Disgusting...

[Rock The Boat 1,329]

12 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

I thought that myth was debunked at least 20 years ago.

Wasn't that the gist of Thatcher's 'trickle down' theory......... and there is still not the slightest sign that it ever happened!

If you want a more topical example then you need look no further than the tech giants who have created huge wealth and paid almost no tax in doing so. They've certainly helped the poor by.................providing minimum wage jobs in warehouses or zero hour contract jobs delivering pizzas.

Both Microsoft and Facebook are giving away billions to charitable causes. Bill Gates has said the bulk of his wealth will go to his charitable foundation. If he hadn't created this enormous wealth he wouldn't have been able to do a thing for the poor. And where else do governments (whether it's a national government or an organisation such as the UN) get their funds to alleviate poverty? It comes from taxes. And the rich pay far more in tax than the rest of us. If you want to help the poor then the more wealth that is created the more the poor can be helped. It's a fact and not a myth.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

1 minute ago, Rock The Boat said:

Both Microsoft and Facebook are giving away billions to charitable causes. Bill Gates has said the bulk of his wealth will go to his charitable foundation. If he hadn't created this enormous wealth he wouldn't have been able to do a thing for the poor. And where else do governments (whether it's a national government or an organisation such as the UN) get their funds to alleviate poverty? It comes from taxes. And the rich pay far more in tax than the rest of us. If you want to help the poor then the more wealth that is created the more the poor can be helped. It's a fact and not a myth.

As someone with 3 degrees in Economics I can say I haven't read such a load of nonsense in a very long time.

The rich have done very well to perpetuate the myth you have just told.

[Rock The Boat 1,329]

1 minute ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

As someone with 3 degrees in Economics I can say I haven't read such a load of nonsense in a very long time.

The rich have done very well to perpetuate the myth you have just told.

So how about using your three degrees in Economics to offer an explanation instead of willy-waving

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

There is absolutely nothing wrong with each of the PL teams saying thank you with giving him £250k. Heck, they've maid hand-over-fist multiple-millions off of his efforts. Further, the PL owners AGREED to give it to him, so they can clearly see the benefit he has brought them over the last 20 years.

The only ones to profit from it all have been the players. Ask them to put their hands in their pockets.If it wasn't for wealthy owners, in most cases, PL clubs would operate very badly. So he hasn't been that brilliant at his job.

[Nuff Said 5,120]

23 hours ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

The top 1% pay 28% of income tax, not total taxation - a very big difference. 

Not to mention that they are still left with a huge amount of discretionary income. Those at the other end of the taxable spectrum are paying what is deemed their “fair” share too but have to make difficult decisions about how to spend what is left after tax.

[Ian 1,129]

To be fair, those at the lower end of the "taxable spectrum" tend to have a lot of support within the UK. Lower to middle earners, particularly families with a single main "breadwinner", are a different matter however.

[Nuff Said 5,120]

3 hours ago, Ian said:

To be fair, those at the lower end of the "taxable spectrum" tend to have a lot of support within the UK. Lower to middle earners, particularly families with a single main "breadwinner", are a different matter however.

“A lot” of support? I don’t think it would seem like that if you were on minimum wage. The point I was (obviously badly) trying to make is that the more you earn the less actual impact on your life. This holds true whether you are on minimum wage or lower to middle income.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

And the rich pay far more in tax than the rest of us.

But who earns the money for them to be able to be in that bracket? Ask someone on the minimum wage where they moor their yacht.

[GenerationA47 751]

22 hours ago, keelansgrandad said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with each of the PL teams saying thank you with giving him £250k. Heck, they've maid hand-over-fist multiple-millions off of his efforts. Further, the PL owners AGREED to give it to him, so they can clearly see the benefit he has brought them over the last 20 years.

Erm, five of the clubs haven't actually agreed to pay the improvised 'poll tax' on clubs https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46221020

The Football Supporters' Federation quoted as saying "Premier League clubs have always told fan groups that budgets are planned in advance and there's not a surplus of cash lying around from their extremely lucrative TV deal.

"In the meantime loyal football supporters continue to be inconvenienced by fixture changes to fit TV schedules, often losing out on travel costs or struggling to get to and from games in the first place.

"Now it appears clubs can stick their hands down the back of the sofa and find £250,000 at a moment's notice."

[GenerationA47 751]

On 14/11/2018 at 08:53, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

I think the £5m to Scudamore is a very blantant message to the new boss that ‘you do well for us, we’ll do well for you’. 

OK, but I thought that's what the 2.5m a year is for, not some discretionary whiparound for another 2 years' salary when he won't even be on gardening leave (i.e. protecting commercial integrity for a period). If he is worth far more than he was paid, and his bonus system hasn't worked (when actually it has! he has made the above mentioned success on the back of his existing reward package!), then why not pay him more out of the Premier League coffers in a normal way.

Presumably the answer will be avoiding national insurance contributions etc, i.e. minimising the amount of funds available to government in an era of austerity and swathing cuts to social services, early years services, NHS - a great move! I hear the Tea Party  types cry. But at least paying it out of the PL's profits would be part of a fair and systematic reward, and the poorer (well, 'less loaded') clubs could use their 1/4 mill towards footballing priorities.

Another thing about that is, if you want this to be about incentivising the next boss, then is it crazy to suggest putting an appropriate bonus system into their new package, so it directly incentives them! Then everyone knows where they stand with clear targets and rewards. Otherwise it's just this wishy-washy unpredictable bodge, for both the willing/unwilling funders and the prospective recipient.

People are saying "he's worth it" and he's personally earned X amount for that League... so, have you done the calculations? may as well argue he is worth double that, or ten times. Why only £5m? Where is your limit?