Understanding the Liberal Mindset

[The Great Zaganza]

He is not the owner if it's a companies with shares. The owners of he shares are, collectively.

 

[AmyStrange]

If the owner has a company and there are shareholders, those shareholders can fire the owner if the owner doesn't have the majority shareholding.

But this it all distraction. The issue is the ignorance of a Labour MP insulting every small business owner and employer in the country, who are workers and pay taxes just like every other worker in the country. And as I expected, the usual suspects on the left leap to her defence.

If they're a CEO, they can be replaced but not fired, and they'd still be a stockholder, so wrong again.

BTW, we're not leaping anywhere. We're merely correcting your mistaken beliefs.

 

[smartcooky]

What small business has shareholders?

Thousands of them. Every small business in UK must be registered with HMRC. Those that are companies (around 40% of them) must be registered with Company House and must have shareholders by law.
Sole Traders make up the remaining ~60% and they are workers by definition. They pay tax just like workers, and work in their own business.

But again this is just distraction from the issue. The subject I raised was the ignorant and insulting comments of an elitist Labour MP, and I will be sticking to that from here on.

I won't be discussing any further about whether or not small business owners are workers... they are and that's a fact.

 

[AmyStrange]

Thousands of them. Every small business in UK must be registered with HMRC. Those that are companies (around 40% of them) must be registered with Company House and must have shareholders by law.
Sole Traders make up the remaining ~60% and they are workers by definition. They pay tax just like workers, and work in their own business.

But again this is just distraction from the issue. The subject I raised was the ignorant and insulting comments of an elitist Labour MP, and I will be sticking to that from here on.

I won't be discussing any further about whether or not small business owners are workers... they are and that's a fact.

Bwahahahahaha... thanks for another laugh at your mistaken beliefs.

Good luck with all that.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

no one ever disputed at they are working. But they can never be Workers - it's just a technical question, not a moral one, as you are trying to make it out to be to justify you being so angry all the time.

 

[johnny karate]

Thousands of them. Every small business in UK must be registered with HMRC. Those that are companies (around 40% of them) must be registered with Company House and must have shareholders by law.
Sole Traders make up the remaining ~60% and they are workers by definition. They pay tax just like workers, and work in their own business.

But again this is just distraction from the issue. The subject I raised was the ignorant and insulting comments of an elitist Labour MP, and I will be sticking to that from here on.

I won't be discussing any further about whether or not small business owners are workers... they are and that's a fact.

Sure okay, but you still haven't established that small businesses have shareholders, only that some registered businesses have shareholders.

 

[Emily's Cat]

In this thread we learn that self-employed people are oppressors.

 

[AmyStrange]

In this thread we learn that self-employed people are oppressors.

Not if they treat their employees fairly.

I owned a calligraphy, sign making, and Party DJ business back East, and even though most of my employees were temporary, I always tried to make sure they were paid well.

 

[smartcooky]

In this thread we learn that self-employed people are oppressors.

Well that's what we can glean from the ill-advised words of Emma Reynolds.
Maybe elitist politicians like her should shut their entitled pieholes rather than insult the very people who pay their salaries.

 

[AmyStrange]

Will that's what we can glean from the ill-advised words of Emma Reynolds.
Maybe elitist politicians like her should shut their entitled pieholes rather than insult the very people who pay their salaries.

I agree with that anyway.

 

[smartcooky]

Oh, how embarrassing...

Emma Reynolds backs off claim employers are 'not working people'

Emma Reynolds said she wanted to 'correct the record' following a barrage of criticism over the jibe in an interview at the weekend.

www.dailymail.com

Emma Reynolds humiliatingly backs off claim that employers 'are not working people' after outcry​

​

Speaking in the Commons last night, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said: '​

Of course, the brilliant men and women across the country who run small businesses are working people.​

​

'I thank them for their contribution to our local economies and our local high streets.​

​

'The bakeries, the cafes, the restaurants, the beauticians, the hairdressers and the local pub and so many more.'​

So she has climbed down off her high horse...and so she bloody should.

 

[dirtywick]

Ms Reynolds replied: 'No, but you're an employee probably of your company, and I'm saying there is a difference between employers and employees.

it's remarkable how you're so badly mangling this concept

 

[smartcooky]

it's remarkable how you're so badly mangling this concept

The only people doing the mangling are those twisting themselves into pretzels trying to distract and deflect from the issue.

 

[dirtywick]

yeah, that’s you lol

 

[dirtywick]

She argued there was a 'difference' between employers and employees

here’s the daily mail author making a similar mistake, perhaps where you got the idea? by apparently implying you can’t draw a distinction between employees and employers by putting difference in quotes.

anyway it seems this woman did so by using the word “worker”. big mistake, as the guys who don’t want to distract from the issue took that to mean she was saying employers don’t do any work and made really long face book posts about how hard they do work, in fact they probably make less money per hour than minimum wage some of them said. they work super hard! not a deflection

it’s such a stupid interpretation of her meaning that you’d almost have to think someone is being dishonest in doing it. which conservative media often is. and they love being victims and are easy to express irrational anger. perhaps that’s why she felt the need to clarify it more simple terms what she meant, wait she did and the daily mail quoted. which to me is anything but a vindication that she thinks employers don’t do work

 

[arthwollipot]

There is a difference between employers and employees. There's no hard and clean divide between them, no characteristics that clearly distinguish one from the other, and nobody is saying that there isn't any crossover between them or that there aren't any grey areas. But employers and employees operate under different legal frameworks, different constraints, different assumptions. Saying that there is no difference between them is the irrational claim, IMO.

 

[dirtywick]

if small business owners want to enjoy the same benefits as workers they can get a job

 

[dirtywick]

There is a difference between employers and employees. There's no hard and clean divide between them, no characteristics that clearly distinguish one from the other, and nobody is saying that there isn't any crossover between them or that there aren't any grey areas. But employers and employees operate under different legal frameworks, different constraints, different assumptions. Saying that there is no difference between them is the irrational claim, IMO.

of course there is, there’s a bunch of differences between them. although i’m not from the uk, so perhaps the self employed are required to treat themselves the same as they would an employee in which case disregard. i assume not, since the facebook rant contained a bunch of ways he is abusing and underpaying himself as his employee as positive examples to justify how offended he was at her inability to recognize his struggle as the victim and how much harder he has to work than everyone else