£30,000 per annum income.

Status
Not open for further replies.

throdgrain

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
7,197
Nah you're wrong there. Most peoples single wage is below £30k. You've only to look in you're local papers to see that, most jobs advertised dont pay anything like that, Inner London excepted.
 

snake75

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
May 29, 2004
Messages
85
yaruar said:
maxi said:
30k is pittance in London, and not much more outside.QUOTE]

It took me 6 years of hard work to get to the point where i earn 30k and it's not a pittance. 1850 a month in take home pay is actually a lot of money. Most people in the country survive on a hell of a lot less than that.

hear hear!!!

those ppl whinging that £30k is a pittance and they are in the 40% tax bracket (which they are not, as the current level is approx £32k plus freepay allowance of approx £4895pa) should try bloody well livin on half that amount or less...and just cos a person doesnt earn much doesnt mean they are stupid or lazy! im struggling to better my earnings potential by training as an accountant...i dont have a high salary, i dont have a company car or private health care or any other BIK, i dont claim tax credits, i dont live off my parents etc etc etc. I wish to god i had the problem of being in the 40% bracket, means ur fuckin quids-in in the first place so stop whinging u guys
 

yaruar

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,617
DaGaffer said:
Six years over a working life of 40-odd years is hardly a long time. Relative to real wealth, 30K is a pittance. Sorry, but it is. Ironically, Labour regard a 'typical' family as having an income of £41,000 ,(although I've read elsewhere its closer to £28K). Sure, there are lots of people surviving on less, but its certainly not 'most' people.

Average disposible income per week for a couple (in 2003, before housing costs) was

Couple with no children (equivalised income benchmark) mean408 median=336

which is 21k after tax income for the average couple (and remember that the majority of people fall below the mean due to the distribution of wealth, hence the much lower median amount) in the UK which isn't that much, probably around the 28k mark (and these are the civil service figures.)

Most people will never earn 30k a year (or equivilent inflationary sum) and it's a privilage to be able to. I have a good degree, an above average level of intelligence and got lucky with getting into the IT industry and i've worked my arse off in low paid jobs to build experience over the years, relatively few people could actually do what i do which is why i get paid well for it.
 

Ormorof

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,817
yaruar said:
maxi said:
30k is pittance in London, and not much more outside.QUOTE]

It took me 6 years of hard work to get to the point where i earn 30k and it's not a pittance. 1850 a month in take home pay is actually a lot of money. Most people in the country survive on a hell of a lot less than that.

yes but thats your personal earnings, 30k is a pittance for a household of 6 living in london. remember its 30k between the 6 of them (3 mothers, 3 babies :p ), not like they are getting 30k each ;)
 

maxi

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
460
jees, how can two posts be interpreted in so many different ways?
 

~Yuckfou~

Lovely person
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,594
Will said:
Errr...so removing the stupidly rich removes demand for services and products? And here was me thinking that the stupidly rich got that way cashing in on business opportunities.

Oh noes, I have failed to understand economics again.

Alan Sugar was a barrow boy.
Richard Branson was the son of a gamekeeper.

People who made their own opportunities. Well off people own the companies that employ the less well off. Remove the well off, remove the jobs.
I admire successful people and aspire, wheras others just want to be given their money.
The only people who want high taxes are those that will never have to worry about paying them.
 

yaruar

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,617
~Yuckfou~ said:
Alan Sugar was a barrow boy.
Richard Branson was the son of a gamekeeper.

People who made their own opportunities. Well off people own the companies that employ the less well off. Remove the well off, remove the jobs.
I admire successful people and aspire, wheras others just want to be given their money.
The only people who want high taxes are those that will never have to worry about paying them.

i hopefully will be paying higher tax rates within a year and will be happy to pay it.

i've also known a few of those people who earn stupid amounts of money. the ones who object to the taxes don't pay any anyway, they all live abroad or at least get paid in offshore accounts. that doesn't stop them from employing poeple through their companies over here.
 

Gengi

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
537
Some purely anecdotal 'evidence' for Maxi.
I work on an oil rig off the coast of Africa, 28 days on and 28 days off, I get paid reasonably well. I personally know 5 Brits who work with me, who spend half of their time living in chalets or caravans in Belgium or France, or who have up sticks and moved to some other European country. This is purely to avoid the £11k -£14k tax bills.
In the other European countries if you are out of the country for half the year you don't pay tax, possibly not fair, but I think a 50 % rebate would be fair, but no the Government wants it all or nothing. So the upshot of this is 60% of the Brits I work with either spend their money stengthening other countries economies or lie and evade their tax.
Possibly not the best example, due to the rotational nature of the work we do, but bear in mind how many 'office workers' will soon be able to work from home, who is to say where home should be, I think Damini may have a point their, when you can earn £50k and not pay tax by living in France or Belgium how many people are going to stay here ?

Later

Gengee
 

Deadmanwalking

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
812
So let me get this right.

Rich people are more skillful, hard working and ultimately much better people then all the other "scum".

Ok. So they shouldnt have a higher tax bracket, as they are as said above. Better then us all. You lot don't like paying tax, as it cripples you, etc etc etc. This was all typed on your computer most likely with broadband, in your own house/flat, car outside, food on table.

And some of you are going to bugger off to france, germany or spain. (I can but wish some of you would).

How about this. On your way to your very skilful, hard working and better job, you get hit by a car. You are rushed to hospital, ICU, wards etc etc etc. You can no longer do your better, superior job and can only manage "Wanting" to work in macdonalds or whatever. Earning about 12k.

Of course being so superior and skillful, you wouldn't take any tax credits, benefits but would earn your 12k and never complain about being taxed the same as someone on 120k. Even if you can't afford to get new shoes every week, feed your children or similar.

Fucking soapbox ethics.

Ps. If you don't like it get public transport and save on road tax. Don't smoke and don't drink. That will be THE biggest tax saving you can make.
 

Turamber

Part of the furniture
Joined
May 15, 2004
Messages
3,558
Looks as if somebody let the kids borrow the computer again. There is a big difference between the income tax system, which taxes your (taxable) income during the year and a tax on the rich ... having lots of money/investments/property makes you rich. Earning a lot of money just means you have a high income. What you do with said income may or may not make you rich -- if you snort it up your nose or spend it on beer and women then you'll not get rich. If you invest it in property, profitable businesses etc then you may well become rich.

I hope this is easy enough for you to follow.

The main taxation on the rich is inheritance tax [edit: and also capital gains tax]. Unfortunately the threshold has not risen a great deal in the past few years, whereas the wealth of (a lot) of individuals has risen a fair amount. My mother, who is a skilled manual worker but certainly not rich or even on a high income, has assets (excluding her flat) that would mean tax is payable on her estate at death.

There is a reason that Marxist governments have failed, and that is because government must reward those with the initiative to engage in free enterprise. Taxing them to the hilt and thus taking away most of what they have worked for is a disincentive. Why slog your guts our working 16 hour days 7 days a week with no holidays if the government is going to take a large proportion of it? Just get that job at McDonald's and take it easy.

If that happens then everyone loses out.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,397
Deadmanwalking said:
Rich people are more skillful, hard working and ultimately much better people then all the other "scum".

No one said a damn thing about 'rich people' being 'better people' than everyone else. Skillful? Well, you can certainly make that argument statistically. Hard working? No-one said that either, and I for one wouldn't say hard-work on its own is going to make you rich. Of course, you're twisting people's words because you've got a serious bug up your ass about anyone having money - that's obvious from almost every post you've made.


Deadmanwalking said:
How about this. On your way to your very skilful, hard working and better job, you get hit by a car. You are rushed to hospital, ICU, wards etc etc etc. You can no longer do your better, superior job and can only manage "Wanting" to work in macdonalds or whatever. Earning about 12k.

Of course being so superior and skillful, you wouldn't take any tax credits, benefits but would earn your 12k and never complain about being taxed the same as someone on 120k. Even if you can't afford to get new shoes every week, feed your children or similar.
.

What a peculiar way of thinking. As it happens, if I was involved in that position, I wouldn't take (or get) tax credits or benefits because I've made provision to look after myself through insurance. Frankly, I don't expect much from the state, certainly not compared to what I put in. Which is not to say I have an objection to paying more than others, because I earn more, but why should I pay extra on top of that?

Deadmanwalking said:
Ps. If you don't like it get public transport and save on road tax. Don't smoke and don't drink. That will be THE biggest tax saving you can make.

What the hell does that have to do with anything? If anything duties on smoking and drinking are a tax on the poor, not the rich. And motoring taxes are a completely separate issue - not tax the rich, tax the guilty.
 

tris-

Failed Geordie and Parmothief
Joined
Jan 2, 2004
Messages
15,260
the only thing that pisses me off about rich people is when they say stuff like "im only on 40k a year, its a crap wage." they stop being able to appreciate the value of money.
i dont earn much, and i still appreciate the value of a tenner.
i think the safest bet is get rid of money altogether and go back to having a set allowance on what we can buy. that will cut out all the arguments :)
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,179
Deadmanwalking said:
Ps. If you don't like it get public transport and save on road tax. Don't smoke and don't drink. That will be THE biggest tax saving you can make.

Public transport is much more expensive than private motoring.
 

JBP|

Part of the furniture
Joined
Dec 19, 2003
Messages
1,360
I know what i would do about it.

However im not allowed to share my views on subjects such as this,by order of Yoni.
 

maxi

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
460
~Yuckfou~ said:
Alan Sugar was a barrow boy.
Richard Branson was the son of a gamekeeper.


I knew someone would say this, it's what keeps the mugs going, 'one day they'll make it too' or 'when i win the lottery this evening'


thats 2 people in 60 million. there are a few more you havent listed. perhaps a handful. Mr Branson wasn't born into estate life either, was he?
 

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
35,981
nath said:
Scouse - it's not jealousy...


I don't see any reason why we shouldn't implement that plan someone suggested earlier - 15-20 hours a week of general community work after 6 months on the dole. Why not make long term claimers work a bit.

Sorry, been away all weekend and am now too caned to argue intelligently - but I just wanted to say that plan was put forward by me.

Ta-dah! :)
 

~Yuckfou~

Lovely person
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,594
maxi said:
I knew someone would say this, it's what keeps the mugs going, 'one day they'll make it too' or 'when i win the lottery this evening'


thats 2 people in 60 million. there are a few more you havent listed. perhaps a handful. Mr Branson wasn't born into estate life either, was he?

They are high profile examples.
The office I am sat in right now is full of people who have made something of themselves, and earn good money.
"Natural Selection"
 

Deadmanwalking

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 29, 2003
Messages
812
There is fuck all natural selection involved most of the time now. The richest people i know wouldn't last 5 seconds if "Natural selection" was what decided our lives.

Saying that, i wish some of you would speed up natural selection and stab a fork into a toaster or something. (A very rich, skillfull person toaster that is)
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,179
Deadmanwalking said:
There is fuck all natural selection involved most of the time now. The richest people i know wouldn't last 5 seconds if "Natural selection" was what decided our lives.

Saying that, i wish some of you would speed up natural selection and stab a fork into a toaster or something. (A very rich, skillfull person toaster that is)

All the wealthy people I know in work are creative, hard working, intelligent folk.

All the relatively poor (those people who don't get much work) I know are shoddy, tend to be a bit lazy, and are for want of a better word, thick.

Hardly any of them wealthy or poor come from wealthy families.
 

yaruar

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,617
Tom said:
All the wealthy people I know in work are creative, hard working, intelligent folk.

All the relatively poor (those people who don't get much work) I know are shoddy, tend to be a bit lazy, and are for want of a better word, thick.

Hardly any of them wealthy or poor come from wealthy families.

Most of the wealthy people i know and have worked with/for are self serving wankers who would sell their own grandmother to a pimp if they thought they would get a good price for her. Either that or they have family money and have bought positions of power in companies and are rapidly losing their fortune due to ignorance and bad management skills.

I've also met lots of hard working, intelligent people who are just managing to scrape by on the salaries they get, and some who work in the academic/public/charity sector at incredibly low salaries because they choose to.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,397
yaruar said:
Most of the wealthy people i know and have worked with/for are self serving wankers who would sell their own grandmother to a pimp if they thought they would get a good price for her. Either that or they have family money and have bought positions of power in companies and are rapidly losing their fortune due to ignorance and bad management skills.

I've also met lots of hard working, intelligent people who are just managing to scrape by on the salaries they get, and some who work in the academic/public/charity sector at incredibly low salaries because they choose to.

If that's true (and I seriously doubt it), then the problem is self-balancing isn't it? You're saying the rich and stupid will end up poor and stupid. Don't see a problem - any company dumb enough to let someone with no skills 'buy a position of power' deserves all they get (and like I said - I don't believe it - certainly not in any kind of company with corporate governance, or that's answerable to shareholders).

Do rich people get jobs because they're rich? Certainly, "old school tie" and all that crap; but the problem is lessening for employees, precisely because of all the rules on corporate governance and because even in that bastion of public school boys, The City, they get found out. I know literally hundreds of City boys (and girls) and hardly any of them are there because of daddy's contacts (in fact I can think of just one who cheerfully admits it - and he has a first from Cambridge, so he probably didn't need help). All of these people are well educated, most are from middle class or working class backgrounds.

Do rich people buy companies they don't have the skills to run? Certainly, (as a Man U fan I'm painfully aware of that :(), but this isn't usually people 'buying positions of power' just because they happen to be rich; for every wealthy dilettante buying himself a plaything, there are a thousand entrepeneurs who've proved themselves (in business - not necessarily as nice people) long before they'd ever be in a position to buy someone else's business.

Strangely enough, I know far more people with trust-funds or daddy's money working for charities than in any other area. Draw your own conclusions from that.


*PS - Pity I missed all the comments before Will edited them; sounds like I missed some real bile :)*
 

Will

/bin/su
Joined
Dec 17, 2003
Messages
5,259
Nothing major. Just try not to get into personal attacks, eh lads?
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,179
Will must have worked in McDonalds at some point :p




PS just kidding
 

nath

Fledgling Freddie
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
8,009
If some rich bloke swapped place with some poor bloke when they were both babies I think it's highly likely that the poor bloke would end up being rich and the rich bloke probably being poor. Tbh it's all about how they were brought up - there may be a bit of genetics involved (but if that's the case then it's hardly their fault). At the end of the day, one only works hard, succeeds because of the opportunities they were given in life and the skills they were given to take said opportunities. Causality man!
 

Jupitus

Old and short, no wonder I'm grumpy!
Staff member
Moderator
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2003
Messages
3,285
nath said:
If some rich bloke swapped place with some poor bloke when they were both babies I think it's highly likely that the poor bloke would end up being rich and the rich bloke probably being poor. Tbh it's all about how they were brought up - there may be a bit of genetics involved (but if that's the case then it's hardly their fault). At the end of the day, one only works hard, succeeds because of the opportunities they were given in life and the skills they were given to take said opportunities. Causality man!

Throwing this comment into the light of the original topic is interesting, making the (imho valid) point that the way they are brought up has quite a bearing on their future success/failure. How well, if we're honest with ourselves, do we really think the kids of the 3 single mums will be brought up even on state handouts? This is the degenerative cycle that we are in in this country and I see no way of stopping it :(
 

yaruar

Can't get enough of FH
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
2,617
Jupitus said:
Throwing this comment into the light of the original topic is interesting, making the (imho valid) point that the way they are brought up has quite a bearing on their future success/failure. How well, if we're honest with ourselves, do we really think the kids of the 3 single mums will be brought up even on state handouts? This is the degenerative cycle that we are in in this country and I see no way of stopping it :(

the only way to try to break the cycle is through education, opportunity and role models for people to aspire to be. people in privilaged positions often don't realise just how difficult it is to break out of cycles of poverty. they just say that people have to work harder, which is true, but if you don't have prospects or obvious opportunities then it's very difficult to lift yourself above them. i was lucky, i got a chance to go to a good university and afterwards worked my arse off breaking into IT and have worked steadily for the last 7 years, but i very nearly didn't. When i graduated i couldn't get any jobs in the fields i was looking into and was resigned to working in pretty menial jobs and scraping a living until an opportunity opened itself up for me. fortunately my brother and father encouraged me to apply for entry level support jobs (something i'd never even considered before and never thought i could do) and i got one and worked on very low pay for a long time buiding up skills. without that encouragement and people believing in me i'd probable still be working in the premium rate number industry earning 6 pounds an hour and living in student accomodation until I got a job doing statistical analysis or similar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom