It was only a matter of time before these animal-like wards of the state blamed conservatives and the “wealthy” for their own barbaric behavior.
After over thirty years and billions of pounds on social welfare programs, this is what London has to show for it.
Reflections of a Rational Republican 
After over thirty years and billions of pounds on social welfare programs, this is what London has to show for it.
This just goes to show you that “The rich need to pay their fair share.” has no expiration date. This is class warfare plain and simply.
And the same thing is occurring here in America. Try it, for example, with any favorite liberal you know. Ask them point blank what is that fair share? When will we reach the point at which the man has contributed enough.
When we are all equally miserable as Eastern Europe learned so painfully doing the second half of the twentieth century.
As one liberal, my personal view is 39% tax rate on income over $250,000 and maybe 42.5% for income over $1 million sounds about right. Also having hedge fund managers have tax rates like the rest of us. For all the GOP tries to equate tax cuts with economic growth, there were tax hikes just before Clinton came in, and the 90’s boomed. And I don’t remember the rich all fleeing the US with those (slightly higher) rates. I feel taxes are the price we pay for civilization, as Brandeis said.
That’s way too high. That said, a 15% tax rate for a hedge fund manager is way to low. I think if you simplify the tax code and maintain or lower rates, you can solve the problem. The wealthiest Americans can afford to exploit the tax code to lower their effective tax rates. Shut down the loopholes and the revenue problem solves itself.
“For all the GOP tries to equate tax cuts with economic growth, there were tax hikes just before Clinton came in, and the 90′s boomed.”
The 90’s boomed despite tax hikes. The country was in the midst of the biggest stock market bubble in generations, the country had a peace dividend from the end of the Cold War, and the deregulation associated with theTelecommunications Act of 1996 boosted the expansion of communications infrastructure that helped grow the internet.
… the Telecommunications Act of 1996 boosted the expansion of communications infrastructure that helped grow the internet.”
More than that, helped usher in an entirely new era of prosperity for America on every level and an entirely new kind of worker based on demand for an entirely new kind of job.
Wait a minute – I thought only the President could create jobs?
And you’re right – close the loopholes and you solve much of the revenue problem. The “upper class” tax rate is simply nominal at best and therefore remains just fodder to woo a liberal voter base. Whatever Washington raised that nominal rate to on one hand would be offset by what they gave in handouts and loopholes on the other.
While I agree that the financial sector has it way too easy, I think ultimately growth will come easier and faster by creating prosperity rather than punishing it and that’s more the direction we should be leaning.
I agree. Raising the bar and lifting prosperty for everyone is far better than lowering it to make us all equally miserable.
So, what would you suggest the government to do with teens like the two girls who were being interviewed? I doubt they are social welfare recipients. Their parents are probably upper middle class folks (majority of the whites in GB are). But the teenagers have unemployment rate of well over 20%. What do you think is going to happen to the society when a lot of of the restless population has nothing to do. Don’t tell me getting rid of welfare program is going to end this. The Conservative government did cut social programs for teens. And don’t tell me the rich should get a tax break because they are sitting on a lot of cash they are not spending or using to create new business. These teens are suppose to the new consumers in the future. I doubt there is a future for them, as they see it.
And to folks like pino, why don’t you ask the top two richest people in America what they think about the fare share of the rich is? Also, tax as a percentage of GDP is at all time low and we are in a deep hole. Why not go back to the Reagan days? He is a Republican, right?
“So, what would you suggest the government to do with teens like the two girls who were being interviewed?”
Interrogate them and put them in prison, if necessary. It sounds to me like they committed theft.
“What do you think is going to happen to the society when a lot of of the restless population has nothing to do. Don’t tell me getting rid of welfare program is going to end this. The Conservative government did cut social programs for teens.”
Immediately ending these social welfare programs would do no more to stop the riots than taking heroin away from an addict would end his addiction. Weaning many of these folks off social welfare will take years, and a strong economic recovery. What these people need are jobs, not handouts. Until governments stop misallocating resources like this, the global economic engine will continue to stall.
“And don’t tell me the rich should get a tax break because they are sitting on a lot of cash they are not spending or using to create new business.”
I actually believe that the debt problem is 80% wasteful entitlement spending, and 20% revenue shortfall. To get us out of this mess, taxes must increase for everyone, not just the “evil” rich. That said, you can bring in more revenue by simplifying the tax code without raising tax rates. Reagan did it, why can’t this President and Congress? In fact, you might even be able to bring rates down. The problem is that Democrats refuse to cut spending, while Republicans refuse to increase taxes. We need both.
the teenagers have unemployment rate of well over 20%.
After listening to the two young ladies being interviewed, I can not even conceive of a job I would be willing to hire them for. There is no possible way I consider them qualified to stand in front of customers and represent my company or store. As for manual labor, I’m sure that they are unwilling and unable. Further, I wouldn’t be able to trust that they have the respect, either for me or for themselves, to do a job well.
Now, combine that with the fact that the minimum wage in the UK is certainly higher than these girls are qualified to make. Who in their right mind would pay those women even $5 an hour for work they can’t do much less $7+. And THAT is American dollars-the rate is higher in UK.
Still not done. In addition to being forced to pay double their value, you have to give ’em vacation, and holidays and sick pay and and and…..Last, yes–still more–you can’t fire them if they under perform even the horrible expectations I already have of them.
In short, the cost of hiring and keeping them, combined with the cost of having to fire the precious little princesses isn’t worth hiring them. It’s the same reason you no longer purchase hand crank washing machines; the productivity isn’t worth the price.
And to folks like pino, why don’t you ask the top two richest people in America what they think about the fare share of the rich is?
I find it telling that the top 2 richest people in America aren’t willing to pay that rate unless and until they are successfully able to force the rest of the rich to pay that same rate.
Blaming conservatives is wrong . Blaming liberals is wrong too. Something like this is a cultural problem that transcends left and right. I very much doubt most of the rioters were on social welfare. So blaming left or right is simply wrong.
Pino, I’m not sure why you defend wealth imbalances in the US. The distribution of income is more skewed than any time since the 19th Century, class mobility is low (if you’re born poor you’re likely to stay poor), and the working class is worse off than ever. The wealthiest invested in bubbles (not productive capacity), and benefit from their position. Surely given the debt crisis we’re in if we are to cut domestic spending to a rate not seen since the Eisenhower years (that’s Obama’s claim — that hardly sounds radically leftist, indeed it pisses off the left wing of his party), can’t we at least go back to tax rates of the Reagan era — and close some loopholes that leave the wealthiest, those who benefit the most from having a stable system, not paying much at all? Is that really class war to make such an argument?
I agree. Both sides are pretty screwed up now.