Selfish, egocentric, talentless bitch.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Hmmmm...I'm not sure many people would claim that "trickle-down" Reaganomics was a massive success...

The best part of that program trickled down Ron's leg.

That's a haunting image, Gawd....

We lived with it for years.

[klr]

...
In any case, money and capital are fluid, and any wealth accumulated by an individual will either trickle down to society as a whole in the long run through natural expenditure or it will rain down in a torrent if a wealthy individual is profligate or philanthropic by nature.

A mighty big 'if', I fear.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

...
In any case, money and capital are fluid, and any wealth accumulated by an individual will either trickle down to society as a whole in the long run through natural expenditure or it will rain down in a torrent if a wealthy individual is profligate or philanthropic by nature.

A mighty big 'if', I fear.

[FBM]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8289295.stm

Artist Tracey Emin has said she is thinking of leaving the UK in protest about being overtaxed...

Hey Emin...

Oh! I read that as 'taintless bitch'. Was looking for a pic. Never mind.

[devogue]

...
In any case, money and capital are fluid, and any wealth accumulated by an individual will either trickle down to society as a whole in the long run through natural expenditure or it will rain down in a torrent if a wealthy individual is profligate or philanthropic by nature.

A mighty big 'if', I fear.

Either way (trickle or torrent), society will benefit.

[devogue]

That 'trickle down' is taxing. Taxing their income and investing it infrastructure, thereby boosting the economy, providing employment and so on.

That's fair enough, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest that such spending by government is wasteful on a level which would never be countenanced by the private sector. Also, I should stress that I think it is good and fair that the rich are taxed like everyone else, as they currently are - the question is how much.

If infrastructure is an issue I like the idea of the carrot and stick approach by government, even at a local level. Here in Northern Ireland a rich businessman developed ideas for a huge retail park in one of our major towns. The trouble was that this town was a notorious bottleneck for traffic on the way to Belfast, so the local council and planning office came up with an idea - Mr Rich would get full planning permission and a forty year guarantee that no one else would be able to develop a supermarket in this town if he built a beautiful new bypass around the town (beside which his retail park would be situated). So now this guy is making a fortune from his big shopping park, but he's also found employment for hundreds of people and he has made the lives of everyone in the vicinity immeasurably better by building a ring road.

In the meantime their fourth or fifth holiday home might have to wait a little while, along with their hundred thousand dollar 'artwork' replicated by families all over the world every morning.

Apart from the fact that (in the UK anyway) lots of people earning £100k per year are going to whacked with this new bracket there is something to be said for people buying property, art or whatever - the money goes somewhere. I sell a luxury item which is considered, like art, at times to be obscenely expensive to most people - wine. One of my best customers is a man worth in the tens of millions of pounds bracket, and he has a particular like for a white wine from Burgundy called Le Montrachet. Each time he buys a case from me it costs him £6-12,000 and right from the start this was the ticket to my business being successful. The price was determined by how rare and desirable the wine is, I had a source who could get me it at a price and I make a tidy profit selling it on. Before long I had enough working capital built up from one customer to employ a local girl for a year on the minimum wage - then I was able to give her a pay rise as other parts of the business developed - then again and again, to the point where she is now on a wage well above the national average.

Each and every time this man (and now his friends) buy from me my business grows and develops in leaps and bounds, much quicker than it would if I was only selling wine at £10 a bottle - I keep employing more people who earn money which they then pump back in to other businesses in the local economy and so on...

The governement through taxation did not get my staff and I in to work - I did by risking my business set up costs, and my customers keep the ball rolling by investing their hard earned money with me as well.

So what does the government do for me? Well, I have paid tens of thousands in business rates and taxes over the past three years and I don't even get my bins emptied. I have paid hundreds of thousands in personal income tax, as have my staff, and we have received far from what could be described as value-for-money in terms of education for our children. health etc. That's not to say that these institutions are poor, just that they are badly run in the public sector and cost above and beyond what they should do.

I do not, and never will, object to paying tax, but there should be a flat rate so that no one can complain about unfairness and politicians can't use tax brackets to grandstand to certain sections of society.

If you don't tax their income, it sits in a bank account, stagnating. It's "value" might be increasing for the individual, but the money itself is not circulating in the economy, it becomes worthless.

I would imagine that most wealth doesn't just sit in bank accounts - it is invested and made to work, to create wealth (and I know the banks fucked up big time, but not all wealthy people work for banks). The UK government has wasted staggering amounts of taxpayers' money on grandiose schemes and bottomless pits of public funding.

Also, a flat tax is not representative of reality. When you factor in all expenses, someone who still has a net gain of several million (or billion) will have a hell of a lot of superfluous cash floating around, that could better be used on the infrastructure that the family of five on $80 000 a year are supporting.

But there are far more families of five around and I would imagine their collective income would far outweigh pretty much all of the richest part of society.

Once again, I don't think there is cash "floating around". In most cases wealth is tied up in investments and holdings rather than pure cash.

Other systems have been tried and tested, but Capitalism seems to win because it appeals to human nature the most - it may not be the best parts of human nature, but at least for the most part there is fairness and a sort of meritocracy at work. If envy and unfairness are added to the mix (on an ethical rather than monetary level) then people will either try to buck the system or not bother.

[leo-rcc]

If I'd be taxed a flat rate of 25% I'd be overjoyed and pay it with a smile.

[Trolldor]

Capitalism:
It requires you have a constant work force, constantly paid, and constant demand. It also requires you have a working poor and the unemployed. The incredibly rich only enjoy their position because there are people to whom the system necessitates they live below the poverty line. If they don't want to pay the taxes which supply the welfare for these people, they can fuck off.
Before anyone whines about individual choices - doesn't matter. Someone would have to fill the gap, the role, and not everyone who does wants to be there, or should be there. Capitalism requires failure.

And finally, capitalism only remains because people are selfish pricks. They're happy with it until it fails to deliver. The moment it does you have socialism, or communism, and when that inevitably fails capitalism comes back. Until it fails.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

And finally, capitalism only remains because people are selfish pricks. They're happy with it until it fails to deliver. The moment it does you have socialism, or communism, and when that inevitably fails capitalism comes back. Until it fails.

Short answer: We don't have a clue how the economy works.

[Trolldor]

We only have an economy because people can't be trusted to take only what they need.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We only have an economy because people can't be trusted to take only what they need.

The ape wants as much as it can get. We're a few million years shy of overcoming that.

[The Dawktor]

Fortunately, if Emin wants he art work to soar in value- all she has to do is die!

[devogue]

Capitalism:
It requires you have a constant work force, constantly paid, and constant demand. It also requires you have a working poor and the unemployed. The incredibly rich only enjoy their position because there are people to whom the system necessitates they live below the poverty line. If they don't want to pay the taxes which supply the welfare for these people, they can fuck off.

Capitalism doesn't require anyone to live below the poverty line. I agree that Capitalism is pyramidic in shape, but the base does not necessarily have to be poverty-stricken. That it is (in the third world) is more to do with human nature than the nature of Capitalism, just as Communism was fucked up by human nature.

Before anyone whines about individual choices - doesn't matter. Someone would have to fill the gap, the role, and not everyone who does wants to be there, or should be there. Capitalism requires failure.

It may require failure but failure can be relative, The trick is to allow for failure within Capitalism but not strip every last vestige of human comfort, dignity and hope from the individual.

And finally, capitalism only remains because people are selfish pricks. They're happy with it until it fails to deliver. The moment it does you have socialism, or communism, and when that inevitably fails capitalism comes back. Until it fails.

I have to say I agree with you. As a species we need to grow the fuck up and sort our priorities out. We only need one house, we can only eat a certain amount of food every day and we only need one bed to sleep in. However, we are selfish, acqusitory animals - Capitalism seems to be the best way at the moment of sating those desires, but with compassionate governance acting as a conscience for Capitalism we can provide a safety net for those people who need help - when it breaks down, though, it can be pretty fucking ugly (as seen in the US with health care reforms).

I would argue that there is a fine line between reining Capitalism in through taxation and victimising the most successful proponents of a system which is making the world go round.

[Trolldor]

The problem is, you have to pay someone to clean the toilets. They could get paid more, but someone would have to be paid less, and nobody wants to be paid less. The richest of the rich get paid excessively. Instead of giving a several hundred thousand dollar pay rise to an executive, why not a one thousand dollar pay rise to the toilet cleaner?

[devogue]

The problem is, you have to pay someone to clean the toilets. They could get paid more, but someone would have to be paid less, and nobody wants to be paid less. The richest of the rich get paid excessively. Instead of giving a several hundred thousand dollar pay rise to an executive, why not a one thousand dollar pay rise to the toilet cleaner?

Because if the toilet cleaner gets a huge pay rise in line with top executives then you are talking Communism, and Communism not only didn't work but it created a huge amount of misery and people who lived their lives with no ambition and/or resentment at working hard to improve themselves and their surroundings but for no reward.

Again, it's a very human thing - if we could make Communism work life would be grand, but we like reward for our efforts and the way I see it if someone goes through a First World education and has all the breaks in life from being born in Australia or the UK and they end up cleaning toilets then they shouldn't be renumerated as well as someone who has worked their ass off picking potatoes, saving the money, risking it for investment and succeeding, or someone who has worked like crazy at school and university to become a doctor or an astrophysicist, or whatever.