Ava-Santina Evans | This House Believes You Have No Right To Inherit Wealth | Cambridge Union
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 тра 2023
- Ava-Santina Evans speaks as the Third Proposition for the motion in the Debating Chamber on Thursday 27th April 2023.
............................................................................................................................
Thumbnail Photographer: William Blakesley-Herbert
............................................................................................................................
Ava-Santina Evans is the political correspondent at PoliticsJOE and has been a lead producer at LBC. She has been a critical voice regarding many of the government's social and economic policies.
............................................................................................................................
SUBSCRIBE for more speakers:
/ @cambridgeunionsoc1815
............................................................................................................................
Connect with us on:
Facebook: / thecambridgeunion
Instagram: / cambridgeunion
Twitter: / cambridgeunion
LinkedIn: / cambridge-union-society
Great Idea, Teachers are underpaid, so let’s take away someone’s inheritance because their father worked hard to provide for his future generations.
She is talking crap, that’s why we pay taxes so people get paid fairly, not strip away some one else’s savings!!
A C- high-school speech that evaded the topic at hand and simply fired blanks in a multitude of different directions with the sole premise that the very/super rich have little to do apart from devoting their entire time to stopping everybody else having a share of the pie. Her juvenile giggles, over rehearsed childlike jokes and asides, and robotically read out speech was met for the most part by the blank expressions of even those members of her own side. The Cambridge Union deserves a lot lot better than this charlatan.
Well that's a few minutes I'm not getting back. I'd recommend you learn from my mistake.
This was somewhat preposterous. She read out a rambling mess of trade unions, higher education, social justice and hereditary wealth. Then brushed off the perfectly valid intervention to continue reading the increasingly bonkers script that is pretending the ‘aristocracy’ is deliberately keeping working class kids out of universities- which anyone who knows anything about higher education knows is simply untrue and a rather immature and ill informed assertion. If she is ever lucky to own a house and have kids, we look forward to her not leaving her house to her kids but instead donating it to the wealthy trade unions to do with as they please.
Well said.
What was her point.
She seems completely out of her depth.
She complains about the Conservatives abolishing elected school boards in 1902 which had been giving subsidised or free secondary education. What she doesn't seem to know is their duties were handed over to the council in the form of LEAs , who then levied taxes to pay for free education for all until 12. There was also a massive increase in the number of secondary schools,1000 opened by 1912 including 350 for girls and they were encouraged to create free places for the poor. Why 1902 is relevant when literally no one from that time is alive I've no idea, but when she's talking about freeing the poor from their "shackles" I think we can guess where she's coming from
I don’t agree with the majority of what Ava is saying, as both my husband and I came from working class backgrounds and have worked our way “up”, which has meant that we have been able to provide our children with more opportunities than we had.
We need people that generate wealth in this country in order to help those that are in need and can’t help themselves.
I am proud to describe myself as a capitalist with a conscience.
The point was that all children should have opportunities and it shouldn't be a lottery dictated by how successful your parents are.
If you believe we need people that generate wealth there could be children capable of growing up and generating wealth if only they had access to the opportunities afforded to wealthier children.
Conversely there may be children squandering opportunities and not going on to 'generate wealth'
Why not raise the education standards for EVERYONE, rather than trying to bring the top level ones down? @@obsidian348
I would be interested to hear your thoughts on faith schools then @@obsidian348 , because they tend to outperform other schools. Following your train of thought, could this not be described as a lottery ticket then?
Then give single people a 50% discount on a house. Getting a partner in 2024 is not a realistic goal.
Why is she speaking from a script? Isn't this a debate?
Only way she knows cause she doesn't know how to speak what's on her mind she needs people to do it for her
Obviously not familiar with the Union - it is a forum to present ideas and discuss them, occasionally resulting in debate, but the name of the place does not compel the action. ;)
WATCHING THE AUDIENCE IS LIKE A SLOW MOTION CAR CRASH
excuse caps xD
Actually, yes people DO have the right to inherit wealth especially those who've worked in building the family business that results in that wealth. And there's another component to this. The person who is leaving the wealth to someone else has the right to leave it to whoever they wish instead of being forced to "give" that wealth to the government.
That's the thing about rights. I've been in this discussion with many about rights in general. Where does the right to do ______ (insert action here) come from? How do you think you have the right to do that?
Turn that around. What gives a person or people in government the right to say someone cannot do something if that something is causing no harm, isn't infringing the rights of others.
This is the fundamental difference between American and European thought. Most of these types of discussions I get in are with people from the UK.
It fundamentally comes down to whether you're a meritocrat or a feudalist/aristocrat. You don't have to be left wing to see the huge problems with inheritance. Hell, you can be a through and through capitalist, just read the works of Adam Smith. Do you reward innovation and the most talented/hard working, or do you allow reward by birthright. I'd argue that stifles growth and advancement of the country/species as we put less 'capital' (which is essentially merely the fuel that powers the right to influence innovation and decision making) into the hands of the young and talented from poorer backgrounds, and more power to influence decisions in our economics/business/politics into the hands of those who may be clumsy, stupid or poorly read, merely because they inherited that capital.
Inheritance is simply put, the most stark yet most difficult to deal with from of nepotism.... not only is it morally questionable, it is inefficient and not a free market. We should seek to foster as close to a fair starting line the race of life as possible within our country. It always makes me concerned that those who most often say 'equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome' are the first to miss that we have neither.
Nope,we should all earn for our existance
Well said
@@someblokecalledtom I consider myself a meritocrat, and in my view people who have wealth to inherit to their children or relatives have all the rights to do so. In fact, I don't think it's a matter of aristocracy/meritocracy - it's a matter of freedom to decide what you want to do with the wealth you've earned/accumulated.
Leaving inheritance is not a form of nepotism, let alone morally questionable - any decent parents would help their kids to the best they can (which includes leaving their capital/assets when they pass away). Whether those who inherit the wealth have the capability to use it wisely or end up squandering it (because apparently they are 'clumsy, stupid, or poorly read') is not for us to be concerned about - who are we to decide to whom the asset should be distributed to if we are not involved in earning/accumulating it?
Why should we seek to foster a 'fair' starting line anyway? Fair to whom? And who should be the judge to what's fair or not? Who exactly are we racing against in the 'race of life'? It always makes me concerned that those who most often throw these rhetoric cannot even define what they are.
@@someblokecalledtom There is no 'huge' problem with inheritance. A family gets to keep their money. It's merit too
None of this makes any sense. There's no question on inheritance. A family's property should remain their property, or they will move the wealth to another location, where the state they're in can't find it or tax it.
Move it offshore, if the state and public get greedy. Simple.
HAHA the people who run the state are the ones with $500 TRILLION is in tax havens lol. Fake 'elite' private school social network infests government, financial institutions, banking and corporations. Careers, government conracts worth billions and infinite loans. People like you are bootlickers for the greatest bunch of thieves.
Imagine working your whole life, taking risks, creating wealth, being prosperous, blood sweat and tears...perhaps you worked so hard your marriage fell apart, perhaps you worked so hard you carried long term injuries for life
And upon your death the government takes 40% ...almost HALF of whatever wealth you generated throughout your lifetime, for themselves.
That means 40% of the hours you worked belongs to the government...for them to distribute YOUR money to large corporations, vanity projects or the funding allocated to literally killing unborn babies in the womb and then providing generous handouts to migrants in order to entice them to move to the country (somewhat of an ethnic cleansing).
works out to being about 30,000 hours of your life working purely for government or 3750 days or 15.6 working years.
You also leave your kids in an uncertain state, who knows what becomes of them...and they have nothing to remember you by.
Yes,and in your life time you educated your children.But they Must earn their existance.They cant be weak and stupid playboys withot respect to anything.Government should take 100 % wealth you generated.They should only left bisnes and maybe 10 x 10 living space.Also , then you would spend and enjoy your earned wealth.
It's double taxation. That's all anyone should need to know, you are being taxed on wealth that was already taxed.
She's a posh lady who feels guilty about it
Maybe, or maybe not. You have no mean to know what's in her head, and hopefully I think.
Just because she speaks well doesn't mean she's posh? It can just depend where you were born. Also, there are many people of wealth who understand how rigged the playing field is in favour of those with inherited wealth, that doesn't mean they feel guilt, they're just aware of the privilege of their births. There are many, many of people born into wealth who throughout history have agreed with her stance. She makes a very good point.
@@kdog4587
She says she's for the people but wants the people to either buy new cars or pay ATM 12 quid a day to drive to and from work school etc
During a cost of living crisis aswell 🤣🤣🤣 this div has no idea about real life . She slumming it with the other champagne socialists around Wood Green archway muswell Hill ways paying for over priced properties drinking over priced coffee she's literally a walking Talking stereotype 🤣.
I'd say daddy is high up in the media
😅😅
Who is this woman? Does she have a career?
@@MHS-ql7ee tf ?? go touch grass holy crap
You're an anonymous poster on a youtube video, a cursory google would show you she's an established journalist who quite clearly has a career. Don't be such a fatuous pig just because you ideologically disagree with someone.
According to Douglas Murray and other people, no, she doesn't have a career.
@@walterstrauhal9709 What, so because Douglas Murray disagrees with her, that means she doesn't have a well documented career as a lobby accredited journalist? That's idiotic.
This is the most asinine argument I've ever heard about any topic in my life
I hate woke but I do not agree with you. How do you prove your point ?
Thought the ‘topic’ was the condition of her throat.
I'm more than half way through and there has been no discussion of inheritance 🙄
She's not very bright is she? University of Sussex I'm afraid.
She still looks black and blue from the beating Douglass gave her
"This house believes you have no right to dispose of your end-of-life earnings however you damned well please."
Fixed.
Naive woman
'Its supply not an increased demand'. That argument literally ignores one half of the housing market from the beginning of the debate.
Over ten years from 2012 - 2022 the population of the UK has increased from about 64 million to about 68 million based on official figures. To put that into context, there were 1.14 million people living in Birmingham in 2021 which is our second largest city.
Average household size in the UK 2010 - 2021 was 2.4 people again based on official figures. That means the number of dwellings required to house the population in 2022 compared to 2012 has increased by 1.67 million (i.e. 4 million/2.4).
That is by definition an increase in demand for housing driven by increased population size.
Those are official figures and according to the supermarkets and water firms the actual figure is around 10 million higher than that.
Is it fair that Ava should inherit her beauty from her parents? Perhaps the children of attractive people should be disfigured at birth?
Beauty?
@@GiacomoSorbishe’s attractive enough that it’s an advantage.
She’s average at best and she is clearly wearing ample makeup.
@@EOTA564, she seems a bit below average for her age to me: remove all the fancy makeup, designer clothes, etc. and you really do not get anything impressive; I am fairly sure that she will be more favoured by conveniently being a diversity token to spew what she has been brainwashed to angrily spew during her education years.
Yes she is good looking, although the allure dissipates as she talks.
You do have a right to inherit wealth when your family have worked hard and already paid the tax on it. Paying inheritance tax is unfair thats a second tax. I am sick and tired of the jealousy of people whos parents have not gained wealth to pass down I am one of them but I am not jealous of the people that have.
I don't understand the applause the speaker gets. It makes even less sense than her talk.
Im intigued as to what social class Ava Evans came from. Im pretty sure she didn't grow up on a council estate in Dagenham!
Miss Santini, he reason why the age for house owning is about 50 is that the kids inherit at around that age, so your plans would prevent even that avenue.
The main issue as I see it is the connection between wealth and political power. If these were uncorrelated, then there can be robust policy solutions to a lot of issues that were brought up by the proponents of the resolution. However, the connection between wealth and political power allows the wealthy to use political power to shield their assets. I don't think this has too much to do with inherited wealth though; wealth disparity (including through inheritance) seems to be a downstream effect of the marriage between capital and state rather than a cause of it.
No party has ever built enough houses.
Genuine question which University did she go to?
University of Sussex why?
Just reading your paper aloud is *not* effective speaking & really shows how unprepared she is for debate. Is it sexist to say she needs better underwear as well?
Owning your own home is not a human right it’s a privilege
Considering that John Maynard Keynes taught at Cambridge , and Ha Joon Chang teaches at Cambridge , what a bizarre topic . The issue is the vast wealth inequality in Britain today was caused by the change from Keynesian Economics
( government regulated ) in the 1970's , to a twisted version of neo liberal economics . Reagan and Thatcher were the poster politicians for this - Thatcher privatized all the public assets she could get her hands on , deregulated the financial services sector and brought in the quackery of trickle down economics .
This is the cause of massive wealth inequality ( Income and asset inequality ) . Britain and the US now have some of the lowest levels of inter generational economic mobility in the Western World , all because of neo liberal economics .
.
And yet the working class grew richer under Thatcher than Blair and Brown.
@@richardevans560Its not nice to tell fibs . Median incomes have remained ever since Thatcher ushered in neo liberalism .
Also , as a result of privatization, the British people are being fleeced on Hydro Electricity rates .
.
This video has 166 dislikes ...
Her family can't have much worth retaining if this is her attitude.
Parents should be able to give there kids help
Vile woman.
When ava santina is speaking at a university, you know the country is dead
Pseudo intellect in the wrong place 🥴
This is the wrong way to go about this. I agree education should be available to all people, but this is nuts!!! This would effect hard working blue collar people, not just the extreme wealthy....wtf?!
If you can't agree to equitably share wealth, nor will you equitably share other resources: land, education, food, minerals, habitats, power, breathable air, clean water.... Ava has my admiration, she's like the one trying to marshall the last vestiges of strength from the dying survivors in a lifeboat. Sadly, I'm an exhausted rower who's given up all hope. If mankind is the best species nature can come up with, the dinosaurs were robbed!
Not the best public speaker to be fair
How much money could you possiibly need to support yourself, your family, and be happy? Millions? Tens of millions? Hundreds of millions? Billions? It is just dead money being pooled for its own sake and not doing very much for anyone. Society is literally coming to a staggering standstill as there is not enough income available to be taxed. Why should children be wealthy with money they haven't earned? For sure, parents want their children to be comfortable but Ava is talking about the countless billions that are being hoarded by the so-called 'great and good' (parasites and vampires!!). Libraries are being closed, hospital waiting lists are through the roof, people are dying in their thousands as they cant get healthcare, many millions are not living up to their potential as they can't afford to get in to higher education. Inheritance tax should be at a much higher than it is on the wealthy and needs to be pumped back in to the economy. Well done, Ava!
I see why Lauren fox doesn’t like her
She’s fair and open minded ♥️
She's not talking about the topic of the debate, if you don't understand why that is wrong I can see why you like her.
Simply adore you Ava in every possible way.
Is this sarcasm?
Are you serious?@@Hadrianus01
Ava is awesome,i enjoy hearing her speak❤
No, she's not. She's a twit.
Define ‘awesome’ 🤔
Why ? what is good about what she says ?
She is actually terrifying with her radical proposals.
@@Pongo1 Yes, she is.