-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
BBC: Corbyn suggests max limit to what people can earn, "somewhat higher than £138K"
- Thread starter Chittagong
- Start date
- Status
You can ask this question of a lot of his statements.
TemplaerDude
Member
Probably not the best or well thought out solution, but I don't think anyone can look at the way society is going and be happy about it.
Netherscourge
Banned
The market and the market alone should determine a person's salary.
If your work is important and/or profitable to the people who employ you, then you should make whatever your employers are willing to pay you to keep you employed.
Let competition determine the limits, not the law.
I'll agree to a minimum wage, to act as a safety cushion, but a maximum wage?
Hell no.
If your work is important and/or profitable to the people who employ you, then you should make whatever your employers are willing to pay you to keep you employed.
Let competition determine the limits, not the law.
I'll agree to a minimum wage, to act as a safety cushion, but a maximum wage?
Hell no.
Anyone can throw out ideas that are great theoretically. Literally anybody. UK society has got major issues, both historical and impending with Brexit.
I don't want a Leader of the Opposition that can bounce ideas around, I want a Leader that can Lead. This idea is worthless because he has sod all plan to even remotely attempt to put together a proposal to implement it.
You literally have members of his party today reacting to his comments with (I'm paraphrasing) 'Fuuuuuucckkkkk no we can't do that he's high as a kite'
runningjoke
Member
We have something like this in the Netherlands, officials in the public sector are forbidden to earn more than ministers (228.599 including expenses). I don't see how you can apply this to private sector.
perfectchaos007
Member
Didn't Sweden propose having an individual salary cap a couple years ago? It was shot down there as well
Bad Arse Vickers
Banned
I can see where he's coming from, but I don't think it will be enforceable in a capitalist society.
I_D
Member
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/occupy-wall-street-why-ben-jerrys-endorsement-rings-hollow/
I've thought this was a fantastic idea for years. It's a shame B&J was taken over by run-of-the-mill greedy people and this fantastic system was shut down.
Hell, even a 50:1 ratio would be better than what we currently see in most of the world's top companies.
UtterlyPerplexed
Member
Have the Tories pissed themselves laughing yet?
A sixth form student can quickly spot holes in this idea. No, really. This isn't something I would ever expect to hear from a man who wishes to position himself as a serious, credible opposition leader, let alone the alternative to government in waiting. It's something I would expect to hear from someone in Year 9 who understandably lacks a sufficient understand of economics and real life experience to critically recognise the obvious pitfalls of such a plan. Jesus Christ. At a time when a credible and effective opposition is critical, particularly with Theresa May now in full android mode sounding like a broken record on Brexit while positing virtually no coherent plan if any at all, I take one look at Corbyn and wish he can just go and permanently make jam or start a fuss with a train company.
A sixth form student can quickly spot holes in this idea. No, really. This isn't something I would ever expect to hear from a man who wishes to position himself as a serious, credible opposition leader, let alone the alternative to government in waiting. It's something I would expect to hear from someone in Year 9 who understandably lacks a sufficient understand of economics and real life experience to critically recognise the obvious pitfalls of such a plan. Jesus Christ. At a time when a credible and effective opposition is critical, particularly with Theresa May now in full android mode sounding like a broken record on Brexit while positing virtually no coherent plan if any at all, I take one look at Corbyn and wish he can just go and permanently make jam or start a fuss with a train company.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Can you explain what the pitfalls are to introducing a pay cap where the rest of the money goes to tax?
SenorArdilla
Member
Oh look. No shame nor brains.
To be fair to Corbyn, he didn't choose his salary, nor do I think he could be accused of doing his job only for the money.
There are an array of reasons that make this policy exceptionally stupid but Corbyns salary and putting the max salary cap as higher than that aren't among them
A footballer is paid £50 million
A rule is put forward that anything over £150,000 doesn't go to the footballer anymore
At that point, the football club puts on the contract that they will be paid £150,000 P/a since it doesn't affect the footballer one iota.
The football club then effectively earns the same revenue pre-rule without giving it away in salary.
The problem then becomes how you tax the football club differently, at which point you've achieved nothing and invariably the club (or business or whatever) certainly won't give back that extra cashflow easily. Since the Government already has fundamental problems taxing large firms, this rule just benefits the already wealthy.
Is it a clever trap to make the Tories call an early election then he leaves and Labour turn into the best party ever and steamroll them in the election.
psychodino
Neo Member
......................Cmon......................
Nobody 'chooses' their salary. They choose the job, and the salary goes with it. If Corbyn really believes there should be a cap to salaries, why doesn't he lead by example and cut his right down to the salary of a working-class citizen?
It's also a very stupid rule for the public sector as well to be fair. Senior managers in public sector organisations may be responsible for thousands of members of staff and statutory duties with significant responsibilities. Unlike ministers, who are appointed purely through democratic means, public officials are working in a professional career that requires training and skills. The chief executive of a London borough is responsible for a budget of several hundred million and numerous responsibilities.
Unless your plan is to absolutely guarantee that we don't have any decent public officials at all, we should be paying market rates. It's a completely arbitrary notion that public servants shouldn't be paid more than ministers.
Nah, holding off is basically extra time on top of the five years she'll get for crushing Corbyn.
TBH I don't think he put it very well at all. Appeal to authority, pointless anecdote, and then an unsupported assertions about how 'people' use the term.
There is a strain of centre-left politics that is pro-business, pro-free-market, friendly to Wall Street and unconcerned with American military flexing abroad. You know, like Hillary Clinton. She differs from Republicans on social issues but shares a lot of the same assumptions about economics and foreign policy.
How can I describe that political flavour in a way that is acceptable to sensitive Democrats? I think 'neoliberal' is a perfectly fine usage, but if that sets people off then I guess I need to find a different word.
WhateverItTakes
Banned
As I understand it, people being paid a lot is fine, as long as they actually spend the money and put it back in the economy. Although I guess for rich people they spend on decadent things so things don't 'trickle-down' so to speak. Still, reckon a salary cap would just turn people off working here, which with Brexit we really really can't afford.
But again the real story here is Corbyn just can't play the game for the life of him. The Labour leader should be savvy enough to know a soundbyte like this is something people/the media will latch on to, when he really should be furthering an agenda that both puts the government to task and demonstrates ideas that the electorate might immediately take to. Being praised by your closest fanbase for these wonderful ideas is fun and all but it gets you nowhere.
But again the real story here is Corbyn just can't play the game for the life of him. The Labour leader should be savvy enough to know a soundbyte like this is something people/the media will latch on to, when he really should be furthering an agenda that both puts the government to task and demonstrates ideas that the electorate might immediately take to. Being praised by your closest fanbase for these wonderful ideas is fun and all but it gets you nowhere.
UtterlyPerplexed
Member
VendettaRed07
Member
This is so astoundingly stupid it's actually impressive.
kavanf1
Member
If you want to hire someone who expects to earn a million a year, then instead of offering them a £1 million salary, simply offer them £138,000 salary plus stocks/shares/share options/insert perfectly legal tax avoidance thing here, worth £862,000. Net result is a pointless cap which has provided the government with precisely £0 in tax receipts and has cost the taxpayer a fortune to administer, and the person still earns their £1 million.
As someone who has lived quite comfortably on a few k for the past few years, I approve of this. I can't fathom what people with 100k+ even do with all that money. Do they just sit on piles of gold like Smaug or something?
This is an excellent point though, one which illustrates the hypocrisy of not only Corbyn but politicians in general. Politicians who claim to care for the working people ought to live like the working people. Politicians who start wars ought to have a legal obligation to participate on the front lines. Judges who pass a death sentence ought to have a legal obligation to play the part of executioner, too. And people who clamor for more transparency ought to wear a body cam 24/7
Night Angel
Member
Yes. We literally buy 6 lbs of gold every year so we can sit on it like a dragon.
Because surely people that make that much don't own houses or cars, have children, pay bills, or pay taxes. Surely not. No one needs any of that stuff anyway. We should all have to struggle along on cheap shit because you do.
The Albatross
Member
His last sentence is like saying "The sun rises in the east and sets in the west," in response to everything else he said. Sure, it's true, the sun does rise in the east and set in the west, but it's irrelevant to everything he said prior to that.
Yes, Footballers probably don't need to make £50million/year, but there's an awful huge disparity between, say, £150,000/year and £50million/year.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
Cheers.
Honestly, in that case, it seems to me that the problem is corporate taxation more than individual taxation. There is nothing inherently wrong with capping an individual's pay. The government needs to find ways of taxing more efficiently. I do agree that the primary goal should be to achieve this rather than an arbitrary pay cap first, but at least one of thesr will have been accomplished rather than individual pay having no cap and money being relabelled and tunneled elsewhere.
Also, if everyone had a pay cap, perhaps then they would start to push the government on taxing corporations and those who change their money in to stocks/options more fairly.
Something needs to happen and I appreciate the man's balls in regards to be willing to push the far side of the spectrum but this is well beyond a non-starter. I don't mind the strategy of asking for the sun so you can reach the moon, but this star is in another galaxy that exists in an alternate dimension.
Step down off your high horse, mate.
With the footballer example he used - why wouldn't every footballer worth a damn go to another country that didn't cap earnings? Same for successful writers, actors, entrepreneurs, business-people, etc...
This would create a massive brain drain. Some would choose to stay, but many would leave.
This would create a massive brain drain. Some would choose to stay, but many would leave.
The Albatross
Member
One post describes people earning over £100k/year as fantasy lore evil dragons stockpiling gold. Another post sarcastically dismisses this idea. Who's riding the high horse?
More Fun To Compute
Member
You know, before today I didn't really know how thirsty GAF was for government contract work for their companies where they earn 30 times as much as their lowest paid employee.
The market has decided Jeremy Corbyn is worth £138,000 a year though.
GameAddict411
Member
So when every person who earns more than 138k leaves the UK, what would happen then? Who would pay the taxes? Who would run the economy? And who would invest in UK businesses? This coupled with brexit will cripple the UK beyond repair, and I think at that point they will turn the British government into a communist state.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
A lot of them already do dont they.
Business folk already are committing legal tax avoidance. So are famous actors, and many who earn millions of pounds a year.
Problem is this:
Do you want a rich person to use public resources without paying into the system equally relative to you? Or do you not want them to be able to do this?
It was more of the way the poster was looking down on the working class because they use 'cheap shit' through no fault of their own.
gutter_trash
Banned
so his cap is based on his own salary, like usual the world revolves around him
A socialists dream is my guess.
Herr Schwarz
Banned
Brain drain if you pay people at the top too little.
Conversely also the polar opposite at the bottom where we pay our min wage workers too much so factories are drained to China etc.
I like how there's more upset about the high echelons of life than the nonstop drain of factory and manual labour positions.
Conversely also the polar opposite at the bottom where we pay our min wage workers too much so factories are drained to China etc.
I like how there's more upset about the high echelons of life than the nonstop drain of factory and manual labour positions.
Boy Wander
Member
Yeah, get fucked Corbin. I'm not taking a pay cut.
Real answer: What a fucking moronic thing for a leader of the opposition to say. He might as well have said "Never vote for Labour because we're idiots".
I assume that a good deal of tax income comes from people who earn over 138k a year. What happens when a cap comes in?
Fucking idiot with delusions of competency.
Real answer: What a fucking moronic thing for a leader of the opposition to say. He might as well have said "Never vote for Labour because we're idiots".
I assume that a good deal of tax income comes from people who earn over 138k a year. What happens when a cap comes in?
Fucking idiot with delusions of competency.
- Status