Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

thats not the point, the point is that the bill was just this very moment introduced, first reading sometime in the future, didn't make it out.

sounds like a major peice of legislation.

idea is that maximum wage should be no more than 20 times average wage with permutations.

they also said that no one should get paid more that Gordon Brown who gets about £110k/year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A maximum wage might be difficult to enforce, so I'd prefer to see a high top-rate tax band of 80% - but where people have the option to donate ALL the extra 30% tax to a charity of their choice (from an approved list) instead of to the treasury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What total idiocy. I feel almost sorry for people whose solution to a better life is to steal from others, or who want someone else to do it at gunpoint.

It's that state of mind which dooms folk to perpetual mediocrity and dissatisfaction.

Open your minds to focussing on your own aims, and achieving them. Stop living your lives in envy of others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So one of the biggest problems we have in the wider society right now is the 'benefits trap' ... where people have no incentive to get jobs because minimum wage is set arbitrarily at the level of (or below0 the level of benefits that are 'lost' to the person who gets their first job.

To be clear: I am NOT saying minimum wage is a bad thing. I am NOT saying that benefits are a bad thing. I AM saying

that they both have disadvantages (and that their disadvantages make anice neat double-whammy for anyone facing the challenges of living between the two).

How on earth is 'maximum wage ever going to be a good thing?

Minimum wage and benefits are in place because they are either morally or socially a good thing (depending on your perspective of course!).

What benefit, economically, would 'maximum wage' be?

I would suggest none.

What benefit, socially, would 'maximum wage' be?

I would suggest very little. Except to remove the one driver - however odious and unpleasant - we have for entrepreneurship ...?

What benefit, morally, would 'maximum wage' be?

I would suggest very little. The 'moral' argument that those who do have opportunity should have that opportunity curtailed because others don't is logically weak, for one thing.

Aidanapword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest มร หล&#3
What total idiocy. I feel almost sorry for people whose solution to a better life is to steal from others, or who want someone else to do it at gunpoint.

It's that state of mind which dooms folk to perpetual mediocrity and dissatisfaction.

Open your minds to focussing on your own aims, and achieving them. Stop living your lives in envy of others.

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Open your minds to focussing on your own aims, and achieving them. Stop living your lives in envy of others.
I suppose you're in the 'good luck to Fred the Shred camp', then!

OK, so I'll aim to get the faulty electrics on my car fixed and not worry about fraudulent claims by MP's or 'barely legal' till-dipping by sacked bank chiefs!

Edited by blankster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are talking about introducing a maximum wage now in parliament.

sounds good, but im sure it will have socialist overtones, like everyone ending up on £5.76/h

thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest DissipatedYouthIsValuable
they are talking about introducing a maximum wage now in parliament.

sounds good, but im sure it will have socialist overtones, like everyone ending up on £5.76/h

thoughts?

Just get rid of global tax havens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose you're in the 'good luck to Fred the Shred camp', then!

OK, so I'll aim to get the faulty electrics on my car fixed and not worry about fraudulent claims by MP's or 'barely legal' till-dipping by sacked bank chiefs!

oh what happened to Fred the Shred, it all gone quiet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
link or it's not true ;)

Seriously, the dude said it, however, he was talking generally, it was not a fact, he said that a cap should be set and that many think that that cap should be at the same level as the prime ministers salery which is £106k or something.

It will be in the official parliament transcripts.

i think this is a mjaor bill that has not seen any attention. the impact could be enourmous!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seriously, the dude said it, however, he was talking generally, it was not a fact, he said that a cap should be set and that many think that that cap should be at the same level as the prime ministers salery which is £106k or something.

It will be in the official parliament transcripts.

i think this is a mjaor bill that has not seen any attention. the impact could be enourmous!!!

Actually I can believe you (sadly!) because this lot just don't get it, their "getting it" ability sucks so hard that the idea that the PM should be at the top of the wage heap will seem natural to them, nothing anyone could possibly object to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
they also said that no one should get paid more that Gordon Brown who gets about £110k/year.

link or it's not true ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How would you enforce this?

Lets say I set up as a sole trader and I earn more than the maxiumum in a year what happens?

thats what the bill will cover when it gets its first reading.

i dont know. i wouldn't wory too much, the figures are in the hundreds of thousands, you know, as you do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing this will do is make anyone able to earn more than the maximum wage leave the country. I can see no purpose for it. There may be an argument for a maximum wage in the public sector, but even there, there may be some highly skilled people such a surgeons who deserve the pay they can command.

This is the ultimate politics of envy, and cannot see how it would become law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see a system where the pay of executives was a fixed multiple of the lowest paid person in the company- this would give executives a positive motive for raising the pay at the lower end, as their own pay would go up in tandem.

This would encourage a degree of fairness in the distribution of profits throughout a company, and still incentivise both management and workforce to improve profitability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would like to see a system where the pay of executives was a fixed multiple of the lowest paid person in the company- this would give executives a positive motive for raising the pay at the lower end, as their own pay would go up in tandem.

This would encourage a degree of fairness in the distribution of profits throughout a company, and still incentivise both management and workforce to improve profitability.

It's my company and my house goes if I fail, therefore if you propose a system of fixed pay are you prepared to put a proportion of your house up to guarantee the lendings of the business you work for, that are often used to pay your salary.

No I thought not.

The system is already 'fair' you take risks, work hard and with luck you are rewarded for it.

I thought this socialist claptrap was long dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's my company and my house goes if I fail, therefore if you propose a system of fixed pay are you prepared to put a proportion of your house up to guarantee the lendings of the business you work for, that are often used to pay your salary.

No I thought not.

The system is already 'fair' you take risks, work hard and with luck you are rewarded for it.

I thought this socialist claptrap was long dead.

I'm not proposing a system of fixed pay- I'm proposing that there is a link between the pay of the people at the top and the people at the bottom. So the more profitable your company, the more you can pay both yourself and your employees.

What is wrong with that? Unless you feel that anything that impedes your ability to exploit your fellow man is inherently a bad thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What total idiocy. I feel almost sorry for people whose solution to a better life is to steal from others, or who want someone else to do it at gunpoint.

It's that state of mind which dooms folk to perpetual mediocrity and dissatisfaction.

Open your minds to focussing on your own aims, and achieving them. Stop living your lives in envy of others.

+ 1

Dont dream about taking other peoples mony your not going to get it even if they do it.

If this happens then why the hell should somone take the risk of starting a company or starting a company that looses money for years.

We do not all work for the government and there are loads of countries who will be more than happy to take our billionaires away.

I am more than happy for property land taxes though somthing that addresses the issues at hand not the governments desire to cover up their overspanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's my company and my house goes if I fail, therefore if you propose a system of fixed pay are you prepared to put a proportion of your house up to guarantee the lendings of the business you work for, that are often used to pay your salary.

No I thought not.

The system is already 'fair' you take risks, work hard and with luck you are rewarded for it.

I thought this socialist claptrap was long dead.

And having one of the highest degrees of income inequality among our competitors is working out really well for us...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And having one of the highest degrees of income inequality among our competitors is working out really well for us...

Many people have a choice , though not all there are some real issues in some communities and areas.

Please explain to me why if I decide to take a risk and start my own business from a bedroom with a phone (see choice no skills, no degree no silver spoon) that millions of others could do if they made that choice, I then after creating jobs and paying taxes somehow I am now a target for envious people who made different choices.

If you don't work for me you don't have to apply for a job, and if you do you can always leave.

It's always about choice , but then today's socialism is never about adding choice is it? It is the pure unfettered application of class envy, the trouble is your targets aren't too easy to spot are they? no more top hats and fob watches now, just people the same as you who made different choices which were open to the vast majority (though by no means all) thats the bit that hurts isn't?

The poor can't help the poor and the weak can't help the weak so how about aspiring rather than whining?

Edited by Greg Bowman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not proposing a system of fixed pay- I'm proposing that there is a link between the pay of the people at the top and the people at the bottom. So the more profitable your company, the more you can pay both yourself and your employees.

What is wrong with that? Unless you feel that anything that impedes your ability to exploit your fellow man is inherently a bad thing?

No one is exploited in my business they can stay or leave surely or are you suggesting I should become a social worker?

There is nothing wrong with 'that' because successful businesses run like that anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I suppose you're in the 'good luck to Fred the Shred camp', then!

OK, so I'll aim to get the faulty electrics on my car fixed and not worry about fraudulent claims by MP's or 'barely legal' till-dipping by sacked bank chiefs!

Well I am in the 'don't care about his pension' camp. Yes, the man helped the whole boom bust and I would be all in favour of shooting him, but short of that, how is taking his pension away going to help me personally? Do I get more money in my pocket? Will I pay less tax? Answer is no to both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   288 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.