Jump to content

Recommended Posts

so with rage winning does it leave a spirit of hope that people can still make a difference?


yes we can draw our money out of banks that refuse to understand why excessive bonuses can be taxed...


chose how and where we spend our money.


surely this will remind people that if you want you can make a difference however much we feel we can't.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/
Share on other sites

No it doesn't. This was a negative campaign whose only point was beating another release to a unimportant position. Who cares?


The question you should ask is not that this reminds people they can make a difference but what would people want to make a difference about?


Most people can't be bothered so long as their life is ok.


Shame that this event has been given any importance in the media. There are far more important things happening in the world.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278311
Share on other sites

plimsoul Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> yes we can draw our money out of banks that refuse

> to understand why excessive bonuses can be

> taxed...


Perhaps you could explain why it's fair to impose extra taxes on somebody earning, say, 70k a year, but not on a footballer earning many times that?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278384
Share on other sites

I'm not sure it's about tax so much as freedom.


Large earners are already taxed more heavily than lower earners - losing as much as 60p in the pound to the government.


If you're increasing that burden (to say 80p in the pound) then essentially you're saying that it doesn't matter how successful you are beyond a certain point, you won't get to meaningfully benefit.


This is essentially a curtailment of freedom, and probably too onerous for the entrepreneurs that allow our country to flourish to be sufficiently rewarded for their ingenuity.


They'll just piss of elsewhere.


It's got nothing to do with 'fair'.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278387
Share on other sites

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's got nothing to do with 'fair'.


Of course not. It's about finding scapegoats, grabbing headlines, winning votes. All aimed cynically at the average tabloid reader who considers "the banks" and their employees to be a homogeneous entity, and probably thinks that you can open a savings account with Goldman Sachs.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278388
Share on other sites



Did I miss something - who has said extra taxes are to be imposed on those earning 70k? (although I wouldnt necessarily be against a point or two)


Who said footballers should be exempt?


[quote=Large earners are already taxed more heavily than lower earners - losing as much as 60p in the pound to the

government.]



Indeed. But the luxury of being a large earner is that 40% of (say 500k) still leaves a lot of moolah - a hell of a lot more than the average Joe (private OR public quids!) who has subsidised the bailouts and will take the brunt of the upcoming cuts. So if average Joe can take a real, life-changing, genuine hit, so a high earner can take a cut in a bonus, in my book


I'm not advocating a return to 80-90% tax but I would like the idea of raising tax to be possible without people crying about leaving the country all the time. Basic humility and connection to other people would stop me complaining about a bonus getting taxed considering what people on far less are about to get hit with. I wouldn't see it as punishment or a curtailment of freedom - I would still think I am one of the lucky few with a good job, a bonus and largely impervious to the cold wind blowing


Does no-one ever consider themselves spoilt anymore? I suppose they never did, hence the term spoilt

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278463
Share on other sites

Did I miss something - who has said extra taxes are to be imposed on those earning 70k? (although I wouldnt necessarily be against a point or two)


Who said footballers should be exempt?



The O.P. implied that the bonus tax was fair. I am disputing this, as I don't like the way it has been applied across the whole financial industry - including companies who had no part in causing the financial crisis, and received no government money. As far as I know, footballers (as an example of a high earning profession) do not have to pay this tax, as they don't work for banks.


if average Joe can take a real, life-changing, genuine hit, so a high earner can take a cut in a bonus, in my book


Yes, maybe so. In which case, introduce new tax bands for higher earners. Don't tax people extra just because they work in finance.


I don't want to totally hijack the thread, but this issue really does annoy me.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278476
Share on other sites

*warning, almost certainly nonsensical phlegm speckled rant warning*


What i dont get is that during my time in banking, everytime the bank I worked for effed up it's cost savig strategies and didn't make any money that year even though most desks were doing well, most of the company got it's bonuses taken away from them (ok us, I am bitter).


Now the banking industry as a whole screwed up strategy and would probably have collapsed if it wasn't for government intervention. In this country we have very specific institutions who got the strategy wrong and are now effectively public institutions (and coincidentally bought the crappy Dutch one I worked for).

Yet they are paying bonuses, whereas other public sector employees have at least a fiver year pay freeze ahead and if ireland is anything to go by pay cuts to look forward to.


If they hadn't been bailed out those bonuses wouldn't be being paid because belts would be so tight.

Is it fair that now bad debts have been effectively written off (thanks for buying that UK) that the desks are now in rude health that these effectively public sector employees benefit personally to such an extent and out of line with their more traditional public sector comrades?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278514
Share on other sites

I don't know much about football. But I understand that footballers are looking for 'net' earnings these days. I.e what they end up with after tax rather than before tax.


What is to stop your average international banker looking for the same deal?


Could the taxing of bonuses in the way suggested by the govt actually lead to the bankers being even better paid than they are. Which, all the time we hold massive stakes in the banks, would be at our expense?


As I often say you have admire these politicians with the courage of their contradictions.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278760
Share on other sites

Well you can negotiate any way you want, it doesn't alter the outcome:


The tax comes from the net pool available to the employer to fund salaries. Hence HMG's suggestion is that if you reduce this pool through increased taxation the bonuses go down.


As SMG pointed out, the greed of footballers or bankers is nothing to do with HMG.


In the case of football, since HMG is not funding footballers' salaries, it has no moral high ground to intercede. However, since bankers (and brokers) bonuses are generated due to tax payer funding keeping commodities or shares artificially high, HMG does have the moral high ground to intercede.


Whether it makes practical sense is another matter entirely.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278780
Share on other sites

Exactly the point, because of that we could lose our (please, don't laugh) very skilled bankers to other countries and other companies.


Why should unsubsidised banks compete with ours. We are clearly going to have to keep the skill level to stay competitive and because of the tax on bonuses that will cost us more. It will also cost the others more, so why not, they may think move to a less taxing regime? The top players in the city could move elsewhere following the markets. We need to stay at the top of the game or risk losing a massive amount of tax revenue, ?42 billion I believe, in the future.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-278984
Share on other sites

There's no such thing as a bank that didn't receive support either directly or indirectly from the taxpayer.


The taxpayer kept afloat an entire system that would otherwise have folded. That this manifested itself in major shareholdings in a couple of banks is irrelevant, they were merely the first dominos to fall. The rest would have followed as night follows day.


Every bank is making profits now on the back of that investment, because it kept the entire market artificially solvent.


It would take a myopic, mighty smug and arrogant individual to deny that truth - almost like (dare I say it) a banker...

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-279128
Share on other sites

Huguenot if you keep on telling it as it is, you had better be prepared for a temporary banishment.


We can't have the wild truthful ramblings of a failed economist speaking out to all and sundry, it's just not cricket!


I think you should apologise to admin and Dulwichmum (her geezer's a banker) immediately, with a built in proviso that


there will be no more of these 'honesty' outbreaks, as it may bring about another fiscal collapse!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9225-people-power/#findComment-279249
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Since you’re clearly not experiencing what we are I’m not sure I agree with any of your points. I also asked for anyone else having a similar problem… it’s absolutely fine if you’re not but I’d appreciate less of the “go live your life”. There is no need to comment with that tone, it doesn’t provide us with any help for the matter. Nor is it polite. We’re a very kind family simply not wanting damage and don’t find the actions necessary. It’s been the same driver/delivery for a while and this never used to happen. I wouldn’t post this on the forum if it wasn’t getting so frustrating. Again, the kids and myself have kindly asked for this to stop a few times with no success. We all work hard for our living and would never want (nor are we trying) to rid someone of their livelihood. But similarly, I don’t find it fair. Please feel free to PM me if anyone has any advise or shares the same.  
    • And now we have the worst labour government in many many decades who by moving to your position on the right are ushering in a far right reform government. Well done you.
    • You implied he did a good job in your first paragraph when you said you would have hated to see Corbyn lead the country through Covid - the alternative being Johnson, presumably? With the results we all saw. Unite - you have a problem with unions? Who work hard to see that their members get a fair deal in their workplace? How exactly are these people and groups "all as bad as each other"? In what way? Labour "purging their party of the far-left" has given us a weak prime minister who has apparently deserted any "left" (aka caring for other people and having decent moral principles) leanings he ever had. Which is why people appear to be leaving Labour in droves and voting, or intending to vote, Green or Lib Dem or for an independent Left candidate. Starmer has shot himself in the foot, in my opinion. But what would I know. What worked?! I don't know enough about what you are talking about to comment, but "believing" you know the reason someone did something does not make it true. I don't believe that Corbyn ever got "starstruck" or "forgot about his politics", but if you can provide evidence that those things are true, then fair enough. I don't think you can, though.
    • I think you need to get a grip If it's who I am thinking of, she's a young black girl in her twenties, has braids with bright colours through them and - I suspect - works with her father. It's always the same man behind the wheel and he's older than her, always in the same van, so I'm assuming it's a father-daughter combo which, if it is, I think is rather sweet.  They hustle hard in a job that is poorly paid, has little prospects, is relentless and thankless. The fact that they have stuck it out since the pandemic says a lot about them.  I think she's a lovely girl, who's perhaps a little shy - but she'll smile or chat back if you make the effort with her. And I admire her for sticking with that job for so long. Perhaps she's just one of these people who's naturally a bit clumsy or bashes things, the same way some people are heavy on their feet when they walk. But I wouldn't dream of jeopardising her job because she closes the slams the gate and doesn't 'kiss' the ring doorbell with her fingers.  Perhaps she's being passive aggressive because you are. And perhaps she also wishes she got to spend her time worrying about potential damage to her letterbox or her gate.  As for your gate / letterbox - you're talking about hypotheticals. Has there been any damage? No. Then go and live your life and worry about it when it happens.  (apols we have the wrong person, but some of my points still stand). 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...