ChatterBank1 min ago
Rich/Poor divide in the UK
34 Answers
From recent posts on here, for example regarding State Pensions, it seems there is still such a minority of well-off people. IS the divide greater than ever? How do people feel about it?
To put it at its most basic, I don't believe anyone should have to experience the constant nagging worry that money problems bring.
I would love to hear your views. Thanks, Lisa x
To put it at its most basic, I don't believe anyone should have to experience the constant nagging worry that money problems bring.
I would love to hear your views. Thanks, Lisa x
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by leelapops. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Gosh I was only asking! I see I have brought out some really strong feelings, groundings and beliefs in people. I only asked from personal interest, as it has always intrigued me how opposed people can be. Anyway, not to go too deep...!
Thank you to everyone for all your well thought-out answers and the effort you've put into putting your feelings into words.
x
Thank you to everyone for all your well thought-out answers and the effort you've put into putting your feelings into words.
x
Steve, I believe I have summarised your views below:
The have nots will be screwed for the benefit of the haves.
The rich contribute financially considerably more to society than the poor so who�s really screwing who?
The rich have a me me me attitude.
If by that you mean that higher earners begrudge paying more tax for no additional benefit, then guilty!
Anyone who betters themselves is betraying their roots.
So we should stay in our poor working class backgrounds if that is how we were raised?
The have nots are not offered the opportunity to pull themselves out of the poverty trap.
Every child has the opportunity for a full education. Go into any school and asked what kids want to be when they are older and an alarming percentage of them will say they want to be famous. Where is the attitude to succeed? They need to be taught that success only comes through the right attitude and hard work.
Capitalism breeds greed.
You have failed to explain how society can work otherwise.
The have nots will be screwed for the benefit of the haves.
The rich contribute financially considerably more to society than the poor so who�s really screwing who?
The rich have a me me me attitude.
If by that you mean that higher earners begrudge paying more tax for no additional benefit, then guilty!
Anyone who betters themselves is betraying their roots.
So we should stay in our poor working class backgrounds if that is how we were raised?
The have nots are not offered the opportunity to pull themselves out of the poverty trap.
Every child has the opportunity for a full education. Go into any school and asked what kids want to be when they are older and an alarming percentage of them will say they want to be famous. Where is the attitude to succeed? They need to be taught that success only comes through the right attitude and hard work.
Capitalism breeds greed.
You have failed to explain how society can work otherwise.
-- answer removed --
Steve, you're living in cloud cuckoo land. I also have some experience of communist Russia, and whilst I saw people lining up for bread, I also saw the limousines transporting the elite. There were major class barriers - and very obvious ones. Ordinary people were drawing water from wells, and often lived several families to one house or flat. Electricity was strictly rationed and lights often went off for several hours a day. Only the wealthy could afford a car, or a home phone, and then they waited for years to acquire those things. I tried to buy some shoes, but I had nothing much to choose from. Only one shop sold shoes, and they offered very little choice. People were begging me for my clothes and my make-up - that's how much they had. That's the reality of communism. But let's get back to people waiting in line for bread. Is that really what you want to see here? In the west, even the poorest can pop into the ever-popular Tescos whenever they want to and pick up a loaf of bread that they can afford - and yes, they can also buy McDonalds whenever they want to. Can this really be worse than that?
-- answer removed --
Steve, I'm rather perplexed. Was that aimed at me? I don't know what post you're referring to on 23 02 08 at 16.07, unless it's the one that Meglet wrote.
People on the streets begging, have you never been approached by a Big Issue seller.??? or got any spare change The class barriers were between the elite & the poor, as you have failed to grasp not between themselves. they were not drinking anti freeze or after shave. The only difference is they have to endure it on a larger scale.
Yes, they do have to endure it on a larger scale, but I fail to see the attraction in that, or why anyone would want this country to emulate it. It seems you're saying that if some are poor, then we should all be poor, and that it would be preferable, for the sake of equality, if all working people here lived in a similar level of poverty. Do you think that unless everyone has the wherewithal to climb out of the poverty trap, then we should all ignore our opportunities and stay in the bread queue alongside the poorest? I fail to see the logic in that, and I can't see how you do either, since you don't earn your living selling the Big Issue. You've clearly moved up a notch.
Incidentally, whichever post you're referring to, there's no reason to resort to rudeness. This is only a discussion.
People on the streets begging, have you never been approached by a Big Issue seller.??? or got any spare change The class barriers were between the elite & the poor, as you have failed to grasp not between themselves. they were not drinking anti freeze or after shave. The only difference is they have to endure it on a larger scale.
Yes, they do have to endure it on a larger scale, but I fail to see the attraction in that, or why anyone would want this country to emulate it. It seems you're saying that if some are poor, then we should all be poor, and that it would be preferable, for the sake of equality, if all working people here lived in a similar level of poverty. Do you think that unless everyone has the wherewithal to climb out of the poverty trap, then we should all ignore our opportunities and stay in the bread queue alongside the poorest? I fail to see the logic in that, and I can't see how you do either, since you don't earn your living selling the Big Issue. You've clearly moved up a notch.
Incidentally, whichever post you're referring to, there's no reason to resort to rudeness. This is only a discussion.
What's arrogant? This tired old 'No-one gave me nothing and through sheer graft and determination, I've risen to the top of the heap. And if other people worked as hard as I have....'
Jesus. The sheer number of variables that determine how "comfortably off" you are is enormous, and this self-congratulatory all-through-my-own-hard-work tripe is masturbatingly self-absorbed.
- One parent can afford to give up work and educate up until you go to school? Well done. You've got a head start.
- Your parents can afford to school you privately? Well done. You've got a huge head start. The statistics bear that out.
- You're set to inherit a house/a company/a lump sum of cash? Well done. You've got a massive head start.
Have you worked to get any of them? Nope. But god forbid that should willingly give a bit back to society.
And that's just the purely financial factors. If you have to get your degree in night school, while working full time, does that really require the same sacrifice as someone with rich parents trundling off to Oxford with all their school friends?
I'm not suggesting for a second that all low earners/benefit claimers are pulling their weight and busting a gut - but has everyone who lives in a townhouse in Kensington worked their fingers to the bone for a lifetime? And the suggestion from someone on this thread that if you can't prove that those at the bottom are all trying their hardest, then the idea of redistrubuting wealth to any of them is flawed - well, that is just so... saddening.
Maybe I'm just a big softie, but I'm prepared to put up with the unfairness of slackers/hoodies/'chavs' getting an undeserved leg-up if it means that all those who really need help, get it.
It seems that some (most) of you would sooner see a struggling member of society go without help because you can't bear to see a penny of your money
Jesus. The sheer number of variables that determine how "comfortably off" you are is enormous, and this self-congratulatory all-through-my-own-hard-work tripe is masturbatingly self-absorbed.
- One parent can afford to give up work and educate up until you go to school? Well done. You've got a head start.
- Your parents can afford to school you privately? Well done. You've got a huge head start. The statistics bear that out.
- You're set to inherit a house/a company/a lump sum of cash? Well done. You've got a massive head start.
Have you worked to get any of them? Nope. But god forbid that should willingly give a bit back to society.
And that's just the purely financial factors. If you have to get your degree in night school, while working full time, does that really require the same sacrifice as someone with rich parents trundling off to Oxford with all their school friends?
I'm not suggesting for a second that all low earners/benefit claimers are pulling their weight and busting a gut - but has everyone who lives in a townhouse in Kensington worked their fingers to the bone for a lifetime? And the suggestion from someone on this thread that if you can't prove that those at the bottom are all trying their hardest, then the idea of redistrubuting wealth to any of them is flawed - well, that is just so... saddening.
Maybe I'm just a big softie, but I'm prepared to put up with the unfairness of slackers/hoodies/'chavs' getting an undeserved leg-up if it means that all those who really need help, get it.
It seems that some (most) of you would sooner see a struggling member of society go without help because you can't bear to see a penny of your money
Incidentally, the myopic double standards of the right wingers never fail to amuse me.
Seemingly every day, you grumpily point to society's ills, and the erosion of shared values and respect, and the breakdown of British society.
And then when it comes to the clearest way of showing society that you care - putting your hand in your pocket to help out the needy - suddenly you revert back to the first person: "I worked hard for it, and it's all mine".
Taxation is a moral good. And yet the right-leaning media and politicians refer to it as the 'tax burden', as if we should be affronted by it. An entire 'tax avoidance' industry exists where the super-rish and businesses employ people to exploit loppholes, knowing full well that it's shafting poorer tax payers and goes against the spirit of the law. But then they've 'worked hard' for it.
And meglet's answer just sums it up for me. This suggestion that by contributing to society, the rich are being 'screwed' because they're not directly seeing the 'additonal benefits' of their tax outlay.... Good lord.
It matters that there's a yawning, growing gap between rich and poor. It affects the level of crime, the quality of our helathcare, the preservation of our values. How can you expect society to stay cohesive when there's a chasm growing between the top and bottom.
And then you bring communism into it, as if your views on tax are based on altriutic reasons. Give us a break. I'm not advocating communism but a fairer tax system, as ruby says, works just fine in Scandinavia. And if it's squalor you're talking about, take a trip to Baltimore. Two hours from Washington, the heart of capitalism. A horrific ghetto where people can't affford even basic healthcare.
Seemingly every day, you grumpily point to society's ills, and the erosion of shared values and respect, and the breakdown of British society.
And then when it comes to the clearest way of showing society that you care - putting your hand in your pocket to help out the needy - suddenly you revert back to the first person: "I worked hard for it, and it's all mine".
Taxation is a moral good. And yet the right-leaning media and politicians refer to it as the 'tax burden', as if we should be affronted by it. An entire 'tax avoidance' industry exists where the super-rish and businesses employ people to exploit loppholes, knowing full well that it's shafting poorer tax payers and goes against the spirit of the law. But then they've 'worked hard' for it.
And meglet's answer just sums it up for me. This suggestion that by contributing to society, the rich are being 'screwed' because they're not directly seeing the 'additonal benefits' of their tax outlay.... Good lord.
It matters that there's a yawning, growing gap between rich and poor. It affects the level of crime, the quality of our helathcare, the preservation of our values. How can you expect society to stay cohesive when there's a chasm growing between the top and bottom.
And then you bring communism into it, as if your views on tax are based on altriutic reasons. Give us a break. I'm not advocating communism but a fairer tax system, as ruby says, works just fine in Scandinavia. And if it's squalor you're talking about, take a trip to Baltimore. Two hours from Washington, the heart of capitalism. A horrific ghetto where people can't affford even basic healthcare.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles7 mins ago
Law15 mins ago
ChatterBank17 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles41 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles67 mins ago
