General / Off-Topic The 1%, or the growing divide between the few rich and the expanding poor.

[Zak Gordon]

A topic that has been in need of some discussion, as it just impacts each and every one of us, in growing more obvious ways. The title of 'The 1%' is a little inaccurate, but it is a term that has started to gain public awareness. The biggest issues is less with the 1% and more the 1% of the 1%, there have been a few reports over recent years going into those details more fully.

Anyway i will kick off with the recent release of the Paradise Papers and breaking news on that:

'Paradise Papers leak reveals secrets of the world elite's hidden wealth':

https://www.theguardian.com/news/20...reveals-secrets-of-world-elites-hidden-wealth

And just to be clear, i don't think people being rich is a problem itself, but when you have the trend of recent years; a growing more powerful rich, and an increasing poor demographic, you are on the road to problems.

 

[Cosmos]

Well history has a tendency to repeat itself.. Vive la revolution.

 

[metatheurgist]

Well history has a tendency to repeat itself.. Vive la revolution.

Much harder today though. Previously the bourgeois were noble in-breds, genetic defectives barely capable of holding onto power. Today they're Rhodes scholars with multi-disciplinary degrees. Of course if it takes more energy to dislodge something the more catastrophic the result.

 

[beelbeebub]

I would point out that globally speaking the gap is shrinking.

We do have the super rich billionaires, who are "pulling away" from the rest of us but they aren't the 1%, they are more like the 0.01%.

If you are single, live in the UK and earn more than 40k, you are in the 1% of global earners.

If you are single and earn the average 25k, you are in the 3%.

Don't get me wrong, the super rich are taking the p out of everyone, but pretty much everybody in the developed world gets more than 90% of humanity so we ought be be a little careful about lobbing rocks around.

 

[PigKiller]

Much harder today though. Previously the bourgeois were noble in-breds, genetic defectives barely capable of holding onto power. Today they're Rhodes scholars with multi-disciplinary degrees. Of course if it takes more energy to dislodge something the more catastrophic the result.

You do know who the President of the United States is don't you?
"Rhodes scholars with multi-disciplinary degrees..."
You got to be kidding.

 

[metatheurgist]

You do know who the President of the United States is don't you?
"Rhodes scholars with multi-disciplinary degrees..."
You got to be kidding.

Psst! He doesn't actually run that place, the compa....<hurk!>

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

I'm one of the 99%. Lol

Although, what's the % of people below the poverty line, and % people who live comfortably, but are not rich?

I do wonder.
Technically I'm below the poverty line I think ..

 

[Rampant]

This is something I've been concerned about for the last 8 or 9 years - since the global crash, basically.

The super-rich never witnessed any drop in their standards of living or their income, they just continued to leverage the economies to continue to get even richer, while, in the real world, everyone else witnessed a medium-to-large dip in their family incomes and finances.

And on top of growing income they also want to "avoid" the fair level of taxation that has been set by government? Pretty ugly if you ask me.

Cheerz

Mark H

 

[Cosmos]

Much harder today though. Previously the bourgeois were noble in-breds, genetic defectives barely capable of holding onto power. Today they're Rhodes scholars with multi-disciplinary degrees. Of course if it takes more energy to dislodge something the more catastrophic the result.

The mistake in general thinking is that revolution leads to war, when in fact its war that leads to revolution. And the class war has been waged upon the many by the few. Sadly they are winning.

Its the war thats violent, revolution need not be. Even if communism does seem incompatible with the human condition Marx was right when he said, 'Workers of the world unite, all you have to lose are your chains'. Real democracy in the work place the 'elites' can't take back is what we should all strive for. If a company was always owned by its employees, even those doing the less desirable work, then that could be considered a revolution.

Its the only real answer to the rapacious system of capitalism we currently endure, unless we wanna raze countries to the ground and lop off the elites heads. The latter of which is rather appealing but perhaps not the best way forward.

 

[Arry]

Nice to see British golden boy; four times world champion and living on a basic pay of, one million pounds per race: Got a 3 million pound VAT refund on his private jet; free from the Isle of Man.

 

[Cosmos]

Nice to see British golden boy; four times world champion and living on a basic pay of, one million pounds per race: Got a 3 million pound VAT refund on his private jet; free from the Isle of Man.

Yeah I just read that.. To the rich money appears to be like crack cocaine, no matter how much they have, they always need more. Its rather grotesque.

 

[beelbeebub]

Nice to see British golden boy; four times world champion and living on a basic pay of, one million pounds per race: Got a 3 million pound VAT refund on his private jet; free from the Isle of Man.

Did he get a refund or just not have to pay it?

 

[Arry]

Did he get a refund or just not have to pay it?

Do stop. It has NOT been paid. Semantics are what the 99% are really wound up about.

 

[duckofdeath]

Much harder today though. Previously the bourgeois were noble in-breds, genetic defectives barely capable of holding onto power. Today they're Rhodes scholars with multi-disciplinary degrees. Of course if it takes more energy to dislodge something the more catastrophic the result.

Spoiler

 

[Minonian]

Anything to support this, or just a "known fact"? (arugmentum ad populum) there was always rich people's and some gets richer while others ruined, their fortune runs out. And the only way to beat them in this game if you becoming one of em. But in this case, You will be the apex, and not him.

(handbag) catch 22 loooser. and even than you can't do it without... Yep! Cheating, with very little success.

Yeah I just read that.. To the rich money appears to be like crack cocaine, no matter how much they have, they always need more. Its rather grotesque.

Know what? Try some game where serous trading is necessary, because right now, you don't have the slightest idea how it works, what trading really means. And no, cargo hauling and mission running does not counts.
Just do what i did and beat a pay to win game without paying a single cent using any macros tricky programs and such only financing yourself from the ingame market.

But right now excuse me! All you have to say the usual internet left wing meme factory "facts".

 

[6xes]

some might think this silly... but this is how i perceive the rich getting richer

when you have Big companies all united in a effort to drive up prices... and a lack of competition.. it basically causes the chain of Rich becoming Richer and poor becoming poorer
if we add on top a government who supports big businesses... and puts in place barriers for competitors to rise... then again it brings about the chain of rich becoming richer.. and the Gap widening
so basically it is the essence of Government Colluding with big businesses to maintain their share in the market.

add again the self feeding lobbyist to pay off Government officials to make barriers for competition and create a catalyst so Big Companies can get around paying taxes
.. we again end up with a self feeding cycle of Rich becoming richer becos the government is creating the enviroment to do so

Collusion is occurring within governments more than people wish to acknowledge!!

Im not rich .... but am happy with having enough.. everything else that comes after the necessaties is a blessing to me.. even the necessaties is a blessing!!
Aint you lucky air is free!! lol
Thank God!

 

[beelbeebub]

Do stop. It has NOT been paid. Semantics are what the 99% are really wound up about.

It sort of is important.

If you buy something in the US and bring it to the UK you should pay 20% VAT in most cases.

In some circumstances you can claim it back, so after you have paid the money, they send it back to you.

The net position is you didn't pay the VAT.

There was a scam (actually criminal) a few years ago where people claimed the VAT back on things that VAT had never been paid on in the first place (using fake paperwork) and effectively got refunded money they had never paid in the first place.

If LH was paid a VAT refund for VAT that had never been paid, that would be criminal. If he claimed back VAT that he had paid then it would depend on the circumstances as there are ligitimate circumstances where that can happen.

A good (if weird) example is AGAs (the big cooking ranges in farm houses).

Usually you pay 20% VAT on cookers, but if you order the version with a central heating boiler (as the original AGA was a combined cooker and hot water heater) you only have to pay the lower 5% rate that's charged to central heating boilers. As the saving on VAT is greater than the extra for the boiler you save money. It's irrelevant if you hook the boiler up to anything.

So if you were buying one and you had the option to save hundreds of pounds perfectly legally, what do most people do?

LH took advice from a number of top law firms on the most cost effective way to buy a jet plane and the told him the cheapest legal way was this structure.

We should be shouting at HMRC and those that draft the tax laws and even at the high priced lawyers who find the loop holes. I'm not sure the people who.got to them for advice should be hugely in the firing line. After all LH lives outside the UK, and earns his money from driving cars built in the UK by a German owned company around racetracks mostly outside the UK and EU for a company with german owners in race series owned by Americans.

The fact he's not paying huge amounts of UK taxes is not that surprising

 

[Patrick_68000]

I am shocked that the Queen optimizes her financial investments

rolleyes: )

 

[racer1]

Surely most people would take all legal measures to reduce their tax bill? It is just common sense. That doesn't change just because you're rich.

Taking Lewis Hamilton as an example if he employed people to run his affairs efficiently they'd be doing a bad job if they didn't take advantage of this sort of arrangement.

The problem is that there are so many of these legal arrangements that are silly or used in an unintended way, they need to be clamped down on and made illegal.

 

[beelbeebub]

Surely most people would take all legal measures to reduce their tax bill? It is just common sense. That doesn't change just because you're rich.

Taking Lewis Hamilton as an example if he employed people to run his affairs efficiently they'd be doing a bad job if they didn't take advantage of this sort of arrangement.

The problem is that there are so many of these legal arrangements that are silly or used in an unintended way, they need to be clamped down on and made illegal.

Absolutely.

How many of the "99%" have paid a plumber in cash for a cheaper price?

How many iPhones and iPads are written off of work expenses.

How many miles to pick up the kids or go to the shops are done in work vehicles using fuel that the VAT will he reclaimed on?

Sure, if you are rich there are more options. Your average plumber probably wouldn't set up a shell company in Bermuda to lease his tools back from, but avoiding (as opposed to evading) taxes is not immoral.

If you take the counter view that people should not take any steps to avoid tax at all, you are basically arguing that the state can levy whatever tax charge it likes on an individual or company with no right of appeal.