Quote Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew View Post
With respect, I feel I've missed your point because I feel you're giving mixed messages. You're asking rhetorical questions but coming up with no solutions. You say all the right things and imply that we, as a society, shouldn't have food banks, benefits, etc. which, to me, is like wishing for world peace, but at the same time, I've no idea what you're advocating as an alternative?

If we're going to have capitalism and the disproportionate accumulation of wealth by individuals who have obscene amounts of money and all the benefits that that wealth can give them, then we must, as a caring society, have a social means of security for the workers who help the employer accumulate those obscene amounts of personal wealth. We could call it......social security.

The real 'benefits' are the benefits that obscene amounts of personal wealth can bring the individual e.g. being able to perform a pointless vanity journey to space whilst other people are pointlessly dying because they didn't go to the right school and therefore they end up with substandard healthcare.

I checked out 'orphan crushing machine' and its meaning and context as I don't do Twitter, Facebook et al and haven't, for just over a decade now so it's not one I've read about or seen used in other media. I think you're citing it incorrectly though in your posts.

Like I said, I'd be more interested in your solutions.
I never said I had solutions, my point was that the claim is that foodbanks are bad but welfare is good seems to be at odds with each other. Neither should be required in our society yet here we are. If you're claiming a handout what does it matter if its called welfare or foodbank? Its still a handout.

The likes of Bezos and Branson aren't indicative of business owners and whilst they own large amounts of wealth, this is not piles of cash but future earnings. I'm not advocating that the accumulation of such wealth is good for society, just pointing out that this wealth is not liquid.

what is the answer - well governments are starting to co-ordinate the issue of low tax jurisdictions in a global economy, which is long overdue. This should help combat profit shifting/BEPS.

we could also move towards an fully indirect taxation system - a system which targets those who spend on luxuries whilst ensures those who only spend on the basics aren't taxed at all. Indirect taxes are very difficult for the individual to avoid, and thus the wealthiest in society end up paying more tax at the point of consumption, rather than using various legal structures to avoid paying tax altogether.