No Fault Evictions

[woodieallen]

Forgive my ignorance, as I don't know who Belize is, but I wasn't meaning to use them as an example of rich, just trying to demonstrate that the graph of hard work versus reward is nothing like a straight line. Added to which, why should it be that someone who works with their hands should be paid a fraction of what a "quant" working in the city does? There's very little correlation between hard work and high earnings, as some occupations are deemed more worthy than others.
In my opinion.

Why should it be a straight line? To think that that is the right approach is bordering on naivety. It fails to grasp economic realities. Little things like investment. Overheads. How much value does a worker bring to the business which in turn pays more tax which surely you'd agree is a good thing. That sort of stuff.

 

[woodieallen]

Monbiot puts it rather well, I think:

If wealth was the inevitable result of hard work and enterprise, every woman in Africa would be a millionaire. The claims that the ultra-rich 1% make for themselves – that they are possessed of unique intelligence or creativity or drive – are examples of the self-attribution fallacy. This means crediting yourself with outcomes for which you weren’t responsible. Many of those who are rich today got there because they were able to capture certain jobs. This capture owes less to talent and intelligence than to a combination of the ruthless exploitation of others and accidents of birth, as such jobs are taken disproportionately by people born in certain places and into certain classes.

I find Monbigot a trifle trite in his very narrow-minded in his treatment of this topic and adopts the Jacob approach that everything not 'socialist' is bad. The use of emotive phrases such as 'ruthless exploitation' is just playing to the sycophants in the socialist gallery.

There is a spectrum here. I'm in the middle ground and can see value in both left and right wing views but not to the exclusion of one or the other.

 

[John Brown]

It’s a factor of how much revenue workers generate that determines the reward they get. Some one working all day weaving baskets will earn less than some one working all day trading equities because of the simple fact the basket weavers products will bring in £100’s in profits vs the trader bringing in £Ms in profit. I know the view of many is the basket weaver is a more ‘worthy’ worker than a merchant banker but the reality is that reward is related to the value created. If no one wanted next day delivery of pretty much anything then Bezoz would probably be an Uber driver.
This is also the problem with unions. They try to protect jobs that don’t generate revenue at the expense of the job in the long run.
If no one wants baskets don’t expect to make a living making baskets.

I understand how it works. Over 40 years ago I was given a crash course in traded options, with a view to producing a game/simulation program for employees. It didn't come to anything, but it was a revelation. It seemed that, for the most part, no underlying stock ever changed hands - after all the puts and gets had been cancelled out.

A couple of decades ago I read a piece explaining that only about 3% of the trades that took place in the city were of any benefit to the underlying stock. I mentioned that figure a few years ago to someone more involved in that sort of thing, and he laughed at me. It seemed 3% was a ludicrously high estimate.
But as I said, I understand how it works, and I know that there are arguments in defence of things such as HFT, but I don't see how anyone could call it a meritocracy.

Unions have their place, but I would agree that sometimes they wield too much power.
But I also know that no-one is going to change their mind in this forum, I try to keep out of it, but then somebody writes "this once proud nation" or something equally Trumpian, and I have a relapse.

 

[Jacob]

.....the Jacob approach that everything not 'socialist' is bad. ....

I never said anything of the sort!
What I do say is that to demonise "socialism" on the one hand, or on the other to idealise socialism as a system waiting to replace the existing system, is to ignore the fact that we all are already living by it to a large extent.

 

[John Brown]

I find Monbigot a trifle trite in his very narrow-minded in his treatment of this topic and adopts the Jacob approach that everything not 'socialist' is bad. The use of emotive phrases such as 'ruthless exploitation' is just playing to the sycophants in the socialist gallery.

There is a spectrum here. I'm in the middle ground and can see value in both left and right wing views but not to the exclusion of one or the other.

That's good! Monbigot!! Did you make that up yourself, or hear one of the bigger boys say it?
Honestly, it's like being back in the playground again.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I've not heard it before. It's good, though.

 

[selectortone]

It’s a factor of how much revenue workers generate that determines the reward they get

Not necessarily. Take the Duke of Westminster for example. How much work has he put in to 'earn' the £9billion he inherited from his father? Upon which, by the way, he paid no inheritance tax, thanks to clever trusts set up by his army of tax lawyers.

I don't begrudge guys like Bezos (hope I've spelled it correctly) or Musk their billions, they worked for it. Parasites like little lord Hugh Richard Louis not so much.

 

[Chris152]

I find Monbigot a trifle trite in his very narrow-minded in his treatment of this topic and adopts the Jacob approach that everything not 'socialist' is bad. The use of emotive phrases such as 'ruthless exploitation' is just playing to the sycophants in the socialist gallery.

There is a spectrum here. I'm in the middle ground and can see value in both left and right wing views but not to the exclusion of one or the other.

I think he's just trying to make that point that people are mistaken if they think hard work and enterprise is enough to account for great wealth, that they are not 'possessed of unique intelligence or creativity or drive' - and that circumstance has a far greater part to play. As for ruthless exploitation, clearly you don't have to ruthlessly exploit employees to make a decent income. That said, I think there's a bigger picture in which we're nearly all exploited and deliberately misled in a consumer society - with the goal of making a tiny minority very wealthy - but perhaps that's another thing.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I read years ago that when the queen volunteered to pay some income tax Lord Vestey said there's only one of us left now. His firms paid something like £60 in tax on profits of hundreds of millions. The Inland Revenue at one time apparently had a team of something like forty accountants trying to break the trusts involved - they couldn't. It's often been mooted that the very reason for our tax laws being so complex is becaue they protect hereditary wealth.

 

[AJB Temple]

Forgive my ignorance, as I don't know who Belize is, but I wasn't meaning to use them as an example of rich, just trying to demonstrate that the graph of hard work versus reward is nothing like a straight line. Added to which, why should it be that someone who works with their hands should be paid a fraction of what a "quant" working in the city does? There's very little correlation between hard work and high earnings, as some occupations are deemed more worthy than others.
In my opinion.

I've employed a few (very few) quants and quite a lot of people (in a different business) who worked with their hands. There are not many quant jobs and many are in hedge funds and complex trading operations. These days most of the younger ones are mathematics PhDs recruited from the best universities (those that require high academic standards to get into). There are not many people capable of doing the work, and good ones are in demand, whereas almost anyone can work with their hands. Demand and competition sets the price. They often have quite, how shall I put this, distinctive personalities.

Oddly enough many quants (my best friend is one) can also work with their hands, make stuff and fix motorbikes. Not many people who mainly work with their hands can do what he does with mathematics and IT though.

Many think this pay disparity is unfair. However, the skill is totally transferable and hedge funds don't need to operate from the UK. We are an island and to a degree through political policy choices we can choose whether we are richer or poorer as a nation. Drive the risk takers away and you have chosen poorer. Brexit already made it difficult enough for import and export industry so many who look to invest in Europe do not choose our little Island.

 

[Spectric]

people are mistaken if they think hard work and enterprise is enough to account for great wealth

The outcome really depends upon your mindset, people who end up with a great deal of wealth tend to be those whose biggest motivator in life is money, more money and even more money but for those who are more inquisitive and hands on that enjoy making and designing wealth will elude you because you may desire more money but you enjoy other things more and do not dedicate your life to be a slave to money. I personally place knowledge above wealth, I find more motivation in learning and making than thinking about making excess money to have that lifestyle that I know I would hate.

 

[woodieallen]

Not necessarily. Take the Duke of Westminster for example. How much work has he put in to 'earn' the £9billion he inherited from his father? Upon which, by the way, he paid no inheritance tax, thanks to clever trusts set up by his army of tax lawyers.

Then tighten up the rules.

Parasites like little lord Hugh Richard Louis not so much.

That reply is just childish and ignores all the philanthropic and charitable work that he carries out.

 

[woodieallen]

...I think there's a bigger picture in which we're nearly all exploited and deliberately misled in a consumer society - with the goal of making a tiny minority very wealthy - but perhaps that's another thing.

Really ? Does anyone force you to go out and buy product X or product Y ?

 

[John Brown]

I've employed a few (very few) quants and quite a lot of people (in a different business) who worked with their hands. There are not many quant jobs and many are in hedge funds and complex trading operations. These days most of the younger ones are mathematics PhDs recruited from the best universities (those that require high academic standards to get into). There are not many people capable of doing the work, and good ones are in demand, whereas almost anyone can work with their hands. Demand and competition sets the price. They often have quite, how shall I put this, distinctive personalities.

Oddly enough many quants (my best friend is one) can also work with their hands, make stuff and fix motorbikes. Not many people who mainly work with their hands can do what he does with mathematics and IT though.

Many think this pay disparity is unfair. However, the skill is totally transferable and hedge funds don't need to operate from the UK. We are an island and to a degree through political policy choices we can choose whether we are richer or poorer as a nation. Drive the risk takers away and you have chosen poorer. Brexit already made it difficult enough for import and export industry so many who look to invest in Europe do not choose our little Island.

I take your point, but once again, what does it have to do with "merit"? Your best friend could be considered lucky to have quant skills and motorbike skills. Does that make him more deserving?
Life can be a bit of a lottery, the potential you're born with, the family or country you're born into can have a disproportionate effect on your lifestyle. Of course there are always exceptions, the ones who pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, but they are probably more unusual than you'd think, maybe they make more noise about it.

 

[Chris152]

Really ? Does anyone force you to go out and buy product X or product Y ?

It'd be a mistake to underestimate the pervasive influence of advertising, the promotion of lifestyles through the media and so on, on the choices we make. They're there, shaping our consciousness and values from the moment we're born. People like to kid themselves they are free-thinking, making their decisions from scratch, but that's nonsense.

 

[AJB Temple]

I take your point, but once again, what does it have to do with "merit"? Your best friend could be considered lucky to have quant skills and motorbike skills. Does that make him more deserving?
Life can be a bit of a lottery, the potential you're born with, the family or country you're born into can have a disproportionate effect on your lifestyle. Of course there are always exceptions, the ones who pull themselves up by their own bootstraps, but they are probably more unusual than you'd think, maybe they make more noise about it.

I think merit and deserving are both subjective things judged by other people. A picture may have artistic merit in my view, whereas you may think it mere scribble. As for deserving, if there was a god then only she could decide who deserves what, as most people, rich and poor think they deserve more. Humans seem to be naturally envious of each other and intrinsically greedy. I've known quite a few wealthy people as a result of my working life. Most of them keep quiet about it. This can be a social factor as well - for example in the Netherlands (quite Calvinistic societally) and Switzerland which ~ two places where I have lived, ostentatious displays of wealth are looked down upon. We tend anyway to view everything through the lens of our own circumstances and experience and may not realise we are wearing blinkers.

 

[John Brown]

think merit and deserving are both subjective things judged by other people. A picture may have artistic merit in my view, whereas you may think it mere scribble. As for deserving, if there was a god then only she could decide who deserves what, as most people, rich and poor think they deserve more

I agree.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I don't know about deserving more, but I think the majority seem to think that everyone else's job is easier than their own.

 

[Jacob]

I don't know about deserving more, but I think the majority seem to think that everyone else's job is easier than their own.

...and that being on the bread line is a life style choice!

 

[John Brown]

I don't know about deserving more, but I think the majority seem to think that everyone else's job is easier than their own.

I can't disagree with that. Just like everyone thinks they're a better than average driver.