London Mayor: We should be humbly thanking the super-rich, not bashing them.

On November 17, an article, written by Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, was published in Telegraph. I thought it would be interesting to have a discussion about:

We should be humbly thanking the super-rich, not bashing them
As well as creating jobs and giving to charity, the wealthy should be hailed as Tax Heroes

The great thing about being Mayor of London is you get to meet all sorts. It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city – from the homeless to Irish travellers to ex-gang members to disgraced former MPs. After five years of slog, I have a fair idea where everyone is coming from.

But there is one minority that I still behold with a benign bewilderment, and that is the very, very rich. I mean people who have so much money they can fly by private jet, and who have gin palaces moored in Puerto Banus, and who give their kids McLaren supercars for their 18th birthdays and scour the pages of the FT’s “How to Spend It” magazine for jewel-encrusted Cartier collars for their dogs.

I am thinking of the type of people who never wear the same shirt twice, even though they shop in Jermyn Street, and who have other people almost everywhere to do their bidding: people to drive their cars and people to pick up their socks and people to rub their temples with eau de cologne and people to bid for the Munch etching at Christie’s.

Read more at: www.dailymail.co.uk...

Source: www.dailymail.co.uk...

This is a very hard article to comment on, as personally I tend to highly disagree with the super-rich topics. In UK luckily the taxes are high enough, so they would contribute more to taxes, although at the end, the gap between the super-rich and super-poor is becoming only wider, largely due to the rich becoming even richer by exploiting the employees more, how it tends to be nowadays. If a company is producing large profits, while majority of salaries are relatively low, the employees are simply producing more value than they get paid for.

As the major also points out there are certain three characteristics that most of the super-rich share. If you took a look at these, you would that these are vastly based on luck. Not everybody are given strong mental skills (strong analytical/reasoning skills) or good physical/mental health (from energy to self-discipline, stress tolerance and even risk-taking). The third factor is luck. This leads to the question where should the line be. Some people are born incredibly talented, while some have no talent at all. Should the ones with no talent struggle for the rest of their lives financially in order to benefit the talented ones? If the person has significantly lower than average talent, it is near to impossible that they would ever become wealthy, unless they were born so. They might work incredibly hard, yet they would never even reach the levels where the talented one began at. Hard working without no talent does not produce much results financially.

That is where my personal viewpoint stands at. Where is the line, as the current one is too largely based on luck and very often, especially in retail and production, leads to exploitation of the weaker ones to benefit the stronger ones - social darwinism. The companies, who pay the least to their employees, earn the most, as that is what keeps the prices low compared to opponents.

I believe anyone, whatever their talent, should be able to live reasonably well (not starve or suffer from health issues due to no money for doctor and be able to afford certain tech and other medium-priced consumer items) and the talented ones be rewarded reasonably well for their efforts (significantly more than the untalented ones, but as long as the untalented do not have to suffer to benefit the talented ones).

The fact that the high-salary people pay so much taxes, simply shows simply how out of balance the salaries are and this is going far worse in the coming future, if things don´t change soon.

I shall humbly thank the super rich...

...when one sends me a super check

You do realise that if those super rich a holes didnt do what they did in your country because of tax or wage caps or whatever, they would do it somewhere else and your country would get nothing.

Boris, while looking like quite the idiot, doesnt some times say things that make sense. This is one.

A Tory praising the super rich, calling for them to be knighted immediately, what a surprise!!

He was talking about the top 1% in his column, but the top 1% probably don't pay any taxes because they don't work. Their money is held in off shore accounts, so once again, no taxes. Most of the 1% live off money inherited, money that has been passed down throughout the generations.

People think Boris is great because he comes across as a buffoon, a loveable floppy haired toff. However, this guy was caught red handed agreeing to get a journalist done over, because his mate had been investigated by the journalist. He has a real nasty streak to him and my greatest fear is that he could plausibly become Prime Minister one day.

The top earners in the country have seen their tax bill reduced under this Government, whilst the poor have had what little they were receiving reduced and there are further plans afoot to reduce it even further.

The Tories talk about a something for nothing culture, yet force the unemployed to work for free for their corporate buddies. So, something for nothing is okay for the super rich, but not the poor?

Double standards indeed.

Biigs
You do realise that if those super rich a holes didnt do what they did in your country because of tax or wage caps or whatever, they would do it somewhere else and your country would get nothing.

Boris, while looking like quite the idiot, doesnt some times say things that make sense. This is one.

BS I'm afraid. The bankers keep on threatening to leave London, but that will never happen, never!!

reply to post by Cabin


History not only repeats itself but rears it's Feudalistic head once again!

God forbid, we can live freely without holding our hands out to the uber wealthy that seem to control everything in our lives...........

Usually I do not get involved in threads of political nature of those whom live in a country other than my own, however due to the global pattern of the elite and their control over us serfs on a global level, I couldn't resist replying to this thread. It is becoming pretty clear, that global dominance of those pulling the strings of the puppet governments is a fast approaching train wreck.....

what if they all did? more bankers would replace them and probably half as good for good reason.

While i dislike the huge gap between super rich and normal dave, normal dave doesnt employ 100,000 people.

I have nothing against the rich. (For the most part.) However, they deserve no more thanks than a bum on the street. The same goes for knighting. But honestly, going through the list of those who have been knighted, hasn't it lost it's luster?

Nice to know that Toronto is not the only city with a goof for a mayor!

reply to post by Biigs


Where will they go? They won't go anywhere else in Europe as the Germans want to reduce the bankers bonuses significantly, but good old George Osborne took it to the European courts to try to prevent them.

For every 1000,000 they employ, they make 3 times as many unemployed. The entire political system is in place to protect 'the city' and damn the rest of us. I will never ever praise the slave masters or enjoy my servitude.

To put it politely. F..k .ff Boris!

Thank the super/rich for their greed and avoidance of taxes etc etc.

showing my gratitude
where's the toilet...I need to s... - both of them

Biigs
While i dislike the huge gap between super rich and normal dave, normal dave doesnt employ 100,000 people.

Mr super-rich is worth nothing without the sweat and toil of normal dave.

teapot

Biigs
While i dislike the huge gap between super rich and normal dave, normal dave doesnt employ 100,000 people.

Mr super-rich is worth nothing without the sweat and toil of normal dave.

SO?!?!?!?!?


Dave has a damned job?!

reply to post by Cabin


We should thank them for:

1) Starting wars in the name of so-called democracy
2) Stealing our money as their the ones who control the banks and corporations
3) Barely paying their employees enough to live on without starving
4) Spying on us
5) Flaunting the law

If anyone else has anything to add please be my guest.

Cabin
I mean people who have so much money they can fly by private jet, and who have gin palaces moored in Puerto Banus, and who give their kids McLaren supercars for their 18th birthdays and scour the pages of the FT’s “How to Spend It” magazine for jewel-encrusted Cartier collars for their dogs.

I am thinking of the type of people who never wear the same shirt twice, even though they shop in Jermyn Street, and who have other people almost everywhere to do their bidding: people to drive their cars and people to pick up their socks and people to rub their temples with eau de cologne and people to bid for the Munch etching at Christie’s.

What i like most about Boris's statement is how he point's out clearly that the super dont do anything for themselves, are completely dependent on other people doing their "bidding" yet were suppose to be thanking them for "creating jobs" and paying taxes - Is this article suppose to be hard look at the truth?

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Ya, a goof with balls at least, but lets not make this a Ford debate lol


Fact is that a majority of peoples reactions to something like this is - "why would you ever put super rich people into a position where they deserve anything from us, they have everything they need."

Main point to be taken from a sentence like that is - people

they are people just like you and me, and a belief that they shouldnt be given consideration because they are rich shows how shallow that persons view of what being alive is about, just because they are extremely successful at taking care of their financial needs, doesnt mean they are bad people or that they have every other part of their life figured out especially emotionally)

Think of this - there are super rich people out there who do community service, who donate to charity, who create jobs for people, who support causes

and there are super rich people out there who dont give a #, and break rules and laws and hurt people for their own benefit

Also...

there are super poor people who are nice, give what they can to others, work hard to support their families, are a part of their communities, support causes

and there are super poor people who steal, do crimes, hurt people for their own benefit, break the law, dont give a #

And there are middle class people of the same distinctions


I believe it was said that 90% of people who win the lottery (who didnt already come from money) lose it all and are back to where they were after a few years


those super rich people are rich because they create something stable that grows, I dont see many of these lottery winners creating stability that manifests itself as jobs and careers for other people to rely on in their life


And truth is that a majority of people here on ATS would probably fit into this 90% model (probably around 90% :roll

So I applaud this mayors decision to choose to treat the super rich with this sort of distinction,

the only question now is, how do i get super rich

reply to post by RP2SticksOfDynamite



If I could avoid all taxes I damn well would,

I find it interesting that all of the poor and middle class people who I talk to complain constantly of all the taxes they have to pay, and when someone figures out a way to get out of it they all condemn them to hell

Im sure a lot of those people if they became rich would do the same

Fact is that avoidance of taxes is a part of the system and probably has some way of making it work smoother in some cases,

the other fact is that I dont know the whole story of how it works because my point of view is from the bottom,

reply to post by teapot


And where would dave work if some super rich guy hadnt brough investors together to form the companies that Dave has a job at

or would Dave know how to do that himself??

would he know how to run the whole company?

would he know how to negotiate with the other big fish? or the government?

Would he be on top of every aspect of the business, even when it interferes with his social and family life?

would he know what risks to take for the corporation as a whole?

would he know how to keep the shareholders happy?

would he know how to manage and handle his employees?

would he know how to get in touch with influential people who would be able to help and lubricate the process of business?

would he know how to look at a business plan and see if it would work?

or look at a venture and see if it would be profitable?

those at the top are just as needed in our current system as the Dave's doing the manual work


Just because they have the money to spend, flaunt and enjoy doesnt automatically pit them against people who dont have the money.

I saw a study that said that 95% of millionaires in Canada were self made, coming from poverty or middle class (and i know a few personally myself)

are they to be condemned because they made sacrifices that others didnt?

reply to post by tankthinker


Seems to me you gave all the reasons necessary to prove that it is because of government regulations and a bunch of hogwash legalize, that an ordinary citizen like "Dave" doesn't stand a chance in hell of surviving on his own worth and overcoming the oppression from the top you seem to be defending.........