You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Watching an episode of Salvage Hunters and John Caldwell is on there selling odds and sods to the dealer raising funds for his charity. What he's raising compared to his wealth is equivalent to me raising £5.
He could just give from his own pocket so why bother? Self promotion? Makes a good story for TV about what is essentially a normal/dull bloke? I don't get it.
Makes a good story for TV about what is essentially a normal/dull bloke? I don’t get it.
It's how (some)rich people do attention seeking 🙂
He had a house rebuild filmed for C4......lots (look at me) cringe moments.
Dragons Den is on a similar level. It's like a normal person giving £20 to charity and i'm sure the level of interrogation is not comparable.
Dragons Den is on a similar level. It’s like a normal person giving £20 to charity and i’m sure the level of interrogation is not comparable.
Not really comparable, it's about viable business investment (and decent TV) rather than just bunging someone some smash for nothing in return.
Like food bank donation points in supermarkets.
I take items through the self checkout without paying for them and put them straight in. Who’s kidding who?
Geraint Thomas, resident of Monaco, raising money for the NHS during COVID.
You've just described children in need, lots of millionaires with questionable tax dealings telling us to dig deep when they could end world hunger between them.
John Caldwell clearly needs to do more telly; I've no idea who he is
Bono…
It makes them feel better and by getting over people to pay money towards the charity they back means they don't actually have to use up any of their precious billions.
No idea who John Cauldwell is, but a lot of these “celebs” doing shit for charity are not just about the cash - but about TV awareness of the charity, a badge of credibility (famous person supports charity = must be good), and stimulate ordinary people to feel they should do something for charity.
Like food bank donation points in supermarkets.
I take items through the self checkout without paying for them and put them straight in. Who’s kidding who?
you’ll make an interesting theft case one day… I think you might have got away with it if you had not just admitted the intent!
Everyone in this thread is top 1% by wealth in the world... and quite a few on this forum will be top couple % of that 1%
As far as I can recall, to be theft the item has to leave the premises. As these collection baskets are inside the shop still, all you are doing is moving stock.
I wouldn't be surprised at all if the shops didn't re-patriate stock from the collection point to the shelves anyway.
Everyone in this thread is top 1% by wealth in the world… and quite a few on this forum will be top couple % of that 1%
So what. Yes I am very rich compared to a lot of people in Africa for example but that doesn't mean I am very rich in the UK (where I live and have to pay for things, live somewhere etc,.) and doesn't mean I could give away 100's of millions of pounds with no noticeable impact to my life.
I get the points and often think my self that they should dip their hand in their own pockets. BUT.....we don't know what they give to charity already and maybe this is just a seperate charity thinkg to their normal stuff.
That said, nobody needs billions of pounds in the bank.
Fits well with the motivation of a narcissist
a lot of these “celebs” doing shit for charity are not just about the cash – but about TV awareness of the charity, a badge of credibility (famous person supports charity = must be good), and stimulate ordinary people to feel they should do something for charity.
There's also the fallacy that celebrity always equals rich.
Farage might get a million for appearing in the jungle, but the average soap actor or gigging comedian appearing on the Pointless Celebrity special probably is winning more for the charity than their usual day rate.
and doesn’t mean I could give away 100’s of millions of pounds with no noticeable impact to my life.
A billionaire probably couldn't either, but then you've got to define a point where you feel everyone should donate their excess wealth. Is it slightly richer than you? Or slightly richer than the global mean wealth?
A billionaire probably couldn’t either, but then you’ve got to define a point where you feel everyone should donate their excess wealth. Is it slightly richer than you? Or slightly richer than the global mean wealth?
You think a billionaire giving away say 200 million would impact their life in a noticeable negative way, how exactly?
I can easily define a point where excess wealth should be donated and it is a LOT richer than me as we are talking billionaires here after all aren't we so none of this slightly about it.
As far as I can recall, to be theft the item has to leave the premises. As these collection baskets are inside the shop still, all you are doing is moving stock.
The thing that matters here is intention to permanently deprive the owner. It's hard to argue that putting someone else's thing in a donation basket is not done with the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the thing.
No idea who John Cauldwell is,
Founded, and subsequently sold, Phones 4 U
I would far rather he didn’t arrange affairs to minimise his Uk tax liabilities before he starts pretending he cares about this country
Correct and John Caudwell financially supported a disabled childrens' charity, don't know the name and whether he still does so. He also started and funded a Lyme disease charity as most of his many children were affected, additionally offered the Government a massive donation (can't remember how much) if they put their money into Lyme disease research. Unsurprisingly the Government did not respond.
As far as I can recall, to be theft the item has to leave the premises.
you’d be wrong! No need to leave the shop even for classic shoplifting - it’s slightly easier to prove if you do, but not essential.
As these collection baskets are inside the shop still, all you are doing is moving stock.
Tell the magistrates!
I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the shops didn’t re-patriate stock from the collection point to the shelves anyway.
Then THEY would be committing theft. These are usually in supermarkets with reputations to protect, and moderately high turn over of staff with relatively low loyalty (and some who are bound to be pissed off) so a high risk of whistleblowing.
, but then you’ve got to define a point where you feel everyone should donate their excess wealth. Is it slightly richer than you? Or slightly richer than the global mean wealth?
Anyone on an income £5k per year more than me* should have a 100% tax band obviously.
*adjusted each year by inflation and/or any pay progression I receive, whichever is greater.
I hear on Radio 4 that the richest 26 individuals in the world have greater wealth than the combined total of the poorest 50% of the globe, If true then that is quite a stark statistic.
He could just give from his own pocket so why bother?
Isn't he one of those who've pledged to give away as much as he can in his lifetime? I mean I disagree with with premise of Billionaires and I rather not have him decide where his excess wealth goes to (Taxation etc etc) but at the very least he's not building penis shaped rockets or being a not so subtle far-right arsehole on social media. And in the world of billionaires that more or less sainted behaviour these days.
I think a lot of people have the misconception that billionaires sit on piles of cash or have it all sitting in a bank account that they can dip into as and when. They don't, it'll all be in trust, or hidden away in some offshore registered shell company and they will "rent" their homes, cars etc to themselves through some complex tax arrangements so it actually means they have no personal assets, massive salary and/or tax liability. They have teams of tax accountants to make sure they pay minimal amounts of tax, with minimal personal assets.
Mere mortals can lend small amounts to aspiring business types through platforms like lendwithcare. 10,000 people doing that never gets on the telly, yet it is the same monetary value.
Watching an episode of Salvage Hunters and John Caldwell is on there selling odds and sods to the dealer raising funds for his charity. What he’s raising compared to his wealth is equivalent to me raising £5.
He could just give from his own pocket so why bother? Self promotion? Makes a good story for TV about what is essentially a normal/dull bloke? I don’t get it.
Not sure of the point you are trying to make?
Even if £100k is equivalent to you giving £5 back in the real world its will £100k that can do good. Would it be better if he did bugger all in your view?
I would far rather he didn’t arrange affairs to minimise his Uk tax liabilities before he starts pretending he cares about this country
Given up to recently he was highest tax payer in the UK he is doing a piss poor job.
I take items through the self checkout without paying for them and put them straight in. Who’s kidding who?
That's actually quite an attractive idea, but I guess it's still classed theft, even if you don't benefit personally, intention to permanently deprive, and all that.
Everyone in this thread is top 1% by wealth in the world… and quite a few on this forum will be top couple % of that 1%
Indeed and generally the top global 1% have a bit more that we absolutely need and as a result get a bit more comfort and security, often not as much as you maybe think.
However the top 0.1% really are money hoarding bastards, very much relying on the social narrative that their wealth despite being vastly more than they need for a comfortable existence is earned (questionable) and somehow they should be allowed to hoover up and hide resources that could be put to far better use elsewhere in the world. Somehow they're beyond criticism because us plebs don't give our very last penny to Oxfam?
I think a lot of people have the misconception that billionaires sit on piles of cash or have it all sitting in a bank account that they can dip into as and when. They don’t, it’ll all be in trust, or hidden away in some offshore registered shell company and they will “rent” their homes, cars etc to themselves through some complex tax arrangements so it actually means they have no personal assets, massive salary and/or tax liability. They have teams of tax accountants to make sure they pay minimal amounts of tax, with minimal personal assets.
The poor little lambs having to hide their money from taxation and take out 'loans' from their businesses to live lavish lifestyles, what a wrench it must be. The "technicality" of not actually having a Scrooge McDuck vault doesn't change their habit of consciously putting wealth and resources out of reach for the rest of humanity...
Musk could have put a real dent in world hunger but ****ed up Twitter instead, Bezos launched his cock rocket instead of having a pop at global poverty, the super rich really aren't worth worshipping they're now more like bond villains than ever before, and Capitalism is increasingly looking like a broken system.
Not sure of the point you are trying to make?
I'm saying that he is phenomenally rich and yet appears to be a tight bastard. The narcissist theory seems to apply.
Why does STW always bang on about people who are mainly self made but never focus on parasites like Charlie boy, Johnny Harmsworth and Hugh Grosvenor?
We seem to hate people being successful but have no issues with aristocrats gaming archaic tax laws that should have ended in Victorian times.
A lot seem to think that billionaires have billions in the bank, reality is most have their fortune in their portfolio of assets, same as we have loads of 'millionaires' in the UK who have their money in their house, car, pension, etc.
As for the likes of Rothermore, Grosvenor, etc, always makes me laugh that they never have to worry about giving to the tax man, let along charity, we still live by the rules set hundreds of years ago where someone killed someone else and stole their land, or sided with someone and got their land, and now they can be non-doms yet keep all their titles and so on, i do think in a hundred or so years it'll be a little harder for them, but we still seem to be subservient to our lordships.
...self made...
Now there's a myth...
We seem to hate people being successful but have no issues with aristocrats gaming archaic tax laws that should have ended in Victorian times.
They're all grasping bastards, I'm not sure why any single individual should need access to more than £3m of accumulated wealth these days in order to 'survive' (being quite generous).
I think the problem is we've been raised to think we're in some sort of meritocracy and thus money is magnetically drawn to those with merit. Reality doesn't reflect that idea.
In a society where people are measured by their bank balance and the shiny toys they own, if you've lucked out and ended up rich where is the real incentive to use your spare cash altruistically?
Musk could have put a real dent in world hunger but **** up Twitter instead, Bezos launched his cock rocket instead of having a pop at global poverty, the super rich really aren’t worth worshipping they’re now more like bond villains than ever before, and Capitalism is increasingly looking like a broken system.
It would be a welcome boost if they just treated their workers with a bit more respect and paid them as the success of their businesses merited. Instead they pay poverty wages and prefer union busting to fair treatment. I think you can see the real values of the super wealthy in their actions of how they treat their workers and how they minimise their contributions to society (tax) far more accurately than their PR charity events.
"As far as I can recall, to be theft the item has to leave the premises."
As others have said - wrong. All that is needed is evidence of intent. A classic example being CCTV footage showing suspect glancing all round before pocketing an item. The crime is complete there. Security always waited at the exit as it avoided any possible spurious defences.
Taking about shoplifting. Back in the 80s I got called to an Asda. Security had watched on CCTV and seen a young couple with a toddler shoplifting. They had stopped them at the exit and the guy had bolted but they detained the woman and the toddler.
It stuck in my mind because of what happened next. The woman, obviously wouldn't say who her partner was. Her name was, say, Jane Smith. I asked the toddler his name. He said Alex XXXX. His surname being different. Obviously his dad's name. It was an unusual name, belonging to a well known local family of thieves. This narrowed it down to one of three brothers and a comparison of photos on file confirmed which one. He got charged later.
Soon afterwards I transferred to a different dept/area and had no more dealings with that family. However 30 years or so later having retired and taken a part time job dealing with prisoners for G4S I picked up a con at Dumbarton Sheriff Court to return to prison. His name - Alex XXX. It was the same boy. In the intervening decades he had followed the family tradition and done several spells in jail for thefts and housebreaking etc.
But what struck me was that guy had no chance in life. A good hillwalking friend of mine was brought up two streets away in a "normal" family and lived a normal working and family life. When your normal as a toddler is getting taken out shoplifting what chance have you got?
Why does STW always bang on about people who are mainly self made
No such thing as this. Name me one person who has become a billionaire solely through their own actions and I’ll make your argument look like a sieve with the most basic of Googling.
No such thing as this. Name me one person who has become a billionaire solely through their own actions
Does setting up a company that became a multi billion £ company count? Employing thousands at a decent wage too.
Or are we talking about a sole trader who had no help from anyone else?
Wouldn’t be self made in the first instance then would they? Can you name one from the latter? It is why the term is utter bollocks.
I think to say they aren’t self made if anyone else at all was involved is a bit ridiculous, tbh.
I disagree and won’t change that stance until you provide any evidence to the contrary. Nobody accrues that amount of wealth without treading on a shit tonne of people along the way. It’s a ridiculous term.
No such thing as this. Name me one person who has become a billionaire solely through their own actions
Depending on how much he spends, its pretty likely that Ronaldo will earn over a billion over his career. I'd consider most of that the reward of his own actions. Michael Jordan was allegedly worth 2.2bn a few years ago
https://www.thepioneers.co.uk/posts/an-interview-with-peter-kelly-founder-of-softcat
He’s in the top 170 richest people in the UK, but top 20 tax payers, before we start down that road.
Nah, footballers have a mass of coaching and support systems, he may have an incredible natural talent but that was nurtured and grown by many others. It is actually nice to see some sports people pay tribute to the teachers, coaches and people who helped them on the way up, instead of the bullshit myth that they battled alone against the world.
Ridiculously overpaid and a lot of o Michael Jordan’s wealth is down to his mums business acumen and revenue gained through marketing and advertising. That involves a lot of people. The trainer company that helped make him wealthy don’t have the best track record when it comes to treating their workers fairly either.
The whole “self made” horse shit helps to perpetuate the myth that these people are better than us plebs.
He’s in the top 170 richest people in the UK, but top 20 tax payers, before we start down that road.
Seems like a nice chap and I’d bet he’d probably be one of the first to contribute his success to luck and those that work with/for him.
The whole “self made” horse shit helps to perpetuate the myth that these people are better than us plebs.<br />
Thanks for helping illustrate the very point I was trying to making. Peace out and have a merry Christmas.
I’m not helping you do anything of the sort. I’m guessing you think I’m jealous or something. Im not, Im basically very left leaning and don’t think anyone should have access to obscene amounts of money. I live in hope of that fairytale existence of a fair world for all. There’s more than enough money to go around. I also despise how the media puts these people on pedestals for no other reason than money.
Merry Christmas back at ya 🎄😀
If you win the lottery, i’m putting that down as ‘self-made’.
Although you could say all the other hapless losers who also bought a ticket helped.
Does setting up a company that became a multi billion £ company count? Employing thousands at a decent wage too.
I'd suggest some some light reading. To be fair just the first few pages deals with why this is a bit of a falsehood.
www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/Capital-Volume-I.pdf
Although you could say all the other hapless losers who also bought a ticket helped.
And the people running it, the house always wins in any gambling game.