Wolfheart wrote:
periphery wrote:
I live in Australia, and aside from the healthcare thing (which I was primarly referring to private healthcare, in Australia we have Government funded healthcare too but more wealthy people still have a preference for private insurance because the treatment is faster and often better), what you just posted as nothing to do with increasing the earning capacity for people who work in trades. We are talking about an employed trades person verses someone that works in tertiary industry. Unemployment benefits and other social security benefits has no bearing on the earning capacity of either. Except that trades people may get better tax breaks, because they earn less.
I don't know what you are referring towards but people who earn over £35'000 a year have to pay 40% tax so if even you earned £50'000 a year, you would only see about £30'000 a year. Even if a tradesman charge £15 an hour and works an 8 hour day, that's between £700-800 a week depend on if he works 5 or 6 days.
So let's work it out.
Average Businessman who earns £50'000 a year, 40% tax = £30'000
Average Tradesman who earns just under £35'000 a year, 20% tax = £28'000
Tradesman who works 6 days a week, £40'000, 40% tax = £20'000
The tradesman who works five days a week is better off than the tradesman that works six days a week.
Before anything...this seems to be a terrible misunderstanding on how taxes work. I may not live in the UK, but most modern nations have a pretty consistent basis for how they handle the bottomline of taxes.
I don't know what the exact tax bracketts are at each interval up to 35k a year, so we will simply ignore that and assume a 20% tax below threshold.
The overall tax structure for each of these three individuals should look like this:
35k @ 20% + 15k @ 40% = 28k + 9k = 37k
35k @ 20% = 28k
35k @ 20% + 5k @ 40% = 28k + 3k = 31k
If the UK is not using this method for taxes(which I doubt...given that even in the US people seem to know Jack about how taxes actually work. Therefore, it is likely the same in UK) then they need to rewrite the tax law. I am also purposely avoiding deductibles and everything else associated with tax law that could further complicate the issue.
--------------------------
Moving on to something more thread related:
This thread reeks of ego and insecurity. Given some of your past threads and responses, I thought this might have merely been a troll thread. Having read through the discussion, I seem to have misjudged the situation. There has always been a love for both Beautiful men and Big muscled men. This is not recent at all.
Additionally, the sheer amount of bad information being thrown around in this thread is mindboggling. Furthermore, the appearance of strength/ability correlating with actual strength/ability is awful. I will only say a few things:
Olympic athlete average weight and Bmi...and Sasuke Yuuji Urushihara. Sasuke in general works well too. As most of the athletes who do well tend to be of average build with low Fat ratio. If you watch all the sasuke videos...athletes who are body builders or weigh too much tend to fail specifically because they cannot control their own weight or lack the stamina as the weight wears on them throughout the course. If there is any competition that accurately shows strength(power) to weight ratio...it is Sasuke.