[Archived] Local Elections

[LeChuck]

I presume you never had a good job and worked jolly hard at school for it...

I don't understand why people always think those in huge salaries have earned it. Nobody is going to convince me that the people earning huge salaries in the banking industry deserve to earn massively more than nurses, or that anyone on a high salary is a "wealth creator" and we need to pander to them to keep them here. It's scaremongering with little, if any, foundation.

I can't find a link to the following so if anyone knows what I'm on about it and would like to post it for me, that would help me out....

There was a discussion on Radio 4 around the time of the most recent banking scandels. A study was done that measured the success of businesses against the pay of the top people in the company. The study found there was no correlation at all. I heard this story a few years ago so I'm a bit low on facts from it unfortunately. I'll keep digging.

Of course tax should have scales depending on pay. As you move higher up the pay scale, the money just becomes disposable income. The amount of tax someone earning £1,000,000 pays might dicate whether they can have one luxury sports car or two. For someone on £10,000 it affects their ability to buy the bare essentials (or at least, what we in Western soceity consider the bare essentials) for their family.

I'm not sure I agree with Jim's 90% mind you! But certainly 50%.

[Mike E]

The only way I would agree with the flat tax rate is if wages were based on what the job entails, it's importance to the well-being of the 'customers' (for want of a better word) and how good you are at it. The highest paid people in the country should be (imo) members of the Armed Forces, then members of the Emergency Services/Doctors/Nurses/Teachers etc etc all the way down to professional sportsmen/actors/musicians.

Maybe there should be a 2-tax system? The professional gamblers (bankers), company directors etc should be on a progressive scale, while those whose jobs provide vital services to the public of Britain should be a on a flat rate?

I dunno....

[thenodrog]

Confiscating or asking those with the broadest shoulders to stop evading taxes and pay their fair share ?

_{Flat tax benefits the rich and penalises poor and middle income earners - which you know. Or perhaps you didn't, and are in fact a bit thick.}

Hang on a bit. You were the one who asked for people to pay their fair share. It's still unfair as people earning more have to pay more but it seems fairer than the current system.

Tell me Jim why do you constantly wasnt to punish people who are hard working and industrious? People who get on through their own skill and endeavour?

[Mike E]

Hang on a bit. You were the one who asked for people to pay their fair share. It's still unfair as people earning more have to pay more but it seems fairer than the current system.

Tell me Jim why do you constantly wasnt to punish people who are hard working and industrious? People who get on through their own skill and endeavour?

While I agree with your overall point, I don't believe for one second that bankers are more deserving of their obscene 'earnings' than nurses on a barely-above-average wage.

[thenodrog]

Bye then.

Bit harsh ste even though he goes out of his way to be obnoxious . What did TGM do to get such long a ban?

[thenodrog]

While I agree with your overall point, I don't believe for one second that bankers are more deserving of their obscene 'earnings' than nurses on a barely-above-average wage.

???? "above average" is good isn't it? Why should a nurse earn any more than average?

Just as an aside every time salaries are mentioned why the hell are nurses always trotted out as an example? Lots of my wife's relatives are in nursing and whilst the job (dealing with the relatives and hospital admin p1sses them all off) most are more than happy with their remuneration. One things for certain sure nurses are a mighty long way above the minimum wage.

If I earn £100,000 pounds a year and pay £25,000 in tax, why is that any less fair than someone earning £10,000 and paying £2,500 tax?

That £75k I get to keep is what I've earned as a result of the level of responsibility, risk/criticality or the cost to replace me by whoever is paying me.

I can therefore afford to buy better things with my money, a bigger house, better car, better holiday, etc.

Seems to me that this wider ethical issue is fairer wages, not unbalanced taxes.

But maybe I'm just thick.

Exactly so. And by definition not only pay another 20% out of already taxed earnings by way of VAT but also provide employment and wages for people in those industries. People who earn more spend more. Thats a much more positive way to kick start the economy rather than bleeding the wealth creators out of existence.

Flat tax is a good idea in a country where the disparity between top and bottom is reasonably small. Otherwise it does just penalise those who don't suck the right c_cks (as had allegedly happened where I work), or just have a normal job, whilst those who cash in on the efforts of others, or fiddle the stock market rake it in.

I'm sorry but why should I pay the same tax rate as so many borderline retards who kick a plastic ball about for more than I'd earn in my lifetime?

Thats a limited argument singling out footballers, almost as bad as continually trotting out those nurses as an example.. Headline Prem wages are obscene I grant you but instead of moaning surely then the easy thing to do is practice kicking a ball around too! If you can then well and good and if you can't then you just have to accept your limitations and realise why they get paid so much. Just as a guide Norbert would you pay 30 quid to watch you and your mates play football?

[thenodrog]

"Champions of industry" (pardon?) continue to reward themselves with sickeningly high salaries and bonuses out of all proportion to their abilities while their employees have suffered job losses and wage restraints.Taxing them heavily in times of economic restraint is fair and equitable.

The rich already pay low taxes thanks to legal avoidance schemes (HMRC is belatedly clamping down on these schemes) yet continue to try to evade tax illegally. In short, they think they should pay no tax at all. Governments worldwide now recognise this and the net is closing on these individuals. I look forward to many court cases over the next few years.

Credit to the Tories then eh Jim? Never thought I'd hear you praise them. Bet you feel so much better.

I don't understand why people always think those in huge salaries have earned it. Nobody is going to convince me that the people earning huge salaries in the banking industry deserve to earn massively more than nurses, or that anyone on a high salary is a "wealth creator" and we need to pander to them to keep them here. It's scaremongering with little, if any, foundation.

Nurses again!

Just as an aside why don't all those nurses pack it in and go and work in the city? Nothing at all to stop them is there?

[ABBEY]

I'd vote for a party who would reduce my CSA payments from 44% of wage ...robbing scum.

[thenodrog]

I'd vote for a party who would reduce my CSA payments from 44% of wage ...robbing scum.

Robbing scum? Is that the CSA or the ex Abbey?....... or both?

btw I've thankfully no experience of such so can I assume that is 44% of your wage a net or gross figure?

[ABBEY]

both

[LeChuck]

Actually football is a great example to debunk the myth that capitalism and freemarkets mean people are paid 'what they are worth'.

The average Premier League wage is 10x what it was in our title winning season. Are players of today 10x more deserving of money than back then? Is the product 10x better?

Do Danny Murphy and Dickson Etuhu give value related to their salary, compared to say the likes of Lee Williamson?

Does Chris Samba deserve to be ~ 5 times the wages of Clint Hill?

The banking sector is littered with stories of catastrophic failures by highly paid people, just like the PL. Assuming that everyone who earns a high wage is doing so through hard work and skill is naive in the extreme. In fact, naive is far too polite and implies good intentions.

Industry is littered with Steve Kean's - people who weasel their way into higher positions by brown nosing and knowing the right people. Of course there will be people who are exceptionally talented and hard working and deserve everything they get. Although in my experience, those people tend to do something more meaningful with their lives than the likes of banking. Research scientists etc.

[LeChuck]

Nurses again!

Just as an aside why don't all those nurses pack it in and go and work in the city? Nothing at all to stop them is there?

Do you think nurses get into the industry for the money? Not everyone is driven by wealth and greed.

If you continue to use phrases like "hard working" in relation to very high earners, then of course the likes of nurses are going to be mentioned. It's a very easy argument to use. If hard work resulted in high pay then nurses would earn a lot more.

[Guest Norbert]

Do you work in the city of London Gordon, or anything like that? This is a genuine question and not some sort of jibe.

[jim mk2]

Hang on a bit. You were the one who asked for people to pay their fair share. It's still unfair as people earning more have to pay more but it seems fairer than the current system.

Tell me Jim why do you constantly wasnt to punish people who are hard working and industrious? People who get on through their own skill and endeavour?

I only want people to pay the correct tax. Paying tax is not a punishment. Do you think these "captains of industry" and the likes of footballers pay 45% top rate tax like everyone else because if you do you must be deluded.

See Le Chuck's post for the so-called "skill and endeavour" of these people.

Credit to the Tories then eh Jim? Never thought I'd hear you praise them. Bet you feel so much better.

Nurses again!

Just as an aside why don't all those nurses pack it in and go and work in the city? Nothing at all to stop them is there?

Credit it to HMRC - no one else.

Not everyone's motivated by money, particularly nurses. You wouldn't understand.

???? "ab wage.

Exactly so. And by definition not only pay another 20% out of already taxed earnings by way of VAT but also provide employment and wages for people in those industries. People who earn more spend more. Thats a much more positive way to kick start the economy rather than bleeding the wealth creators out of existence.

It might have escaped your attention but the so-called "wealth creators" have almost bankrupted this country.

Perhaps they would like to emigrate and go and create their wealth somewhere else.

[broadsword]

I don't understand why people always think those in huge salaries have earned it. Nobody is going to convince me that the people earning huge salaries in the banking industry deserve to earn massively more than nurses, or that anyone on a high salary is a "wealth creator" and we need to pander to them to keep them here. It's scaremongering with little, if any, foundation.

It was a well-worn phrase at my old job that "we're too talented to be promoted", it's crazy how useless and parasitic the management was, there by dint of their ability to lick ass and manipulate. Nothing to do with talent.

90% tax is obscene, what right do they government have to take nearly all of someone's earnings? People would refuse promotions across the board as they'd earn more on £250k than they would on £1m. Someone's been at the Gordon Broon Ale.

God knows, I have no time for bankers, lawyers and the like, but to start going all Denis Healey (Mr 98% tax) on the highest earners isn't the answer. They'll just sod off abroad.

[Stuart]

I don't understand why people always think those in huge salaries have earned it. Nobody is going to convince me that the people earning huge salaries in the banking industry deserve to earn massively more than nurses, or that anyone on a high salary is a "wealth creator" and we need to pander to them to keep them here. It's scaremongering with little, if any, foundation.

This is what I'm saying LeC. If there is a problem with the amount of money being paid to people, and the relative wealth of certain jobs, that's a separate discussion. Although, unless we pack in the NHS and all medical care is private, I'm not sure of the commercial value of nursing - which is what sets wages in the private sector.

Of course tax should have scales depending on pay. As you move higher up the pay scale, the money just becomes disposable income. The amount of tax someone earning £1,000,000 pays might dicate whether they can have one luxury sports car or two. For someone on £10,000 it affects their ability to buy the bare essentials (or at least, what we in Western soceity consider the bare essentials) for their family.

Can't agree. If a person is bringing in large sums of money for their company, or saving their company large sums of money, and their salary reflects their worth to the company, why should they not be intitled to earn more "take home" wage. They would still pay more tax than someone on a lower wage but the percentage would be the same.

Again, this comes down to salary levels and what a living wage should be. The basic should be that people can afford to pay their bills and feed their families. If you want to get more money to buy luxuries, become more valuable to your company. Make yourself more employable.

If we are talking about the most needy who cannot do this, e.g. people who have a disability or illness then that's a different story too.

If people are used to operating in a public sector organisation, with fixed pay grades, I could also see how they might form a different outlook. But being a public servant surely means that people accept this - perhaps due to other incentives like better pensions, earlier retirement.

[LeChuck]

In the absence of capping pay or setting pay rates, what other options are there for trying to make society more fair? A scaling tax rate is really the only other solution. It seems like you agree with the ends but not the means? If the result is the same I'm surprised you disagree so much.

What I really take objection to in that sentence is "make yourself more employable". Capitalism needs unemployment. A society that allows people to earn seven-figure salaries needs people prepared to clean up our mess, protect our streets, clean our toilets, look after our kids, toil in fields for our food. If all of these people made themselves "more employable" would they all get high paid jobs?

Instead of threatening to leave the country they should appreciate it's this country that allows them to earn so much in the first place. Instead of telling people to stop complaining and get a high paid job of their own, appreciate the fact that it's these very people that allow them to earn high figures. If they believe their wealth is completely their own doing then drop them off in Zimbabwe or Mozambique...hell, even Greece. Let's see them create their own wealth from there and see how they get on. Maybe they'll appreciate it wasn't as much their own work as they thought it was.

[Stuart]

What I really take objection to in that sentence is "make yourself more employable". Capitalism needs unemployment. A society that allows people to earn seven-figure salaries needs people prepared to clean up our mess, protect our streets, clean our toilets, look after our kids, toil in fields for our food. If all of these people made themselves "more employable" would they all get high paid jobs?

I wasn't attempting to patronise the unemployed.

What I meant was people who want to earn more should make themselves more valuable to their company. Then they can either ask for a pay rise or look elsewhere.

Apologies if that wasnt clear. If you still have a beef with my opinion then fair enough as long as you are objecting to what I'm saying.

But, no, much like football only one 4 teams can get into the Champions League but it shouldn't stop people trying to better themselves.

If people accept cleaning toilets as a vocation, or "their level", that's fine but I'm not sure anyone is going to pay top dollar for their services due to the number of people out there with the skills to do that job. It's supply and demand, I'm afraid.

[LeChuck]

Sorry that came across as a bit personal, I got a bit carried away. I was more arguing against other people who say it and strongly believe it. It's something I've heard a lot. From your posts on here I know you wouldn't be deliberately patronising to unemployed people. My apologies for that.

I don't think anyone considers cleaning toilets a vocation. People who do it will do so because the alternative is being unemployed (hence my statement about capitalism needing unemployment). But put simply, there are not that many highly paid jobs out there (in relation the population anyway). It's simply not a case of being able to aim higher and you will succeed. Few will do so and this will always be the case.

You're absolutely right that it shouldn't stop people trying. But there will always be less of these highly paid roles available than people who aspire to reach them. Those that are fortunate to get them should be appreciative of the soceity that has allowed them a life that many can only dream of, and not threaten to take their ball home with them because they're asked to help out more in times of crisis to reduce damage to those less fortunate.

[broadsword]

I have a well-paid job, but no-one just handed it to me on a plate. I've done it the old-fashioned way, by slogging my back-end off.

Nothing wrong with cleaning toilets, it's a job, no-one oin their right mind would be happy to remain one though.

In my time I've worked in a shoe factory, on a record counter, waste dispsoal at a supermarket, supermarket trolley jockey, in two record shops, at a drinks accessories shop, an electronics retailer, a driver's mate, a car park attendant, a fruit and veg wholesaler, a newspaper delivery boy and bar work. The point being that all that time I was studying and trying to improve my lot - and that's just the jobs I can remember. If there was a punitive tax regime in place at the time, would I have been as keen to keep slogging away? Possibly not.

Although I am definitely not in the same bracket as millionaire bankers. Their salaries are obscene and they don't care what risks they take with other people's money so long as they get their mammoth bonus. It's not attractive (and that honestly isn't jealousy speaking, there's such a thing as having too much money). So quite frankly, you can hit those keaners as hard as you like, suits me.

[LeChuck]

Just for clarities sake, I'm only really supporting high taxing on the wealthiest. Haven't thought about brackets, but possibly coming in at around the £200-300k mark. The sort of level where it really is just luxury income.

Although for argument's sake Bryan, would you really have been any less motivated if there was a 50% tax on earnings over £50k? Could you honestly see yourself having significantly less drive than you did and not getting out of the supermarket? Surely the idea of earning 'even' £50k at that stage would have driven you on from the point you were at?

[broadsword]

Well, 50% doesn't seem that different from 40% when you're earning not very much at all.

I guess I'm no different to anyone else in that I'd like to pay less tax but see no cuts in public services. Doesn't really make any sense at all, that. Although having worked my way up the ladder, I have great sympathy for those stuck at the bottom. It's worth noting that I did get a grant to go to uni, and there have been times when it's been necessary to go on the dole.

What would put me off going to uni these days is having to pay out so much keaning cash for the privilege and then having to repay the state for the next 40 years, that's like bloody water torture. That's far more of a disincentive than what you might be taxed at if you do finally "make" it.

And you have to wonder how many of these bankers have made it from humble beginnings.

[ABBEY]

tell you what bryan going off my csa and in the middle of your amounts,44% is a flaming killer. Its not tax but it still means i have to work every hour i can to live and go on holiday.

[broadsword]

I've heard aboutr the CSA, sounds appalling.

How many more years have you got left of it?

[ABBEY]

5 more