Fat Cat Wednesday

ging84

why is everyone so nosy about what other people earn
footballers, pop stars, and movie stars earn as much or more, and we could all quite easily boycott everything they do if we wanted, but no one does

gazter

chem1st wrote: »

More like £3600 a year. The disabled do get more though.

Depends if the 'typical' includes children. If so you can quadruple that.

Generali

chem1st wrote: »

More like £3600 a year. The disabled do get more though.

As do people who live in houses or pay council tax.

ruggedtoast

ging84 wrote: »

why is everyone so nosy about what other people earn
footballers, pop stars, and movie stars earn as much or more, and we could all quite easily boycott everything they do if we wanted, but no one does

What do you mean no one does?

I don't have a Sky subscription, don't hold a season ticket to any premier league clubs. I don't buy replica kit or club memorabilia.

I also, as far as I know, don't have any current mortgages or contracts with any companies that sponsor the premiership. So my contribution to the Solomon's riches of a bunch of semi literate 20 year olds to run around kicking a ball before rolling around holding their ankles pretending to be hurt, is pretty low.

Likewise, I am afraid Miley Cyrus and Lady Gaga have not enjoyed my patronage much so all their money is coming from people who can actually stand to listen to them.

With director's pay we all pay whether we want to or not. The onlly revenue that companies have is from their customers.

Executive salary and excess is built into every transaction you pay for. They are paid a lot because they are successful in getting you to pay their companies more so that they can all be paid a lot.

Which is rather different to supporting Arsenal.

BillJones

ruggedtoast wrote: »

With director's pay we all pay whether we want to or not.

Then you could perhaps stop dealing with companies whose executives earn more than you feel is fair. Buying more German products would be a good start.

mayonnaise

Executive pay should be decided by the owners of the FTSE listed companies i.e. the shareholders.

We are moving from a advisory vote to a binding vote in that regard, and that's good IMO.

Again, all the frothing of the grizzlies and ruggedtoasties of this world is nothing more than the politics of envy.

Loughton_Monkey

chem1st wrote: »

More like £3600 a year. The disabled do get more though.

Yes, but I'm not a single jobseeker.

If you want to get into the 'real world' and fall off your chair, then go here:

http://www.turn2us.org.uk/benefits_search.aspx

Once children are involved, the Housing Benefit, Council Tax, and Child Tax Credits tend to add up to something approaching average wage. No incentive whatsoever to work.

kwmlondon

The people earning these huge salaries went to school and university with the people who run our political establishment. They run the system to their benefit, and we can come along for the ride too if our interests run in the same direction as theirs. However, since the people who run our political establishment, financial systems, companies and own most of the land and media don't gain any benefit from the welfare system, national health system or from the human rights act they don't support any of them. These are historical hang-ups from another era that our leaders in all fields are trying to dismantle and if you don't like it what are you going to do? What's the alternative? Communism? I don't think so.

Either get very rich or just accept that we're the property of the wealthy and be happy with what we've got.

Loughton_Monkey

ruggedtoast wrote: »

.....With director's pay we all pay whether we want to or not. The onlly revenue that companies have is from their customers.

Executive salary and excess is built into every transaction you pay for. They are paid a lot because they are successful in getting you to pay their companies more so that they can all be paid a lot.

There is a natural tendency to knock the high salaries, but there is a very useful "check" you could do. That is to look at the accounts of 'private' companies. There are many examples. Boots. Swire. Specsavers. Matalan. And the boy Branson (the airline, not his pickle).....

Look at the Gates boy in USA. He's a boy who 'done well'.

Now I think what you will find is that the shareholders are usually the CEO and other directors (perhaps with a financier in the background). These companies have to compete openly in the market and you would see the vast wealth each of these individuals have created for themselves. You can hardly accuse these companies of "ripping off", and normally you would find that the salaries have "100% active and enthusiastic support of the shareholders" [which you don't get in FTSE companies because 95% of shareholders don't vote....].

You would find that the salary some of these people draw down is "pocket money" in comparison to the 'value' they have created in terms of equity stake.

What, for example, would your take be if Branson sold (say) £30 million of his equity stake, put it in the bank to live on, and then declared from the rooftops that from now on, he is going to pay himself a salary of National Minimum Wage?

ruggedtoast

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

There is a natural tendency to knock the high salaries, but there is a very useful "check" you could do. That is to look at the accounts of 'private' companies. There are many examples. Boots. Swire. Specsavers. Matalan. And the boy Branson (the airline, not his pickle).....

Look at the Gates boy in USA. He's a boy who 'done well'.

Now I think what you will find is that the shareholders are usually the CEO and other directors (perhaps with a financier in the background). These companies have to compete openly in the market and you would see the vast wealth each of these individuals have created for themselves. You can hardly accuse these companies of "ripping off", and normally you would find that the salaries have "100% active and enthusiastic support of the shareholders" [which you don't get in FTSE companies because 95% of shareholders don't vote....].

You would find that the salary some of these people draw down is "pocket money" in comparison to the 'value' they have created in terms of equity stake.

What, for example, would your take be if Branson sold (say) £30 million of his equity stake, put it in the bank to live on, and then declared from the rooftops that from now on, he is going to pay himself a salary of National Minimum Wage?

I think most people recognise the difference between self made millionaires and directors ready to whip out the old school tie whenever they feel they need a leg up.

Most people also recognise that profitable doesn't always equal morally acceptable. I am sure tobacco executives, arms manufacturers, the Wilsons, and the head of Wonga do very nicely. That doesn't mean they should be able to sleep at night or that people should approve of them because they are rich.