Sal Paradise wrote:
Let's make this simple - would you say the average standard of living has increased or decreased in the last 30 years? If the answer to that is yes - difficult to argue that not to be the case - how has that happened?
That is a kind of Peter Mendleson view of being comfortable with some people being excessively wealthy despite not being so oneself.
There are two problems with this. First of all we aren't discussing the last 30 years but what has happened since 2008 and from them till now living standards have declined. The fact they may have declined from a high point doesn't mean it is right that your and my living standards take a hit while the 1% are unaffected and are in fact becoming even wealthier.
However, your and my position is I am guessing still pretty comfortable. The ones really taking the hit are the working poor of this country and no doubt others who in the UK are going to see more cuts to what benefits they are entitled to while at the same time there is enough cash hidden away in tax havens to make Osborne's £12bn seem like chicken feed.
The other problem with this situation is the concentration of wealth also concentrates the power. You might be comfortable with Bill Gates helping run the world but I certainly do not want a bunch of plutocrats subverting national governments and I do believe we are entering a phase of history (if we are not there already) where we face this possibility. Concentrating wealth and power leaves to self serving interests doing just that.
No I don't think it is morally acceptable that anyone expect the bankers should pay for the their excesses and that includes you and me. Unfortunately life is not fair and these things happen. I have no issue in supporting those that are in genuine need e.g. mentally/physically disabled. What I object to is the abuse of the system which is pretty widespread. Benefit St is a parody of this position but the behaviours you see there would be replicated in virtually every village/town/city in this country. My own in laws, there are 6 claiming with 7 children none work that p1sses me off big style and perhaps its proximity clouds my view.
How on earth have you swallowed this propaganda? Most people who claim benefits work. Benefit fraud is a tiny fraction of what the majority perceive it to be. It is a huge amount
less than tax avoidance and evasion cost the country.
Why are you not even more indignant about that than you are benefit cheats? It costs us far more money and if we got a handle on it would mean the very real cuts that disabled people are facing (never mind the working poor or those on benefits street) would not have to face the cuts they do.
With all this wealth in the world why has it not trickled down to these people?
Are benefits scrounger annoying? Yes, but wipe them out tomorrow and that will not deliver the £12bn Osborne wants.
Are benefit cheat any more annoying than the Saudi Prince who wrote to Forbes magazine complaining that they wrongly listed him as having a personal wealth of $10bn when it was in fact $20bn?
The issue Oxfam highlight is not someone who works hard setting up an SME taking some reward from that. The directors of the company I originally worked for here in Runcorn sold it and received between £250K and £3m each. Do I begrudge them that? No, why would I?
People like them are not the target of the Oxfam report. It is people sat on half the worlds wealth doing naff all with it except hoarding it while (in the case of Walmart) their employees have to make use of food banks.
[quote[Perhaps if the levels of abuse weren't happening our tax bill would go down giving us more cash to spend and maybe an upward Keynesian cycle might start?[/quote]
And perhaps it would go down if we didn't subsidise the likes if Virgin Trains to run the West Coat main line when the publicly run East Coast is proving the most efficient of the lot and delivering more revenue to the government?
You really need to do some research into just how much benefit fraud costs and if you did I can't see how you would not conclude the government is spending far too much effort for far too little return when there are bigger fish to fry elsewhere.
