| The country is broken 09:05 - Jan 6 with 6372 views | Herbivore |
This is pretty sickening. By the end of today, top executives will have earnt more than most working people in the UK will earn this year. By lunchtime they'll have earnt more than newly qualified teachers and nurses. By the end of Friday they'd earnt more than virtually all cleaners, shop workers, waiting staff, teaching assistants, health care assistants, and carers - the people that keep the world ticking over. This level of inequality is utterly absurd and unjustifiable.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51000217
|  |
| |  |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 16:39 - Jan 6 with 984 views | hampstead_blue |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 15:48 - Jan 6 by eireblue |
So to summarise then, to get back on your substantive points
life is unfair,
UK economy is fine
Your solution to improve matters is a socialist one whereby SME’s are encouraged through taxation to give away >50% of their profits. Which of course would inhibit their growth.
And, you have been shouted at by an as yet unnamed pleb.
Out of curiosity, how do you stop a company that is on target to make say 100K profit, pay all its executives an extra say 15k bonus, and then declare a profit of 10k, and give away 5k.
The executives have worked hard to successfully make that profit.
Again, as always, please try and come up with a solution that can’t be labelled socialist by the right wing press.
I think, by the way the comparison is of course relevant.
For instance the teaching profession is very difficult, it is very important, and the attrition rate for teachers is something like 23% of people leave teaching after five years.
Teachers are paid in the main, by money. Which doesn’t come from trees apparently.
It comes from, according to the Tory party, a successful economy.
I think what they actually mean by that is taxation from the economy.
So if we need to have new intelligent successful people in the future, we can either import them or teach children currently in the UK. Be good if such people remained healthy.
Taxing the economy means, I believe from what Tories tell me, taxing companies, goods, earnings and of course wealth.
That so much more wealth is not being used to help with the needs of things like teaching children, than has been the case in the past, that maybe somewhat worth thinking about.
The metric cited in the OP is in fact a very good way to visualise the disparity in wealth, since visualising 1, 2, 40 billion and what that means is a difficult thing to do without the numbers being contextualised.
Of course it seems obvious to me why some people may not want to think about that comparison. |
So the Social Enterprise model is a bit more nuanced than I can give time to here. It's not the black and white socialist option but can be used in many different ways.
Sadly I don't have time to give a detailed economic solution as I have my own selfish needs to fulfill ;-)
I'll just leave it at that. I've been in the Social Enterprise sector for long enough to know how it can be used more widely as a force for good and change. You can take market pay and still deliver great social impact. You'll just have to trust me on this one.
What would your solution be? |  |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| The country is broken on 16:52 - Jan 6 with 961 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken on 16:38 - Jan 6 by baltimore_suey |
Thanx for proving my point  |
You seem to be trying to set a record for number of posts on a single thread without actually adding anything to the debate. You're probably getting close to be fair. | |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 16:56 - Jan 6 with 946 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 16:39 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
So the Social Enterprise model is a bit more nuanced than I can give time to here. It's not the black and white socialist option but can be used in many different ways.
Sadly I don't have time to give a detailed economic solution as I have my own selfish needs to fulfill ;-)
I'll just leave it at that. I've been in the Social Enterprise sector for long enough to know how it can be used more widely as a force for good and change. You can take market pay and still deliver great social impact. You'll just have to trust me on this one.
What would your solution be? |
You do this a lot. You make a point, someone takes the time to respond in detail demonstrating why your point is somewhat misguided or erroneous, and then you respond saying that's not exactly what you meant but you are right and we'll just have to take your word for it as you're too busy to explain. It's incredibly disingenuous. [Post edited 6 Jan 2020 17:21]
| |
| |
| The country is broken on 17:07 - Jan 6 with 920 views | baltimore_suey |
| The country is broken on 16:52 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
You seem to be trying to set a record for number of posts on a single thread without actually adding anything to the debate. You're probably getting close to be fair. |
It’s still there... |  | | |
| The country is broken on 17:08 - Jan 6 with 918 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken on 17:07 - Jan 6 by baltimore_suey |
It’s still there... |
And that's the record! Well done, chief. Now let the grown ups carry on their conversation. | |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:10 - Jan 6 with 916 views | hampstead_blue |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 16:56 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
You do this a lot. You make a point, someone takes the time to respond in detail demonstrating why your point is somewhat misguided or erroneous, and then you respond saying that's not exactly what you meant but you are right and we'll just have to take your word for it as you're too busy to explain. It's incredibly disingenuous. [Post edited 6 Jan 2020 17:21]
|
What utter rubbish. It's so common on here to simply rebut an answer with more questions. Some like you do it with a real sense of nastiness which is rather rude. Rather than accepting your ideological economics don't work you simply jump on anyone who thinks otherwise.
I've given answers. If you want to go away and look at the models I've proposed then maybe you could, with some lateral thinking enjoy the solutions.
You need to be creative with a model, something you would have banned under your hard left regime.
Allow entrepreneurs to give the answers by giving them sufficient bandwidth within regulation and tax. The Social Enterprise model is in my mind one of the best models we have to deliver great investment returns and social value. You just need to be removed from hard left dogma to see it I'm afraid.
You propose the 'country is broken' but it clearly isn't. It's a failed political ideology that is broken, that of the hard left. The country is just fine thank-you.
Maybe before you keep throwing bricks at us try and look into your own rigid dogma and see what and how you can change? | |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:15 - Jan 6 with 909 views | eireblue |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 16:39 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
So the Social Enterprise model is a bit more nuanced than I can give time to here. It's not the black and white socialist option but can be used in many different ways.
Sadly I don't have time to give a detailed economic solution as I have my own selfish needs to fulfill ;-)
I'll just leave it at that. I've been in the Social Enterprise sector for long enough to know how it can be used more widely as a force for good and change. You can take market pay and still deliver great social impact. You'll just have to trust me on this one.
What would your solution be? |
Ahhh the old nuance and appeal to authority arguments.
Your model doesn’t address the issue in the OP.
There about 2 million people in the UK employed by social enterprises already.
That hasn’t prevented the increasing disparity mentioned in the OP.
There has been a growth in social enterprises at the same time as the disparity mentioned in the OP has grown.
So social enterprises don’t probably address the problem
Also, unless you have an interventionist approach to how companies are set-up, you can’t force entrepreneurs to set-up social enterprises.
The issues seems to me that many people think it okay for some people to earn what some would consider a ridiculous amount of money. A CEO willing to be paid millions for failure, I would guess, is happy with that status quo. And you also think that sort of thing is okay as well.
You can’t build and maintain national health, education, social care to support a better society on the benevolence of SME’s that choose to adopt a social model.
You don’t think there is a problem, so you haven’t proposed a solution.
Your point seems to me, still to be, UK is fine, although life is unfair, I work in a social enterprise, they are great.
So it is all a little bit irrelevant.
I have already stated a main part of a solution. |  | | |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:22 - Jan 6 with 904 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:10 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
What utter rubbish. It's so common on here to simply rebut an answer with more questions. Some like you do it with a real sense of nastiness which is rather rude. Rather than accepting your ideological economics don't work you simply jump on anyone who thinks otherwise.
I've given answers. If you want to go away and look at the models I've proposed then maybe you could, with some lateral thinking enjoy the solutions.
You need to be creative with a model, something you would have banned under your hard left regime.
Allow entrepreneurs to give the answers by giving them sufficient bandwidth within regulation and tax. The Social Enterprise model is in my mind one of the best models we have to deliver great investment returns and social value. You just need to be removed from hard left dogma to see it I'm afraid.
You propose the 'country is broken' but it clearly isn't. It's a failed political ideology that is broken, that of the hard left. The country is just fine thank-you.
Maybe before you keep throwing bricks at us try and look into your own rigid dogma and see what and how you can change? |
It's all just empty words from a proven liar. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:24 - Jan 6 with 900 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:15 - Jan 6 by eireblue |
Ahhh the old nuance and appeal to authority arguments.
Your model doesn’t address the issue in the OP.
There about 2 million people in the UK employed by social enterprises already.
That hasn’t prevented the increasing disparity mentioned in the OP.
There has been a growth in social enterprises at the same time as the disparity mentioned in the OP has grown.
So social enterprises don’t probably address the problem
Also, unless you have an interventionist approach to how companies are set-up, you can’t force entrepreneurs to set-up social enterprises.
The issues seems to me that many people think it okay for some people to earn what some would consider a ridiculous amount of money. A CEO willing to be paid millions for failure, I would guess, is happy with that status quo. And you also think that sort of thing is okay as well.
You can’t build and maintain national health, education, social care to support a better society on the benevolence of SME’s that choose to adopt a social model.
You don’t think there is a problem, so you haven’t proposed a solution.
Your point seems to me, still to be, UK is fine, although life is unfair, I work in a social enterprise, they are great.
So it is all a little bit irrelevant.
I have already stated a main part of a solution. |
Yep, it's all basically his own unique brand of I'm alright Jack. | |
| |
| The country is broken on 17:31 - Jan 6 with 889 views | baltimore_suey |
| The country is broken on 17:08 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
And that's the record! Well done, chief. Now let the grown ups carry on their conversation. |
It won’t go away | | | |
| The country is broken on 17:57 - Jan 6 with 858 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| The country is broken on 09:57 - Jan 6 by StokieBlue |
Perhaps the people at the right top of the organisation should be paid a much lower base salary but then a far larger amount in shares. That way the pay is directly linked to company performance.
SB |
Where does this notion of share value being linked to performance come from? |  |
| |
| The country is broken on 18:01 - Jan 6 with 853 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| The country is broken on 11:49 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
Not at all. Thankfully we live in a society where you can be a success and enjoy that.
We have to accept that life is unfair and it a fact. The best you can do is crack on make the best of what we've got. |
SociopathsRus. | |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:03 - Jan 6 with 852 views | hampstead_blue |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:15 - Jan 6 by eireblue |
Ahhh the old nuance and appeal to authority arguments.
Your model doesn’t address the issue in the OP.
There about 2 million people in the UK employed by social enterprises already.
That hasn’t prevented the increasing disparity mentioned in the OP.
There has been a growth in social enterprises at the same time as the disparity mentioned in the OP has grown.
So social enterprises don’t probably address the problem
Also, unless you have an interventionist approach to how companies are set-up, you can’t force entrepreneurs to set-up social enterprises.
The issues seems to me that many people think it okay for some people to earn what some would consider a ridiculous amount of money. A CEO willing to be paid millions for failure, I would guess, is happy with that status quo. And you also think that sort of thing is okay as well.
You can’t build and maintain national health, education, social care to support a better society on the benevolence of SME’s that choose to adopt a social model.
You don’t think there is a problem, so you haven’t proposed a solution.
Your point seems to me, still to be, UK is fine, although life is unfair, I work in a social enterprise, they are great.
So it is all a little bit irrelevant.
I have already stated a main part of a solution. |
Ok, we are getting there.
If you improve the model to encourage other entrepreneurs to enter then you will expand and extend the reach.
I'd use tax and regulation. Currently social enterprises are typically small ventures leaning more toward social causes than making profit for sustainability.
Extend the model to increase the appeal.
If you can get some real high growth entrepreneurs to embrace the model then more will follow.
I am comfortable with CEO's earning good money. Shareholders should hold them to account. We can't change that but can encourage it. | |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| The country is broken on 18:08 - Jan 6 with 844 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| The country is broken on 12:26 - Jan 6 by StokieBlue |
What can you do about that though?
It's not really their fault that the value of their assets has risen over time but obviously it's not great for people at an earlier stage of life looking to get ahead.
It's a problematic catch 22.
SB |
Who could possibly blame them for thinking about nobody but themselves and playing the game....genuinely a pretty scummy generation...I should know! | |
| |
| The country is broken on 18:13 - Jan 6 with 830 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| The country is broken on 13:45 - Jan 6 by baltimore_suey |
This is just the norm. It doesnt matter how much big bosses earn, as someone has to be in charge you know. THis is just natural. You've gotta have an incentive to work |
Co-operatives. | |
| |
| The country is broken on 18:28 - Jan 6 with 807 views | baltimore_suey |
What about them? Theyre a good idea for those who like them | | | |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:34 - Jan 6 with 789 views | eireblue |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:03 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
Ok, we are getting there.
If you improve the model to encourage other entrepreneurs to enter then you will expand and extend the reach.
I'd use tax and regulation. Currently social enterprises are typically small ventures leaning more toward social causes than making profit for sustainability.
Extend the model to increase the appeal.
If you can get some real high growth entrepreneurs to embrace the model then more will follow.
I am comfortable with CEO's earning good money. Shareholders should hold them to account. We can't change that but can encourage it. |
Again, you have missed the point on CEO pay. It isn’t shareholders that control that. It is the board members. The issues with that model can be changed.
If you extend the SE model, by using taxation, you increase the reliance on beneficial business and will reduce taxes inbound to the Government.
The model you are proposing for enterprises and social care is essentially what we had during the Victorian times. Reliance on beneficial individuals. Unfortunately there weren’t many of them, and the preferred maintains the separation between classes. It was unfair, sure.
But I believe you are okay with a society that is unfair.
Also:
High growth entrepreneurs could embrace the SE model any time they like.
They choose not too.
The point of a high growth company is to grow, not produce profit.
You do not want to produce a profit whilst growing, this is fairly basic stuff.
As soon as you produce a taxable profit, that is money that could have gone into growing the company.
No person trying to aggressively grow a company will pay tax, if they can possibly avoid it.
All the revenue needs to be ploughed back into growing the business.
Maybe we should stop this discussion since you don’t seem to understand the OP.
It isn’t about people earring good money.
It is about earning a disproportionately large amount of money, compared to employees, and other members of a society, you continually avoid that point.
Your point now seems to be, the entrepreneurs that can currently get VC funding from the market to create high growth companies, should now get tax payer money instead, on the promise that when they decide to make a profit they will pay some of it back into a social cause of their choosing.
That is just very silly.
You are proposing taking tax payer money from services and then giving it to people that don’t currently need it. | | | |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:37 - Jan 6 with 784 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:03 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
Ok, we are getting there.
If you improve the model to encourage other entrepreneurs to enter then you will expand and extend the reach.
I'd use tax and regulation. Currently social enterprises are typically small ventures leaning more toward social causes than making profit for sustainability.
Extend the model to increase the appeal.
If you can get some real high growth entrepreneurs to embrace the model then more will follow.
I am comfortable with CEO's earning good money. Shareholders should hold them to account. We can't change that but can encourage it. |
So basically keep everything the same but give tax breaks to small social enterprises like yours? Gotcha. | |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:38 - Jan 6 with 783 views | eireblue |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:37 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
So basically keep everything the same but give tax breaks to small social enterprises like yours? Gotcha. |
Hmmmm, must really learn that sort of brevity one day. | | | |
| The country is broken on 18:52 - Jan 6 with 767 views | Pecker |
1 bedroom studio flat in Greenwich £485,000. So I guess they need it. |  | | |
| The country is broken on 18:57 - Jan 6 with 761 views | Oxford_Blue |
| The country is broken on 12:06 - Jan 6 by Herbivore |
"how do you prevent talented and ambitious and successful people from earning lots of money?"
Easy, employ them in unimportant jobs like teaching and nursing. |
Not sure any one with ambition to make money goes into those things |  | | |
| The country is broken on 19:01 - Jan 6 with 752 views | Herbivore |
| The country is broken on 18:57 - Jan 6 by Oxford_Blue |
Not sure any one with ambition to make money goes into those things |
You should have said greedy as opposed to ambutious if you were referring solely to the pursuit of money. | |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 19:05 - Jan 6 with 746 views | Coco |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 18:03 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
Ok, we are getting there.
If you improve the model to encourage other entrepreneurs to enter then you will expand and extend the reach.
I'd use tax and regulation. Currently social enterprises are typically small ventures leaning more toward social causes than making profit for sustainability.
Extend the model to increase the appeal.
If you can get some real high growth entrepreneurs to embrace the model then more will follow.
I am comfortable with CEO's earning good money. Shareholders should hold them to account. We can't change that but can encourage it. |
Oh god another arrogant narcissist. |  |
| |
| The country is broken on 21:11 - Jan 6 with 694 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| The country is broken on 18:28 - Jan 6 by baltimore_suey |
What about them? Theyre a good idea for those who like them |
So someone doesn't have to be in charge....but of course you knew that. | |
| |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 21:46 - Jan 6 with 671 views | mrshallisfit |
| The country is broken - No it's not. on 17:10 - Jan 6 by hampstead_blue |
What utter rubbish. It's so common on here to simply rebut an answer with more questions. Some like you do it with a real sense of nastiness which is rather rude. Rather than accepting your ideological economics don't work you simply jump on anyone who thinks otherwise.
I've given answers. If you want to go away and look at the models I've proposed then maybe you could, with some lateral thinking enjoy the solutions.
You need to be creative with a model, something you would have banned under your hard left regime.
Allow entrepreneurs to give the answers by giving them sufficient bandwidth within regulation and tax. The Social Enterprise model is in my mind one of the best models we have to deliver great investment returns and social value. You just need to be removed from hard left dogma to see it I'm afraid.
You propose the 'country is broken' but it clearly isn't. It's a failed political ideology that is broken, that of the hard left. The country is just fine thank-you.
Maybe before you keep throwing bricks at us try and look into your own rigid dogma and see what and how you can change? |
The country is just fine. Thank you. That in just a couple of phrases sums up what a self-centred clueless fu#kwit you really are. [Post edited 6 Jan 2020 21:49]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
