miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Ok let's just focus on the mega bankers then. No comparison ? Really ? Exactley So can you stop comparing a guy getting £50k a year and sometimes going on strike to get it to someone who collects in excess of £1 million year in year out who bought the country to financial meltdown, got bailed out by the tax payer and still carries on in his merry ways . NO COMPARISON. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MongerOfDoom Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Exactley So can you stop comparing a guy getting £50k a year and sometimes going on strike to get it to someone who collects in excess of £1 million year in year out who bought the country to financial meltdown, got bailed out by the tax payer and still carries on in his merry ways . NO COMPARISON. Well, your honour, my defense against the charge of causing death by reckless driving, and then while drunk, without tax, insurance, or indeed a driving license is that you cannot compare me to Ian Huntley. Hence I reckon it's all basically OK, and we might as well leave things as they are, seeing as my car has now been fixed. I guess we could maybe revisit the issue if someone finally kills the sicko, and I then cannot find someone else sufficiently repulsive to compare myself against. You see, what I really want is for everyone in the country to be able to drive home from the pub, and it's not really my problem if they won't fight for their right to do so ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I guess we could maybe revisit the issue if someone finally kills the sicko, and I then cannot find someone else sufficiently repulsive to compare myself against. There's always Tony Bliar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
efdemin Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Ok let's just focus on the mega bankers then. No comparison ? Really ? They are both probably males. They both probably didn't at age 14 decide 'I want to be a banker/tube driver when I grow up'. They both probably just did a bit of this and a bit of that until they ended up in the position they are in today. They are both just people. Now they both see a way in which they can line their pockets as much as possible by holding other people/businesses to ransom. They both quite happily do it and don't care if what they are doing is 'fair' or 'moral' or 'right'. It is best for them so they fire ahead. All they can get away with. They are clearly not so different at all. One just happens to be in an industry that yields more power - resulting in the return of their ransom being greater than the other. You really think if Mr Tube driver had taken the 'banking' route instead he would do anything else differently from what Mr Banker is doing today ? I don't. And I am 99% certain of that. As I have said about 100 times on this forum - people are the problem. That is about it. Everything else is just noise. Don't really agree with this. I think you're being too reductionist. You could carry on and end up comparing humans to chimpanzees or something because after all we're all only animals, yeah? But that is absurd as it ignores the way humans work together as a society. So, you have to judge bankers and tube drivers against what role they play in society. And that's a fairly moveable set of values as society's values change over time. At the moment bankers are not thought of highly; go figure. Big bankers are more likely to be alpha-male types who don't just 'fall' into jobs. They are likely to have actively chosen that career for the status or money or the influence. At 14 maybe they hadn't decided to be a banker, but they likely would have been thinking either that or lawyer, doctor, politician, etc. The tube driver was possibly thinking more policeman, fireman, footballer? If they thought more like a banker but didn't have the education, chances are they would have been thinking more along the lines of salesman, estate agent, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Exactley So can you stop comparing a guy getting £50k a year and sometimes going on strike to get it to someone who collects in excess of £1 million year in year out who bought the country to financial meltdown, got bailed out by the tax payer and still carries on in his merry ways . NO COMPARISON. Nope. There are clear and direct comparisons and I have listed them clearly. If you wish to ignore this then up to you. Don't really agree with this. I think you're being too reductionist. You could carry on and end up comparing humans to chimpanzees or something because after all we're all only animals, yeah? But that is absurd as it ignores the way humans work together as a society. So, you have to judge bankers and tube drivers against what role they play in society. And that's a fairly moveable set of values as society's values change over time. At the moment bankers are not thought of highly; go figure. Big bankers are more likely to be alpha-male types who don't just 'fall' into jobs. They are likely to have actively chosen that career for the status or money or the influence. At 14 maybe they hadn't decided to be a banker, but they likely would have been thinking either that or lawyer, doctor, politician, etc. The tube driver was possibly thinking more policeman, fireman, footballer? If they thought more like a banker but didn't have the education, chances are they would have been thinking more along the lines of salesman, estate agent, etc. Of course you could carry this on to the nth degree. However these two situations are more similar than that. Blokes (mainly) doing whatever they can to increase how much they get with no thought of what is fair or right or whatever. Please answer the following: Are Mr Banker and Mr Tube driver comparable because they both quite happily hold the same city to ransom in order to line their own pockets... Yes or no ? I already know the answer by the way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Well, your honour, my defense against the charge of causing death by reckless driving, and then while drunk, without tax, insurance, or indeed a driving license is that you cannot compare me to Ian Huntley. Hence I reckon it's all basically OK, and we might as well leave things as they are, seeing as my car has now been fixed. I guess we could maybe revisit the issue if someone finally kills the sicko, and I then cannot find someone else sufficiently repulsive to compare myself against. You see, what I really want is for everyone in the country to be able to drive home from the pub, and it's not really my problem if they won't fight for their right to do so ... . Both go to prison Ian Huntley for ever the drunk driver for x amount of years . Then on another scale the guy who killed my brother in a car accident many years ago walked free from court as he was not drunk . All 3 killed but they cannot be compared as the same . They are all looked on differently intent being a big part of how they are looked at. Ian Huntley was a sick c--t. The DD who killed was under the influence of a legal substance , does not excuse what he did but he was not warped in nature and did not set out to kill. The guy who killed my brother swerved to miss an on coming car and hit a tree, no blame was pointed at him . Yet someone was still killled. Would you compare him to Ian Huntley ? As with this topic comparing £50k train drivers ( yes they are getting a good wage for what they do ) and bankers who rake in £millions, there is a big difference they are not the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Nope. There are clear and direct comparisons and I have listed them clearly. If you wish to ignore this then up to you. Yes there are clear and direct comparisons , but then there are also massive differences as well. I have not ignored either and have taken both into account to reach my opinion , which is the bankers are in a different league to the Train drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
efdemin Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 (edited) Nope. There are clear and direct comparisons and I have listed them clearly. If you wish to ignore this then up to you. Of course you could carry this on to the nth degree. However these two situations are more similar than that. Blokes (mainly) doing whatever they can to increase how much they get with no thought of what is fair or right or whatever. Please answer the following: Are Mr Banker and Mr Tube driver comparable because they both quite happily hold the same city to ransom in order to line their own pockets... Yes or no ? I already know the answer by the way. Yes and no, as you obviously know already. Yes, because they are both trying to get as much as they can, aka 'capitalism'? No, because the tube drivers aren't holding me to ransom because I don't live in London. But bankers are, because their efforts (+ government) have pushed up house prices and the cost of living all across the country. Edited October 4, 2011 by efdemin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Yes there are clear and direct comparisons , but then there are also massive differences as well. I have not ignored either and have taken both into account to reach my opinion , which is the bankers are in a different league to the Train drivers. Totally agree. However do you not see the point I was originally making ? People will say well done good on you mate get all you can for one group. Yet want to see the other strung up from a lampost. Rather an extreme change of views for two groups of people essentially doing the same thing - albeit at a different 'level'. I just don't think there is a huge difference between the two actions. Clearly others do. Yes and no, as you obviously know already. Yes, because they are both trying to get as much as they can, aka 'capitalism'? No, because the tube drivers aren't holding me to ransom because I don't live in London. But bankers are, because their efforts (+ government) have pushed up house prices and the cost of living all across the country. Indeed. As above - I am not saying there are no differences. I just don't think the response to both makes any sense. From some people anyway. They are both essentially doing the same thing. So why the response to either can be polar opposites is something I find very strange. That is all I am saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Totally agree. However do you not see the point I was originally making ? People will say well done good on you mate get all you can for one group. Yet want to see the other strung up from a lampost. Rather an extreme change of views for two groups of people essentially doing the same thing - albeit at a different 'level'. I just don't think there is a huge difference between the two actions. Clearly others do. Well it is the level that makes the difference and also the fact that the Bankers destroyed so much for so many. £50 k is a good wage for what the train drivers do , but they are still in the realms of normality and my reason for backing them is that I want to see wages for the low paid and average paid going higher not lower . Dragging down the train drivers will only help to keep wages down . Either or it will have no affect on the greedy Bankers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Well it is the level that makes the difference and also the fact that the Bankers destroyed so much for so many. £50 k is a good wage for what the train drivers do , but they are still in the realms of normality and my reason for backing them is that I want to see wages for the low paid and average paid going higher not lower . Dragging down the train drivers will only help to keep wages down . Either or it will have no affect on the greedy Bankers. Don't you worry I have no liking for Senior bankers. I know the damage they have done. As for wages ? I would rather the cost of housing etc.. went down instead than wages going up. But yes some jobs clearly could do with being paid more. I just don't think tube drivers fit into that category. They seem to have it good compared to most (Not senior bankers of course but they are an exceptional group of bawbags) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dissident junk Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 How much does a London bus driver get paid ? Surely a far more difficult job that requires skills and experience. I seem to remember that one of the reasons why London bus drivers never strike is because they have the option to join a share scheme/profit sharing scheme in their company. I have always thought that the best way to prevent tube strikes might be to do a similar thing. Again, just to remind some posters, £50K gross a year puts you in the top ten per cent of all income earners in Britain. It is not "a normal salary": indeed, the average salary is about £24K pa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 I seem to remember that one of the reasons why London bus drivers never strike is because they have the option to join a share scheme/profit sharing scheme in their company. I have always thought that the best way to prevent tube strikes might be to do a similar thing. Again, just to remind some posters, £50K gross a year puts you in the top ten per cent of all income earners in Britain. It is not "a normal salary": indeed, the average salary is about £24K pa. Does the tube make a profit ? I like the idea of your John Lewis or Waitrose type businesses. The workers really feel part of it and are rewarded directly with good results. Seems to make sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neil324 Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Well it is the level that makes the difference and also the fact that the Bankers destroyed so much for so many. £50 k is a good wage for what the train drivers do , but they are still in the realms of normality and my reason for backing them is that I want to see wages for the low paid and average paid going higher not lower . Dragging down the train drivers will only help to keep wages down . Either or it will have no affect on the greedy Bankers. What do bankers have to do with tube drivers wages. Most people are greedy, it's human nature. £50k plus generous benefits ain't low or normal. Minimum wage is low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MongerOfDoom Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 As with this topic comparing £50k train drivers ( yes they are getting a good wage for what they do ) and bankers who rake in £millions, there is a big difference they are not the same. The argument you seem to be advancing is that the drivers can fairly have any payrise whatsoever, as long as there is someone who is paid more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Again, just to remind some posters, £50K gross a year puts you in the top ten per cent of all income earners in Britain. It is not "a normal salary": indeed, the average salary is about £24K pa. And that is why so many people with children have to claim in work benefits . There was a thread on here recently where it showed how much people earn and then claim even those earning up to £40k could claim Tax credits as salarys around the £24k mark might be what we are told are average but they do not put roof's over heads and food on tables on their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 What do bankers have to do with tube drivers wages. Most people are greedy, it's human nature. £50k plus generous benefits ain't low or normal. Minimum wage is low. Well if you care to read the posts on the other pages you will find that comparisons were made with bankers . Never said £50k was low , I said bankers on £millions are in another league , take a look at the past posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 The argument you seem to be advancing is that the drivers can fairly have any payrise whatsoever, as long as there is someone who is paid more? No never said that at all why do you make things up ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MongerOfDoom Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 No never said that at all why do you make things up ? You clearly think that the existence of overpaid bankers is somehow relevant to how much tube drivers should be paid, and you are also very clear that £50k is not too much for said drivers. So a question then: is it ever possible for the tube drivers to be overpaid, how would you tell, and would it still be right to give them a large payrise regardless? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie The Tramp Returns Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 How much does a London bus driver get paid ? Surely a far more difficult job that requires skills and experience. £7 per hour when training for the PCV with the Company, £8 per hour if they already hold a PCV, and up to £11 per hour when doing anti social shifts. Their hours are 40 per week according to my Nephew who is a driver. They now with HGV drivers have to obtain a CPC ( Certificate of Professional Competence ) 5 modules of 7 hours training within 5 years. A friend`s Son is doing his PCV privately the cost including training on a 3 axle coach, all tests, and obtaining all his CPC modules is well over £2k. He will then be able to drive Buses and Coaches including 3 axle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 You clearly think that the existence of overpaid bankers is somehow relevant to how much tube drivers should be paid, and you are also very clear that £50k is not too much for said drivers. So a question then: is it ever possible for the tube drivers to be overpaid, how would you tell, and would it still be right to give them a large payrise regardless? You clearly have not read many of the posts on this thread as if you had you would be able to see where bankers came into the thread , I suggest you go back and read. My own thoughts on the bankers ve train drivers are the bankers are in another league . The tube drivers are not on £50k yet it is £45k and will hit £50k when inflation goes up , so will still be £45 k at todays rates. As for the overpaid question , overpaid compared to who ? how would I tell ? never said I would . What I have said all along is dragging the tube drivers down due to people thinking they earn to much or not likeing the fact of how much they earn will help no one it will all just add to the low pay problem we have in this country . There are many people whos jobs used to pay good money their wages have been slashed over the years and now they rely on in work benefits . The jealous average worker who wants to pull them down as he thinks they earn to much will be worse of in the future not better off . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 £7 per hour when training for the PCV with the Company, £8 per hour if they already hold a PCV, and up to £11 per hour when doing anti social shifts. Their hours are 40 per week according to my Nephew who is a driver. They now with HGV drivers have to obtain a CPC ( Certificate of Professional Competence ) 5 modules of 7 hours training within 5 years. A friend`s Son is doing his PCV privately the cost including training on a 3 axle coach, all tests, and obtaining all his CPC modules is well over £2k. He will then be able to drive Buses and Coaches including 3 axle. Not a lot then . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie The Tramp Returns Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Not a lot then . Frankly I was very surprised I thought they were on £500 week, there is a big thing now on recruiting Women Drivers in London. I know a Guy who holds a D PCV, C HGV, and a C+E licence completed all the Modules, just had his second medical and can`t get a job, just shows the b****y state this country is in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goat Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 And that is why so many people with children have to claim in work benefits . There was a thread on here recently where it showed how much people earn and then claim even those earning up to £40k could claim Tax credits as salarys around the £24k mark might be what we are told are average but they do not put roof's over heads and food on tables on their own. Does that not tell you that the entire tax and benefits system is screwed up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miko Posted October 4, 2011 Share Posted October 4, 2011 Does that not tell you that the entire tax and benefits system is screwed up? No it tells me that the entire wages, tax and benefits system is screwed up . In the last 20 years tax at the lower and average end of earnings has gone up , for many wages down and benefits have been put in place to compensate . How fking stupid. So lets not blame the tube drivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.