Gransnet forums

News & politics

"Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me."

(367 Posts)
DaisyAnne Sat 09-Apr-22 09:24:18

In this country, if you are very rich, you are treated as an individual; if you are poor you are treated as a household.

The "household" idea stems from the view of women, originally legally seen as chattels and later as too feeble-minded to have a bank account without a male guarantor as simply part of a household. It seems that in some parts of government this thinking has continued.

If you are rich, one of you may pay income tax in one country and the other in another. If you are poor the government lumps together "household" income. It even does this when considering a member of that household who is in no way related to you and for whom you have no legal responsibility. If you live together, you are lumped together.

This includes those on Universal Credit. The Benefit for the employer that the worker has to claim. The Benefit that Rishi Sunak saw fit to cut. Rishi Sunak, the man who saw questions about his "households" income as a "smear" while forcing others to ask their "household" to give the government all their private information.

GrannyGravy13 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:11:31

Mr. Sunak has not cut Universal Credit the £20 uplift was given over the various lockdowns of the last two years. It was said at the time that this was temporary.

I am sure that there is a scheme whereby a non-working wife/husband can transfer some of their tax allowance to the other.

It is not the super rich that are at fault it is the system, which successive Governments have not amended, that’s all Governments, Conservative, Conservative/Lib Dem coalition and Labour.

As long as the so called super rich are not doing anything illegal they remain untouchable…

Blossoming Sat 09-Apr-22 10:17:10

F. Scott Fitzgerald ‘All The Sad Young Men’.

As he goes on to say, they possess and enjoy early and it does something to them.

They don’t understand what it’s like to be poor and they never will.

Shropshirelass Sat 09-Apr-22 10:17:45

What Rishi Sunak and his wife have or do not have has no bearing on decisions made with the Governments purse strings. Quite honestly, Rishi and his wife have done nothing wrong and it really is none of our business. What would anyone do if they were fortunate enough to be in their position? We all take advantage of schemes that are available to us.

Urmstongran Sat 09-Apr-22 10:20:05

Good post GG13 👏

DaisyAnne Sat 09-Apr-22 10:22:44

So, GG13 nothing can change when circumstances change. I didn't think there was a law that said once the mighty Sunak has said it was temporary, he could not do a U-turn. After all, this government has had a great deal of practice in getting it wrong the first time and having to put it right.

You don't seem to understand what I said in the OP. I was not suggesting that they were doing anything illegal - where did you think I was? It wasn't about illegality. I suggested they believe they are entitled.

They are not untouchable. It's just that someone has to want to do the touching - and it won't be the Sunaks of this world, will it?

GrannyGravy13 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:26:21

DaisyAnne you do not have to be rich to feel entitled

Whitewavemark2 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:26:37

gg13

The law needs changing. What we want is fairness. I want everyone who lives in the U.K. to have a stake in all its institutions, like defence, law, education, health etc. At present the very wealthy can reside here but not contribute fairly to maintaining these institutions that make the U.K. a reasonable place in which to live.

They gain all the benefits from the rule of law etc but only contribute a tiny percentage of their wealth - compared to the average person, but at the same time have access to those in power to influence the law makers for their own benefit.

Democracy is done no favours and we are as a result a poorer country.

GrannyGravy13 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:27:09

Wealth made legally is not a crime.

GrannyGravy13 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:31:53

Whitewavemark2 there has been no appetite to make significant changes to the tax laws by any Government. This does need to be looked at, but I doubt any of the present cohort (whatever colour of their rosette) will do anything.

As long as the due taxes are paid, what else do you suggest the super rich do?

If they were to make significant donations to charity they would be pulled up for that by some.

Grammaretto Sat 09-Apr-22 10:41:31

There just should not be "super rich" individuals. Full stop.
It isn't good for them and it certainly isn't good for everyone else.

As for being in positions of power - that doesn't sit comfortably at all.

Even my DMiL has come round to realising we need a more equal society and having been a Tory voter for much of her 97 years, that is saying something.

Urmstongran Sat 09-Apr-22 10:44:53

Well communism doesn’t work either.
Look at Venezuela. Mind you Corbyn was impressed ...

Germanshepherdsmum Sat 09-Apr-22 10:45:59

You don’t have to be ‘very rich’ to be treated as an individual for tax purposes. Every person liable to pay UK tax is treated as an individual.
As regards household income being considered for benefits purposes, wouldn’t there be an outcry if the spouse of a high earner were paid UC? That could easily happen if household income were not taken into account.
As regards the so-called cut in UC, GrannyGravy says it all. How many ordinary working people received a permanent £20 pw wage increase during the pandemic?

Whitewavemark2 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:47:00

GrannyGravy13

Whitewavemark2 there has been no appetite to make significant changes to the tax laws by any Government. This does need to be looked at, but I doubt any of the present cohort (whatever colour of their rosette) will do anything.

As long as the due taxes are paid, what else do you suggest the super rich do?

If they were to make significant donations to charity they would be pulled up for that by some.

Well, they could decide to pay tax in the U.K. rather than ship their wealth off shore or claim Non-dom status etc. The point is that the wealthy have lots of choices that we do not have.

We are known as the launderette of the world acting as a butler (see Oliver Bullough) for the downright criminal, kleptocrats and oligarchs, and yet they are courted, have access to the top of society and have influenced governments. Even made Lords!

This must stop.

I find the hypocrisy breathtaking.

Coastpath Sat 09-Apr-22 10:49:17

We all take advantage of schemes that are available to us.

What makes me boggle is that the wealthiest people are the ones most likely to take advantage of schemes designed by rich people to keep rich people rich. How greedy!

Surely, if you are an honourable person when you get to a certain level of financial security you would think now is the opportunity to pay back, to invest in the present and future of others with less advantages than you. Time now to invest in infrastructure and projects to make society better in general. I'm not sure when that point arises, but you've got to be thinking about it when you have three houses, staff, successful businesses, several hundred million in the bank and children in top public schools with access to private medical treatment.

The comfortable rich have least need of schemes and loopholes to avoid paying tax. Tax is only a proportion of earned income - you only pay it if you have it and you get to keep plenty for yourself.

To use or condone the use by family members of these methods of absolving the duty to pay our way fairly (not legally, but fairly and with charitable intent) says something about a person which does not sit right with my idea of someone who becomes an MP in order to serve their country and make society a better place for all.

Urmstongran Sat 09-Apr-22 10:49:18

I agree with you GSM.

Germanshepherdsmum Sat 09-Apr-22 10:50:45

There just should not be any super rich individuals. It isn’t good for them.
That’s a pretty frightening statement which I could imagine coming from John McDonnell’s mouth.
Vive la revolution?

Smileless2012 Sat 09-Apr-22 10:52:12

People in all walks of life avoid paying tax and do so illegally. Undeclared earnings from 'cash in hand' jobs.

For example someone I know who runs their own small business paid for her dishonesty when the furlough scheme was introduced because she received less than she could have done by not declaring everything she'd earned previously.

Criticise those who break the law by all means, but don't criticise those who have avoided tax legally.

Good posts GG13. As you say wealth made legally is not a crime and you do not have to be rich to feel entitled.

GrannyGravy13 Sat 09-Apr-22 11:07:55

There it is in one sentence

There should not be any super rich individuals, it isn’t good for them

I for one am more than happy to live in a Country that allows people to follow their destiny, and if that makes them super rich, good on them.

Whitewavemark2 Sat 09-Apr-22 11:09:26

GrannyGravy13

There it is in one sentence

There should not be any super rich individuals, it isn’t good for them

I for one am more than happy to live in a Country that allows people to follow their destiny, and if that makes them super rich, good on them.

I think that you are missing the point entirely.

GrannyGravy13 Sat 09-Apr-22 11:10:52

Whitewavemark2

GrannyGravy13

There it is in one sentence

There should not be any super rich individuals, it isn’t good for them

I for one am more than happy to live in a Country that allows people to follow their destiny, and if that makes them super rich, good on them.

I think that you are missing the point entirely.

Not at all

maddyone Sat 09-Apr-22 11:17:12

There should not be any super rich individuals, it isn’t good for them.

What a judgemental sentiment. What do you think should be done with these individuals? Assuming they’ve legally earned their income and paid all taxes due?

MaizieD Sat 09-Apr-22 11:18:14

GrannyGravy13

Wealth made legally is not a crime.

It's not a crime because the people who want to amass more and more 'wealth' to leave it lying idly in tax havens, unused houses, unused luxury yachts etc have ensured that the laws concerning money and wealth all work to their advantage.

Can you explain to me to rationale for supporting the sheer pointlessness of the wealthy sucking money out of economies all over the globe and leaving it sitting idle when the greater part of the global population lives in poverty or near poverty?

My definition of 'the wealthy' can include the vast multinational corporations which sit on vast profits and pay their workers peanuts.

MaizieD Sat 09-Apr-22 11:19:28

OK.

Can anyone tell me what the purpose of money is?

Urmstongran Sat 09-Apr-22 11:22:35

To buy stuff with it MaizieD?
Certainly not to hoard it I imagine.