Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
Double Dip Recession, ConDems and sniffling Ed
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mrs. Peter Quinn" data-source="post: 499324" data-attributes="member: 12190"><p>Noone was ever disputing that a brain surgeon should be paid more than a sales assistant Bullitt. That's not a structural inequality thats' just how it is and how it should be. But there are many examples of salaries not commensurate with profession, thats a different matter.</p><p></p><p>Football players are a bad example because although they clearly don't need and shouldn't be paid as much as they, its hadly their fault that they are: it's what happens when theres so much demand amongst idiots for football. I don't want Rooney to earn millions and millions a year but its not his fault that he does, so people complaining about that are missing the point.</p><p></p><p>examples of salary not matching 'worth' or 'value' contributed. CEO of major bank does not <em>deserve</em> to earn millions and millions more than for example my dad who has been chief executive of numerous large charities and never reached a six figure salary. When I say deserve here I am making a value judgment based on how hard he works and the social value and positive changes for people that he has helped bring about, but I would never expect that to be reflected in pay packets. On the basis that both knew what they were likely to be paid when choosing their latest jobs, then arguably the head of the bank does deserve this pay disparity, as thats simply how things are.</p><p></p><p>A socially responsible government, however, understands that the overall worth(social etc) of a banker does not exceed that of a charity executive. You can't change that wealth at source(although we do need to tax static assets more), but since you cannot do that there is nothing wrong with taxing at higher rates for higher earners. Agree that when its a case of parking fine the rate should be the same regardless of wealth, but income taxing is different.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mrs. Peter Quinn, post: 499324, member: 12190"] Noone was ever disputing that a brain surgeon should be paid more than a sales assistant Bullitt. That's not a structural inequality thats' just how it is and how it should be. But there are many examples of salaries not commensurate with profession, thats a different matter. Football players are a bad example because although they clearly don't need and shouldn't be paid as much as they, its hadly their fault that they are: it's what happens when theres so much demand amongst idiots for football. I don't want Rooney to earn millions and millions a year but its not his fault that he does, so people complaining about that are missing the point. examples of salary not matching 'worth' or 'value' contributed. CEO of major bank does not [I]deserve[/I] to earn millions and millions more than for example my dad who has been chief executive of numerous large charities and never reached a six figure salary. When I say deserve here I am making a value judgment based on how hard he works and the social value and positive changes for people that he has helped bring about, but I would never expect that to be reflected in pay packets. On the basis that both knew what they were likely to be paid when choosing their latest jobs, then arguably the head of the bank does deserve this pay disparity, as thats simply how things are. A socially responsible government, however, understands that the overall worth(social etc) of a banker does not exceed that of a charity executive. You can't change that wealth at source(although we do need to tax static assets more), but since you cannot do that there is nothing wrong with taxing at higher rates for higher earners. Agree that when its a case of parking fine the rate should be the same regardless of wealth, but income taxing is different. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
The Clubhouse Bar
Double Dip Recession, ConDems and sniffling Ed
Top