• nialv7@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Okay, so (hypothetically) I can be working for 50 hours a week to make ends meet. If I put any little savings I have from time to time into stock, I am not working people anymore? Just because I want to be financially responsible?

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        This isn’t hard to understand.

        Owning stock doesn’t make you a worker. Being a landlord doesn’t make you a worker.

        If you work on top of the above, you are a worker. If you do not, you aren’t.

        There’s a big difference between “a landlord isn’t a worker” and “a landlord cannot be a worker.”

        An absolutely based comment from Starmer.

        • nialv7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          I agree with you, but that’s not what Keir Starmer said. His spokesperson recanted it, but what he said originally was stupid.

      • biscuitswalrus@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        By your definition I should be called a footballer because I play football once a week casually. Ignore the 50 plus hour weeks of my actual job. I got $50 from football as season champions (it’s a gift card, for the bar, at the place I play). I better go update my linkedin!

        You’re funny, good one.

        • nialv7@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          What are you talking about? This is exactly what Keir Starmer is saying and is what I am calling stupid.

          • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            If Starmer suggested taxing football income you would be being a bit daft if you claimed that it was going to hurt the guy you just replied to on the grounds that he earned fifty quid from football.

            “But he’s a worker too and he’s not rich and you promised not to tax him” is sillier than saying that he isn’t covered by the promise to not raise taxes on working people.

            That’s because (and this is the bit that’s not quite got through to you somehow yet) the vast, vast, vast majority of his income is from working, not from football.