It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Sod that. Screw them both for making me look like a socialist
Actually I think you're kinda circling one of the central issues - parents.
Parents who are stressed, worrying about money and the house, and working long hours in shitty jobs that they don't enjoy... largely don't make good parents - and have a higher propensity for psychologically and physically abusing their kids.
Rich parents don't have those woes, and their kids grow up in nice environments and they get every chance to flourish.
I'm gonna go on the DLA and have lots of ginger children by different women because my back hurts, you lot can pay for it. I'm doing my bit for procreating and securing a diverse and genetically sound genepool of the future.
As for taxing people I sat in a meeting with some, mostly Labour MPs, about 10 years ago, including Blunkett who is a nice guy in which they stated how poor the taxation system is in delivering results. For example for every £10 in tax only £1 gets spent on front line services - the other £9 gets lost in the system. That's why Prescott wanted unitary authorities with tax raising powers - it would have meant £6 or more reaching front line services at the taxes could be raised locally with a central grant from government and as it was more effective taxes wouldn't have to rise.. The Tories are now going some way to fixing this by allowing local authorities to keep taxes they raise locally.
The biggest impact on poverty is done at a community level - it's about housing, social services, support for parents and kids and education.
Remember, it's easier to criticise than create!
a-f*cking-men. thanks for the comment and the link @DarnWeight
more here:
"The west’s leading economic thinktank on Tuesday dismissed the concept of trickle-down economics as it found that the UK economy would have been more than 20% bigger had the gap between rich and poor not widened since the 1980s."
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/dec/09/revealed-wealth-gap-oecd-report
"The idea that increased income inequality makes economies more dynamic has been rejected by an International Monetary Fund study, which shows the widening income gap between rich and poor is bad for growth.
A report by five IMF economists dismissed “trickle-down” economics, and said that if governments wanted to increase the pace of growth they should concentrate on helping the poorest 20% of citizens.
The study – covering advanced, emerging and developing countries – said technological progress, weaker trade unions, globalisation and tax policies that favoured the wealthy had all played their part in making widening inequality “the defining challenge of our time”.
The IMF report said the way income is distributed matters for growth. “If the income share of the top 20% increases, then GDP growth actually declines over the medium term, suggesting that the benefits do not trickle down. In contrast, an increase in the income share of the bottom 20% is associated with higher GDP growth,” said the report."
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/15/focus-on-low-income-families-to-boost-economic-growth-says-imf-study
a) because increasing inequality is proven to be damaging to society.
b) you and louis xvi.
Invest in poor areas and create new jobs. They would do a more efficient job than governments and make a long term profit to boot
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein