tax was dropped from 60% to 40%, yet miraculously the tax take tripled.

As for applauding SHM for his comments in this thread: He has made no points with regard to the budget, or for that matter anything else aside from stating his views on conservatives and making vague postulations that yesterday was better than today, as if everyone doesn't do that - even Chinese people who still worship at the feet of Mao statues. Basically, he has just been his usual prickish self, which is hardly worthy of praise. You are just backing him up because you agree with his ideologically driven nonsense, an example of which would be that you think people who are on the sick somehow pay more tax than rich people, when the facts clearly show the top 1% pay 25% of income tax. Will you or anyone else change your view point in light of the actual evidence? Doubtful. But it was worth a try

 

[missing old pills]

They may well avoid tax, but the top 1% still pay 25% of all the income tax in the entire country (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...of-workers-pay-quarter-of-all-income-tax.html). Maybe if people tried saying 'thank you', instead of 'more more more', they might be more inclined to pay it? I know I would. It would seriously piss me off that so many people had an entitlement complex to my money just because I live on the same island as them. I honestly don't think that they could ever give enough or be taxed enough to satisfy moaners... At the end of the day I understand taxing them based on need, but not on want. People need to eat, and they need to have shelter. They don't need luxuries, they just want them.

I also think there is a psychological barrier at around the 50% tax mark. The best example that we have is when income tax was dropped from 60% to 40%, yet miraculously the tax take tripled.

As for applauding SHM for his comments in this thread: He has made no points with regard to the budget, or for that matter anything else aside from stating his views on conservatives and making vague postulations that yesterday was better than today, as if everyone doesn't do that - even Chinese people who still worship at the feet of Mao statues. Basically, he has just been his usual prickish self, which is hardly worthy of praise. You are just backing him up because you agree with his ideologically driven nonsense, an example of which would be that you think people who are on the sick somehow pay more tax than rich people, when the facts clearly show the top 1% pay 25% of income tax. Will you or anyone else change your view point in light of the actual evidence? Doubtful. But it was worth a try

Doesn't matter what rhetoric you septic tanks spout, we're on to your empire building crusades.
So don't expect an easy time off the likes of SHM

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

Doesn't matter what rhetoric you septic tanks spout, we're on to your empire building crusades.
So don't expect an easy time off the likes of SHM

It's not like SHM gave me a hard time, or challenged me in any meaningful way. By all means keep up with the argument "waaa waaa, those rich cunts only gave us hundreds of billions of pounds for absolutely nothing in return." But even when you combine it with extreme judgementalism (something your type hate when the rich call you scroungers) it, isn't going to change my mind. Try putting forward an actual argument instead of emotive bullshit and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories

Don't get me wrong, I understand why you want more for nothing. I just don't understand why you are under the illusion that if you were a millionaire you would pay full tax, because you almost certainly wouldn't. I mean you still bitch about losing £80 a year after it happened LOL.

 

[missing old pills]

It's not like SHM gave me a hard time, or challenged me in any meaningful way. By all means keep up with the argument "waaa waaa, those rich cunts only gave us hundreds of billions of pounds for absolutely nothing in return." But even when you combine it with extreme judgementalism (something your type hate when the rich call you scroungers), isn't going to change my mind. Try putting forward an actual argument instead of emotive bullshit

Right then fuck face how's this.
I'm an ex British soldier.
I served in an illegal war.
It fucked me up.
A few twats made money.
Simple enough for you.

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

Right then fuck face how's this.
I'm an ex British soldier.
I served in an illegal war.
It fucked me up.
A few twats made money.
Simple enough for you.

I understand your kleanex bill must leave you hundreds of pounds out of pocket every month from all your blubbering, but how is that my fault? Yes a few twats made money, but as a soldier so did you and that leaves you equally to blame.

 

[knock]

those rich cunts only gave us hundreds of billions of pounds for absolutely nothing in return.

But where, oh where, do rich cunts get their hundreds of billions of pounds?

Clue: they don't work for it. They use money they already have (from daddy rich cunt or loans from rich cunts in the rich cunt network) to hire non-rich-cunts (i.e. people who have to work just to live) to produce products or services that they can sell to the same working people at a price which covers their costs including their wages and makes a profit. i.e. workers work for less than the value they create. Rich cunts pocket the difference.

Rich cunts take a lot then give as little as they can. That's the nature of rich cunts.

 

[RLP]

They may well avoid tax, but the top 1% still pay 25% of all the income tax in the entire country (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...of-workers-pay-quarter-of-all-income-tax.html).

No they don't. Their contribution to the total income tax revenue is supposed to be 25%. Whether they actually pay anywhere near that is anyones guess, but it's widely accepted that due to avoidance schemes that figure won't be correct.

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

But where, oh where, do rich cunts get their hundreds of billions of pounds?

Clue: they don't work for it. They use money they already have (from daddy rich cunt or loans from rich cunts in the rich cunt network) to hire non-rich-cunts (i.e. people who have to work just to live) to produce products or services that they can sell to the same working people at a price which covers their costs including their wages and makes a profit. i.e. workers work for less than the value they create. Rich cunts pocket the difference.

Rich cunts take a lot then give as little as they can. That's the nature of rich cunts.

Thank you knock, time and time again you are one of the only person capable of putting forward an actual argument, and without acting like I've spat in your face. I genuinely appreciate it.

Yes, wealth creates wealth. It has always been known. However, when a rich cunt employs a poor cunt the rich cunt undergoes substantial risks. That poor cunt isn't going to reemburse the rich cunt if the venture fails is he? Risk deserves reward in my book. Otherwise where is the incentive for rich cunts to employ poor cunts?

 

[knock]

I understand your kleanex bill must leave you hundreds of pounds out of pocket every month from all your blubbering, but how is that my fault? Yes a few twats made money, but as a soldier so did you and that leaves you equally to blame.

Do you think that a soldier's position in life allows him the same freedom of choice as the very rich? Equally to blame? Seriously?

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

No they don't. Their contribution to the total income tax revenue is supposed to be 25%. Whether they actually pay anywhere near that is anyones guess, but it's widely accepted that due to avoidance schemes that figure won't be correct.

Really? I thought that figure was calculated using tax receipts at HRMC. Do you have any evidence for what you're saying?

 

[RLP]

Yes, wealth creates wealth. It has always been known.

In a world of finite resources the wealth eventually runs out. Money is an arbitrary concept, man made. Capitalism as a model represents the house of cards.

Actually, if wealth creates wealth then surely this austerity thing we're going through is counter productive?

 

[knock]

However, when a rich cunt employs a poor cunt the rich cunt undergoes substantial risks. That poor cunt isn't going to reemburse the rich cunt if the venture fails is he? Risk deserves reward in my book. Otherwise where is the incentive for rich cunts to employ poor cunts?

Ha! That's what they keep telling us. Enterprise involves risk, and profit is the reward.

But what bullshit, and that you've fallen for it shows SHM's analysis to be correct!* I'd love to hear all your stories about rich cunts who took risks and ended up living in poverty.

Oh and PS the incentive for the rich cunt to employ the poor cunt is the poor cunt will work for less than he's worth to the rich cunt, this lining the rich cunts pocket!

A better question is, why is the poor cunt so willing to short sell himself? Because he has no choice. Need to sleep somewhere? £RENT. Need to eat? £FOOD BILL. Need to exist? £COUNCIL TAX.


* I mean about being influenced by the prevailing ideology, not the stuff about you being scum, seeing as it's your birthday

 

[RLP]

Really? I thought that figure was calculated using tax receipts at HRMC. Do you have any evidence for what you're saying?

Yes, in the actual article you linked us all to. It's a projected figure for future tax receipts, not ones already collected.

"It is not yet fully clear how much money this top rate of tax, introduced by the former Labour government, will raise. However, last week the HMRC published its forecasts for all income tax revenues for the current tax year. It suggested that 275,000 individuals, those that will pay the 50p rate, will pay £41.4 billion in tax – 25.7 per cent of the country's total income tax bill."

Edit: As with all income tax projections it won't account for avoidance. Hence why when Osborne scrapped the 50p rate he said it'd only been taking in £1bn instead of £3bn (So scrap it? Idiot). Not all of that will be avoidance - there'll be a drop off of earnings as the economy flatlined, but a good hefty chunk will be. A friend of mine who is heavily involved in this kind of thing said the favoured tactic was to bring forward earnings for their clients before the tax rate came into play.

 

[knock]

Earners on £150k - £250k who won't have accountants will get a tax cut, and are the biggest gainers of the budget.

I don't particularly have an argument with your points but I noticed this and was wondering why you thought those "earners" wouldn't have accountants? I earn (well, used to, I've not worked for a while) less than that and I engage the services of an accountant. Fees can be as low as around £100 a month, if it's saving you more than that in tax (and it easily does, as soon as you trade through a Limited company, for example) then it's worth it. People on 150-250k will, generally, benefit financially from the services of an accountant.

Just to be clear, I am still for the abolishment of money, markets, wage labour, nation states, etc.

 

[missing old pills]

I understand your kleanex bill must leave you hundreds of pounds out of pocket every month from all your blubbering, but how is that my fault? Yes a few twats made money, but as a soldier so did you and that leaves you equally to blame.

I dont wonder why I now question the reasons why I joined to protect fucking lowlifes like you.
I was inspired into joining the army by past family members who had served in the second world war when I was 16.
I'm 41 now and as I see us pulling our troops out of Afganistan with the same bullshit that was spouted in Vietnam I can clearly see it for what it is.
You my friend would last 1 second if you even had been involved in any of these conflicts.
I at no time blubber into Kleenex but I do clearly see fuckwit rightwinged stains on freedom like you from a mile off.
Do the world a favour get the biggest barrel of drugs you can find and stick it in your eye.

 

[RLP]

I don't particularly have an argument with your points but I noticed this and was wondering why you thought those "earners" wouldn't have accountants?

Oh of course some will, but compared to the super rich not as many. I guess that was my point - a few earners around that salary will benefit, where as the multi-millionaires won't, as all of them will have tax avoidance schemes in place. Those people will gain the most, estimated in the tens of thousands of pounds.

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

Do you think that a soldier's position in life allows him the same freedom of choice as the very rich? Equally to blame? Seriously?

Plenty of soldiers who didn't believe in the war didn't go... MOP on the other hand served 9 years, which means he even renewed his contract. Not the action of someone who doesn't believe in the war or the military really.

 

[knock]

Plenty of soldiers who didn't believe in the war didn't go... MOP on the other hand served 9 years, which means he even renewed his contract. Not the action of someone who doesn't believe in the war or the military really.

I didn't say anything about whether or not MOP "believed in" the war or the military.

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

I dont wonder why I now question the reasons why I joined to protect fucking lowlifes like you.
I was inspired into joining the army by past family members who had served in the second world war when I was 16.
I'm 41 now and as I see us pulling our troops out of Afganistan with the same bullshit that was spouted in Vietnam I can clearly see it for what it is.
You my friend would last 1 second if you even had been involved in any of these conflicts.
I at no time blubber into Kleenex but I do clearly see fuckwit rightwinged stains on freedom like you from a mile off.
Do the world a favour get the biggest barrel of drugs you can find and stick it in your eye.

Look. Don't get shirty with me because you were too spineless, greedy, or stupid, to leave the army when they entered a conflict you didn't believe in. If every soldier who didn't believe in the war wasn't a stupid pussy like you then there wouldn't have been a war. You seem to be forgetting that it was a left leaning government that sent you to war, and that governments from the left have killed more people than war and famine combined. Please stop crying, I really don't give a shit that you signed up to fight in an 'illegal war' and came out the otherside damaged.

 

[Mr Smokes Blunts.]

Ha! That's what they keep telling us. Enterprise involves risk, and profit is the reward.

But what bullshit, and that you've fallen for it shows SHM's analysis to be correct!* I'd love to hear all your stories about rich cunts who took risks and ended up living in poverty.

Oh and PS the incentive for the rich cunt to employ the poor cunt is the poor cunt will work for less than he's worth to the rich cunt, this lining the rich cunts pocket!

A better question is, why is the poor cunt so willing to short sell himself? Because he has no choice. Need to sleep somewhere? £RENT. Need to eat? £FOOD BILL. Need to exist? £COUNCIL TAX.


* I mean about being influenced by the prevailing ideology, not the stuff about you being scum, seeing as it's your birthday

Well here's just a couple of stories of rich cunts who have taken risks and ended up poor for it:

I know a cambridge graduate who now runs one of the biggest festivals in the UK who has been a millionaire and bankrupt twice. He is now on his way to becoming rich for the 3rd and hopefully final time.

My dads boss was worth over a mil 5 years ago. Now he has had to remortgage his house and sell his car just to pay his employees wages because his buisness tanked.

Thousands of rich people go bankrupt each year... Everytime the stockmarket fluctuates that's fortunes being made and lost. 2/3 businesses will fail in the first 3 years... So I guess you will now admit you are wrong? I admit it's not a great situation to be in when you're a poor cunt, I am at the moment. But before I was ill I put up barriers to my exploitation by being self employed and selective about my work. I went from being dirt poor to relatively well off quite quickly. There is at the end of the day plenty of ways for poor people to become rich if they are willing to risk it all. I think you will find that many top business people risked it all to get where they are now, and many took a few attempts and bankruptcy to do it.