Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Poor Poor London

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
According to a recent report (can't be arsed to find a link), London has the highest average wage and property prices in Europe.

By a strange quirk of coincidence it also has the highest poverty levels with 53% of children living below the poverty level .

(NB 30% in Chilly Jockland and something like 35% in the sheepworrying Welsh Hills)

So is this something about which we should be ashamed, or is it a case of *shrugs shoulders* well "that's just the way it is"?
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Anyone who is a decent person and not a greedy bastard should indeed be concerned about this. I'm not saying the solution would be easy to implement, but we must try.

    With regard to property prices and the cost of living part of the problem is that some people get paid too much. I know a number of people holding City jobs and even some mediocre position within the company will return £35,000 plus about 10K in bonuses. Anyone with a fancy job title like market analyst or PR consultant can earn £45,000+ plus a handy 15K-20K annual bonus. And we are talking about kids in their mid-twenties who have no real skills or merits to earn such massive amounts of money. These people go on to buy fancy flats in Clapham for the asking price without questioning the price and push the cost of living in London through the roof.

    The gap between the top and bottom earners keeps growing, and as a result more and more children fall below the poverty line. This is a direct consequence of free-market mentality, resistance to pay taxes and savage capitalism. And it will continue to get worse unless wealth is distributed more fairly.

    An interesting (for want of a better word) statistic about Margaret Thatcher’s premiership: When she went to office 16% of children in this country fell below the poverty line. When she left Downing Street the figure was 33%.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well said Al.

    London has many problems and there should be a serious attempt to remedy them, control the property market and tax the rich :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The reason people in 'the city' get paid so much is because the generate more than that for the company, remember trade benifits everyone.

    Granted the gap between rish and poor maybe getting bigger but on average everyone in the UK is getting richer and better off, we live longer and the infant mortality rate is down.

    If you dont like capitalism so much move to cuba or somewhere, I think its pointless to bitch about it, its the only system that works, take any socialist/communist country and see what their like, the vast majority are horrible places to live.

    I'm not saying that children living in poverty is a good thing, its clearly not but I dislike the argument towards a easy solution like focing people to get paid less or higher taxes. Its not as simple like that.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    If you dont like capitalism so much move to cuba or somewhere, I think its pointless to bitch about it, its the only system that works, take any socialist/communist country and see what their like, the vast majority are horrible places to live.

    It isn't an issue of not liking capitalism, its a case of trying to strike a happy medium.

    I'm surprised that anyone thinks it is acceptable - in a supposed first world country - for such a high number of children to be living in poverty.

    [edited to add link:

    Details are here ]
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes the wages may be higher than the rest of the country but everything is more expensive, surely that's obvious. There's also more people living there than any other city. But what measure counts as poverty, only being able to afford 2 pints in the pub and only the silver package of Sky TV?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by PussyKatty
    Yes the wages may be higher than the rest of the country but everything is more expensive, surely that's obvious. There's also more people living there than any other city. But what measure counts as poverty, only being able to afford 2 pints in the pub and only the silver package of Sky TV?

    Nah, from what I remember of the story it's based on income (same figure across the country), so if that's true - and wages are higher in London - then that just makes things worse.

    Guess I need to check.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Is this relative or absolute poverty?

    I assume its relative, but its still not acceptable..........

    Bongbudda you think we should all get paid by exactly how much we add to the economy?

    I don't think a lot of people would be very happy with that performance related pay for all, the joys of capitalism hey?

    Whats your solution then Bongbudda, entrust our lives to the power of the markets, won't we all be so happy.....:rolleyes:

    Higher taxes looks like a good option to me and it certainly isn't 'simple' it is just the best way to redistribute...........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I just think that at this time if you raise taxes a lot it would seriously send us into a nasty economic down turn and a lot of people would lose their jobs, there would be even more poverty and less people paying taxes.

    I didnt say that I think that people should get paid what they put into the economy, I ment that its easy to point out that people get paid a lot more than others, but they are generating wealth which whether you like it or not benefits us all.

    Look at Hong Kong for example, they have one of the lowest tax burdens in the world, freest trade and generaly belive in the market and they have one of the highest standards of living in the world. They may all live on top of each other but they are rich.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just because they 'create more wealth' it does not mean that they deserve such ridiculous sums of money, tax will not necessariy damage the economy, it will just be redistributed and spent by different people.........
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If you put a higher tax on peoples income, whats going to happen, they're going to ask for more to cover it, the companies will, therefore raising their overheads and they will have to raise their prices, prices go up so people want even higher saleries, and it goes round and round. Inflation isnt good.

    OR you could raise the amount of tax put on business, our coperate tax is quite low, again overheads go up so therefore prices rise and so on.

    OR you could raise the amount of tax on goods, prices rise and so on.

    See a patern here?

    I can understand your argument for a fairer system, I really can, I'm just not sure that just raising taxes is the way forward.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People should not have to ask for more money if taxes are raised. What most people in favour of raising taxes want is a limited increase for the top earners. For instance, 45% for amounts exceeding 100K per year.

    No one who owns more than 100K should make any fuss about getting an extra 5% (or 15%) of extra tax on the amount of their salary exceeding £100,000. Especially considering it is very difficult to justify why someone deserves to earn a six-figure salary.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How many of these children were born in England I wonder?

    I think most workers living in poverty in London are immigrant’s illegal/legal. I work in London and you see in most food outlets and coffee shops its er, well lets just say it isn’t English people working their, because whether you like it or not, we simply wont do them kinds of jobs!

    Where as the immigrants will take any jobs that they can! They also end up living in the shit hole areas of London!

    Sad but not much you can do without everything going to shit!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Stop bellyaching for God's sake! Do YOU want to pay 40% tax on a nurse's salary? do you want your own parents to be forced to stop saving for their retirement?

    Also, we cannot begin to compare with Hong Kong, because the work ethic all over Asia is incredibly powerful, whereas Europeans are (on the whole) lazy and ill-disciplined, something that has dogged us since the growth of the unions in the thirties. Say what you like about Americans (and trust me, I'm not a fan), they work pretty hard and earn a lot, and they've never had much truck with unions.

    Talking of which, there was recently an attempted strike by the fire servicein a US city, I forget which. The army were called in, and the firemen were made to get back to work. Discuss...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    If you put a higher tax on peoples income, whats going to happen, they're going to ask for more to cover it, the companies will, therefore raising their overheads and they will have to raise their prices, prices go up so people want even higher saleries, and it goes round and round. Inflation isnt good.


    Since when has there been any kind of historical precedent for that? And what you don't think people demand higher wages right now?

    Even if they wanted them, they wouldn't get them.

    And tax the richest fat cats, what are they going to do? Raise their salaries by the amount that the tax is raised? Somehow I don't think shareholders are going to like that. And if by some chance this does happen, well then its time to start thinking of putting a wage cap on the highest earners...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You can talk of the poverty trap and bourgeoisie opression but the fact remains. The poor are poor because they want to be poor.

    Lets see a stereotypical poor family

    Dad(if there): 40 a day fag habit. (£2500 pa) Drinking day in day out (£1000 pa) Buying junk like Nike Trainers (£70) and Playstation 2s with a widescreen tv on HP.

    Mother: 40 a day fag habit. Vodka Habit. Shoe and clothes habit.

    14 year old child: 20 a day habit. Beer and Cider habit. Sweets and computer games habit.

    10 year old child: No chance at life because mum and dad choose that they would rather kill themselves with lung cancer than help the children with their free education. By now he's probably commiting some minor crimes, not long before starting to drink and smoke.

    There are families like this and they seem to appear to become more and more prominant in society.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject
    You can talk of the poverty trap and bourgeoisie opression but the fact remains. The poor are poor because they want to be poor.


    Fact? :D

    :banghead:
    Lets see a stereotypical poor family

    "stereotypical" being the key word of that sentence I think...
    Dad(if there): 40 a day fag habit. (£2500 pa) Drinking day in day out (£1000 pa) Buying junk like Nike Trainers (£70) and Playstation 2s with a widescreen tv on HP.

    Hmmm...now why do you think they would buy heavily advertised consumerist items like nike trainers? And why would they buy stuff like alchohol and Playstation 2's and big TV's which would enrich their otherwise dull and lifeless lives?

    What would you suggest they do with their money? Invest it in stocks and shares? :D
    10 year old child: No chance at life because mum and dad choose that they would rather kill themselves with lung cancer than help the children with their free education. By now he's probably commiting some minor crimes, not long before starting to drink and smoke.

    There are families like this and they seem to appear to become more and more prominant in society

    No chance in life? Well the people you just mentioned were 10 once, and this is how they ended up how they are. Help if you followed things through to their logical conclusion.

    And to be honest I'm not sure what your point was in this post? :confused:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject
    Lets see a stereotypical poor family

    Let's have a "stereotypical" uneducated post.

    Dude, best you do a little research before posting such shite.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject

    Lets see a stereotypical poor family

    Dad(if there): 40 a day fag habit. (£2500 pa) Drinking day in day out (£1000 pa) Buying junk like Nike Trainers (£70) and Playstation 2s with a widescreen tv on HP.

    Mother: 40 a day fag habit. Vodka Habit. Shoe and clothes habit.

    14 year old child: 20 a day habit. Beer and Cider habit. Sweets and computer games habit.

    10 year old child: No chance at life because mum and dad choose that they would rather kill themselves with lung cancer than help the children with their free education. By now he's probably commiting some minor crimes, not long before starting to drink and smoke.

    There are families like this and they seem to appear to become more and more prominant in society.

    A firm candidate for the Stupid, Bigoted and Moronic Post of the Year.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It would be nice to think that the top wage earnera above 100K "shouldnt mind" about an extra 5% on their tax bill. Dont you think its a bit pointless to argue about what they should or shouldnt do.
    They would mind and thats the point. If the tax burden goes up any more then voters are going to vote differently and we'll all end up with a government who promises to bring down taxes.

    And a wage cap? Hmmm, exactly how are you going to enforce that? It would cost way and above whatever benefit you would gain to enforce it.

    Wealth creates wealth, having rich people is good for everyone.

    Trying to force equality on people just wont work.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No that doesn't even make sense in a capitalist framework.

    Firms seek to maximise profits by running as efficiently as possible that measn maximising revenues subject to minimising costs, there is no way that any frim needs to pay their execs 1000 times the pay of the average worker to gwt the best out of them..............
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by bongbudda
    Wealth creates wealth, having rich people is good for everyone.

    How so?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Toadborg


    Firms seek to maximise profits by running as efficiently as possible that measn maximising revenues subject to minimising costs, there is no way that any frim needs to pay their execs 1000 times the pay of the average worker to gwt the best out of them..............

    A good case-study about wages paid to board executives vs. floor workers: 3 or 4 years ago BT was making £125 profit per second . That's about £2.5bn per year. Does anyone think the former success of the company, the fact that customers stuck with BT and didn't go to others and therefore generated profits for the company, was due to the workforce of the tens of thousands of workers who kept the company running, or the 12 or so fat cat directors who sat on their arses all day in the boardroom doing pretty much fuck all?

    At the height of this profit-making bonanza the company sacked workers in their thousands, with the sole purpose of making even more profits. In one year alone- in which the company declared a pre-tax profit of £1.8bn, if memory serves- the company made redundant a cool 8,000 people. Does anyone believe this mass cut-cutting operations, born entirely out of pure greed, might have had something to do with the reverse in fortunes the company has experienced?

    Surely not a case of capitalist greed being a company's downfall!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Really some people can't see the wood for the tree's. You're stuck with rationalising that people don't want to be poor. Half my family are incredibly poor. (my mother being one of 12.) Some have found ways out of poverty. The others just don't want to, not if it involves work anyway. This is the way of the poor. There is no north/south devide for the poor. All over the country it happens.

    So i'm right wing. Does that scare you with your liberal upbringing? Do you want a kind of MacCarthyism but against the right? Please.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject
    Really some people can't see the wood for the tree's.

    I personally can't see the post for the grammatical errors.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject
    So i'm right wing. Does that scare you with your liberal upbringing? Do you want a kind of MacCarthyism but against the right? Please.

    Did anyone mention your politics then?

    We said that you posted stupid shit, makes no difference if it's left or right wing, its still stupid shit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's better shit than your indoctrinated liberal approach.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why don't you just go out and get a job at McDonalds or moping the floors at a Tube station and then come back and tell us again how easy it is to become rich and prosperous.

    :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject
    Really some people can't see the wood for the tree's. You're stuck with rationalising that people don't want to be poor. Half my family are incredibly poor. (my mother being one of 12.) Some have found ways out of poverty. The others just don't want to, not if it involves work anyway. This is the way of the poor. There is no north/south devide for the poor. All over the country it happens.

    So i'm right wing. Does that scare you with your liberal upbringing? Do you want a kind of MacCarthyism but against the right? Please.

    Do you actually belive rich people work harder than poor people?

    Do you actually think a poor person working in some blue collar job wouldnt trade it in INSTANTLY for a nice white collar job and double the salary??
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by RoyalSubject
    It's better shit than your indoctrinated liberal approach.

    Excellent comeback, "my shit's better than your shit", tell me is this all your own work or did you get a five year old to help you?

    BTW Indoctrinated by whom?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The rich generate more wealth by spending the money they have, by investing it on the stock market and therefore giving businesses more money to widen their markets.

    Its not like people get paid 100K and then dont spend a single penny do they. Even if they left it all in the bank then the bank would have more money to invest and loan out and more oppotunites would be created.
Sign In or Register to comment.