Reply to post: Re: The New Feudalism

Hands up who isn't p!*$ed off about Amazon's new HQ in New York and Virginia?

LucreLout

Re: The New Feudalism

Before getting to rebutting the bits of your post I dsiagree with, let me just agree that I think the HQ2 thing was nonsense and as a capitalist, such state aid amounts to insanity.

The self-styled elite have been fighting back and winning as we see life becoming harder and harder for average people while a small class of "one percenters" get richer and richer.

Globally, living in the UK or USA, you are in the top one percent.

Looking at the last IFS wealth study, many people with a house in the south east or a public sector pension are 1%ers. You need about USD 1M to hit the top 1%. Obviously, much like any bell curve, there's a huge difference between people in the outer extremes - the gap between someone at the bottom of the top 1% and someone at the top of the top 1% is many magnitudes greater than the gap between the person at the bttom of the top 1% and the most dirt poor person alive.

Back then, if you worked even a McJob, you could afford to rent a cheap apartment.

A 40 hour minimum wage job brings in £16286 a year. That's £1205 per month after tax, plus any benefits you're entitled to. It creates a mortgage and 10% deposit worth £60k. That's enough to buy a one bed place within 40 miles of almost any point in the country (I'll give you places like lands end due to geography may not hold true).

We need to fight against this "all for the one percent" philosophy that's taking over not only America but much of the world.

Fight if you must, but the war is lost. Basic mathematics ensures the top 1% will always get richer than those lower down the wealth spectrum, simply because their compound gains on assets will trump the whole income of those with low education low skill roles. I'll spend my time fighting to join the 1%ers, because its a lot more likely to happen than conjuring up ways to hold them back.

see to it that these corporations pay their fair share of tax

This whole concept is entirely debunked and was put to rest eons ago. Define fair. The problem is your idea of fair isn't my idea of fair and nor is it the next blokes. Everyone has different definitions and they have them for differing reasons too. There is no "fair".

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon