Tax System exactly like buying a round

[Max B Gold]

What kind of biscuits are we talking about as I refuse to share my Tunnocks Caramel Logs with anyone.

[Eat The Rich]

Generally, being a host, you offer to others first. For biscuits.

I am fortunate to have some friends, who are significantly better of than most and will pay a larger share on occasion. For beer.

What I am implying is that I see the beer example more frequently than the biscuit one.

The beer example is not about generosity though, you're reading that into it. The beer example is about the intuitive sense we have that if the rich are already contributing more than the rest of us then its really not fair or logical to complain about them being the primary beneficiaries of tax cuts. Where the example errs is in the fact that it totally misunderstands the context and motivation behind progressive taxation. Progressive taxation is an attempt to correct the "flaws" of the Capitalist system whereby the rich extract the greatest proportion of the social surplus (i.e - wealth) and aren't generally that keen on picking up the tab for the upkeep of the very society that furnishes them with a healthy, educated and motivated workforce that creates the wealth that they appropriate.

so...in short yes it is a moral and logic outrage that the rich should benefit from tax cuts because the reason they're paying the tax in the first place is because they are facilitated (by the Capitalist state) in siphoning off an enormous proportion of the wealth that society creates.

The biscuit analogy is drawing attention to the divide and conquer tactics employed by the ruling class whereby they barefacedly grab the vast bulk of the wealth produced by the workers and then whisper in the ears of those with one foot on the ladder (the middle class) that those behind them (i.e - those with nothing) are the ones that are unreasonable. Unreasonable for demanding a bigger piece of the pie, not, it must be added, from the middle class (which is the perennially used scare story from the Right Wing press) but from the ruling class who have near enough everything.

I hope that makes the analogies clearer.

[Eat The Rich]

What kind of biscuits are we talking about as I refuse to share my Tunnocks Caramel Logs with anyone.

I can't eat biscuits because by nature I'm a greedy b*st*rd. So your Tunnocks are safe Maxy.

[Dunners]

*opens packet of biscuits

[Thor]

Generally, being a host, you offer to others first. For biscuits.

I am fortunate to have some friends, who are significantly better of than most and will pay a larger share on occasion. For beer.

What I am implying is that I see the beer example more frequently than the biscuit one.

The beer example is not about generosity though, you're reading that into it. The beer example is about the intuitive sense we have that if the rich are already contributing more than the rest of us then its really not fair or logical to complain about them being the primary beneficiaries of tax cuts. Where the example errs is in the fact that it totally misunderstands the context and motivation behind progressive taxation. Progressive taxation is an attempt to correct the "flaws" of the Capitalist system whereby the rich extract the greatest proportion of the social surplus (i.e - wealth) and aren't generally that keen on picking up the tab for the upkeep of the very society that furnishes them with a healthy, educated and motivated workforce that creates the wealth that they appropriate.

so...in short yes it is a moral and logic outrage that the rich should benefit from tax cuts because the reason they're paying the tax in the first place is because they are facilitated (by the Capitalist state) in siphoning off an enormous proportion of the wealth that society creates.

The biscuit analogy is drawing attention to the divide and conquer tactics employed by the ruling class whereby they barefacedly grab the vast bulk of the wealth produced by the workers and then whisper in the ears of those with one foot on the ladder (the middle class) that those behind them (i.e - those with nothing) are the ones that are unreasonable. Unreasonable for demanding a bigger piece of the pie, not, it must be added, from the middle class (which is the perennially used scare story from the Right Wing press) but from the ruling class who have near enough everything.

I hope that makes the analogies clearer.

Absolutely spot on.

The trouble is the bosses and I’m talking c suite in the USA, or directors here, it’s hard to challenge their authority on pay awards and bonuses. When you speak up I’m sure your card is marked, as they don’t want the people lower down to benefit or give them that helping hand up.

The last company I worked for said no bonuses cos the c suite messed up on a deal and ended up writing off about $250m, the senior leaders of which I was one argued and it was me that challenged them, that anyone on under we said 40k gets paid a bonus for their hard work effort and to provide continued motivation. It was taken back to the c suite and the answer came back “no”. The office was demotivated, annoyed and the atmosphere was shocking. Yet the c suite paid themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars each, I know it was against previous set targets and not necessarily against that financial years, but morale dropped like a brick.

The system is unfair, but when you join you know that and you either accept it or someone else will. So it’s a tough one and no amount of presentation or protestation has changed it in all my years of working. I know I’ve tried and ultimately I failed to change that mindset.

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

At least you tried to look after the lower earners. You truly are a great man.

[Adz]

If there's one thing this thread has achieved it's that I now really want a biscuit.

[Thor]

Yeah, but what type adz? It's got to be chocolate hob nobs the king of biscuits.

[Adz]

In my old age i've become really partial to a dark chocolate digestive

[Dunners]

In my old age I now find that any biscuits trigger my ulcerative colitis.

[Ronnie Hotdogs]

34 is not old.

[Lucky7]

Generally, being a host, you offer to others first. For biscuits.

I am fortunate to have some friends, who are significantly better of than most and will pay a larger share on occasion. For beer.

What I am implying is that I see the beer example more frequently than the biscuit one.

The beer example is not about generosity though, you're reading that into it. The beer example is about the intuitive sense we have that if the rich are already contributing more than the rest of us then its really not fair or logical to complain about them being the primary beneficiaries of tax cuts. Where the example errs is in the fact that it totally misunderstands the context and motivation behind progressive taxation. Progressive taxation is an attempt to correct the "flaws" of the Capitalist system whereby the rich extract the greatest proportion of the social surplus (i.e - wealth) and aren't generally that keen on picking up the tab for the upkeep of the very society that furnishes them with a healthy, educated and motivated workforce that creates the wealth that they appropriate.

so...in short yes it is a moral and logic outrage that the rich should benefit from tax cuts because the reason they're paying the tax in the first place is because they are facilitated (by the Capitalist state) in siphoning off an enormous proportion of the wealth that society creates.

The biscuit analogy is drawing attention to the divide and conquer tactics employed by the ruling class whereby they barefacedly grab the vast bulk of the wealth produced by the workers and then whisper in the ears of those with one foot on the ladder (the middle class) that those behind them (i.e - those with nothing) are the ones that are unreasonable. Unreasonable for demanding a bigger piece of the pie, not, it must be added, from the middle class (which is the perennially used scare story from the Right Wing press) but from the ruling class who have near enough everything.

I hope that makes the analogies clearer.

Absolutely spot on.

The trouble is the bosses and I’m talking c suite in the USA, or directors here, it’s hard to challenge their authority on pay awards and bonuses. When you speak up I’m sure your card is marked, as they don’t want the people lower down to benefit or give them that helping hand up.

The last company I worked for said no bonuses cos the c suite messed up on a deal and ended up writing off about $250m, the senior leaders of which I was one argued and it was me that challenged them, that anyone on under we said 40k gets paid a bonus for their hard work effort and to provide continued motivation. It was taken back to the c suite and the answer came back “no”. The office was demotivated, annoyed and the atmosphere was shocking. Yet the c suite paid themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars each, I know it was against previous set targets and not necessarily against that financial years, but morale dropped like a brick.

The system is unfair, but when you join you know that and you either accept it or someone else will. So it’s a tough one and no amount of presentation or protestation has changed it in all my years of working. I know I’ve tried and ultimately I failed to change that mindset.

Good story though Jacka

[slacker]

In my old age I now find that any biscuits trigger my ulcerative colitis.

Really? That can be a, er, sh!tty ailment which can really restrict your diet (off the booze too?). Sorry to hear it if you’ve got it bad, Dunnem.

[Dunners]

In my old age I now find that any biscuits trigger my ulcerative colitis.

Really? That can be a, er, sh!tty ailment which can really restrict your diet (off the booze too?). Sorry to hear it if you’ve got it bad, Dunnem.

Thanks, slacks. Not too bad for me. I was hospitalised a year ago with it, but have it under control and am on some fantastic medication that keeps the immune system in check. It means I can enjoy the booze, but have to avoid the sugary snacks. Prognosis is quite good as long as I'm sensible, as 70% go into permanent remission after 5 years of treatment, so I'm a lot more fortunate than most.

[slacker]

Good luck with it, mate. Have to meet up for a beer and swap ailment sob stories then, soon. Been ages!

[Dunners]

Definitely. I hear that Candler's tax-dodging consultancy business is doing okay, so we could tap him up for a few rounds.

[Ronnie Hotdogs]