Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

City bonuses reach an all-time record £14bn

13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not saying there is. What i'm saying is, don't tell me they deserve thier high money because they work so hard. It might just be life, and that's that, and I made my choice and they made theirs. But don't tell me they deserve it, because that's an insult to me and all people like me.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    beanbag wrote: »
    I'm not saying there is. What i'm saying is, don't tell me they deserve thier high money because they work so hard. It might just be life, and that's that, and I made my choice and they made theirs. But don't tell me they deserve it, because that's an insult to me and all people like me.

    Tell me why they DON'T deserve it though.

    It's not just a case of working hard, it's a case of, as I stated before, them earning their 'commission' on the deals/money they make.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    beanbag wrote: »
    Hmmm. Well my opinion is not based on envy and I understand that some poeple will always earn more than others. But the idea that that is because those people somehow deserve to earn such massive amounts pisses me off. I'm a full time midwife, I work my arse off and its always stressful, tiring etc. On a shit day, either a baby will die or a mum will die and we all have to deal with that and get on with the job. I earn a fraction of what city bankers get paid. Maybe thats just life, but the idea they deserve it because they work hard or have stressful jobs is insulting to me and people like me who deal with life or death stress and work bloody hard every day, physical tiring work too.

    Nurses, Midwifes, etc all deserve a better deal, but as said people choose their jobs pretty much.

    If you wanted to study and become an accountant, or lawyer you could do. or you could take your existing skills and become a nanny to the rich and famous and charge a packet..

    I remember that Irish girl from the TV Series Hollyoaks who gave it all up to become a midwife back in Ireland. She'd already been picked out of thousands that applied, She could have stayed and made a small fortune doing TV and Modeling work.

    But she chose to give it all up and become a midwife.

    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20030105/ai_n9712235
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Of course people choose thier jobs, that's obvious. But the whole point is that if people like me and other people in important but relatively poorly paid jobs chose to do something else, we'd all be screwed. So it seems your banking on the fact that some people will do tiring and stressful jobs not for decent money but for the love of it and out of sheer goodwill. Even though the evidnece shows that this is what they do (i'm a midwife because i want to help people, do a job where i feel i make a difference, not for the money) that doesn't mean you treat those people fairly if you take advantage of that by paying them shit wages. Yes, i do my job for the love of it, not for the money (who would do it for the money?), but that doesnt mean I don't deserve to be paid more highly given the difficulty and importnace of the job.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    beanbag wrote: »
    Of course people choose thier jobs, that's obvious. But the whole point is that if people like me and other people in important but relatively poorly paid jobs chose to do something else, we'd all be screwed. So it seems your banking on the fact that some people will do tiring and stressful jobs not for decent money but for the love of it and out of sheer goodwill. Even though the evidnece shows that this is what they do (i'm a midwife because i want to help people, do a job where i feel i make a difference, not for the money) that doesn't mean you treat those people fairly if you take advantage of that by paying them shit wages. Yes, i do my job for the love of it, not for the money (who would do it for the money?), but that doesnt mean I don't deserve to be paid more highly given the difficulty and importnace of the job.

    Thing is, in that paragraph, you've just cleared it up for yourself:

    You do it for the love of the job, to make a difference etc...

    The bankers are in it for the money (and maybe they like their job too!).

    THIS is the simple but important difference. Yes, you may deserve to be paid more - but to say that the bankers, working in a completely unrelated industry to yourself don't deserve their money as you're feeling badly done to, is just unfair.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think some people do earn obscene amounts and quite clearly don't 'deserve' the pay they get.

    But beanbag, at least you get to go home and know you've done a worthwhile job, something that has been necessary in society since caveman times, and probably have interesting stories to tell and things you are proud of. I daresay a conversation with you would be a lot more interesting than with a banker type too. :)
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    but when you chose to become a midwife you known that the money was shit, so you have no right to start moaning now about other people making more money then you,
    Bollocks. She has all the right to moan. If everybody moaned the situation might change. Because what is clear is that the present status is not right, just or fair.

    I'm sure there are lots of honest, hard working City people out there who contribute towards the wellbeing of the bank's clients but please don't tell me a chap who spends his day speculating with other people's wealth to make them even richer is more valuable to society (or deserves 100 times better pay) than a midwife.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Bollocks. She has all the right to moan. If everybody moaned the situation might change.



    Also Bollocks.


    There is not enough money in the NHS to afford massive pay rises for nurses, midwives and the like.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    People that make lots of money earn lots of money, its as simple as that in bussiness
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    People that make lots of money earn lots of money, its as simple as that in bussiness

    And people that die on their arse get a generous severance package.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    g_angel007 wrote: »
    Also Bollocks.


    There is not enough money in the NHS to afford massive pay rises for nurses, midwives and the like.
    For starters they could cut the salaries of senior managers and use the extra money to increase the pay of doctors, nurses and midwives.

    Then there is the issue of all the wealth this country has and how it is currently distributed of course.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    For starters they could cut the salaries of senior managers and use the extra money to increase the pay of doctors, nurses and midwives.

    Then there is the issue of all the wealth this country has and how it is currently distributed of course.



    Would YOU take substantial pay cut to increase the wages of people working under you?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Territt wrote: »
    People that make lots of money earn lots of money, its as simple as that in bussiness
    Not quite. Not everyone in the City is directly involved in making money. And of course there are many companies outside the City who are not in the financial sector at all- and yet their directors and executives award themselves obscene pay packets while the floor workers get paid fuck all.

    Let's see how you (or anyone else) can justify this:
    Boardroom pay at the UK's top companies soared 37% last year as full-time directors were rewarded with inflation-busting increases in basic salaries, big cash bonuses and substantial payouts from share schemes.
    The surge in pay, which takes the average total pay for a chief executive to £2,875,000, is more than 11 times the increase in average earnings and nearly 20 times the rate of inflation as measured by the consumer price index. The ratio between bosses' rewards and employees' pay has risen to 98:1, up from 93:1 a year ago - meaning that the work of a chief executive is valued almost 100 times more highly than that of their employees.

    http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2157974,00.html


    So regardless of how much more directors earn, how can anyone justify yearly increases of 37% while workers are getting no more than 3% in most cases? Why not increase everyone's wages by 37%? Directors would still be earning up to 100 times more than workers...

    I'll tell you why. Because they're a bunch of greedy bastards and the pay rises have precisely fuck all to do with rewarding people and keeping them on the company, and everything with pure greed and selfishness.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    g_angel007 wrote: »
    Would YOU take substantial pay cut to increase the wages of people working under you?
    Yes.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    Yes.

    If the situation ever arose, I find it hard to believe that you would actually do so.

    Fair play to you if you did though.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    beanbag wrote: »
    Of course people choose thier jobs, that's obvious. But the whole point is that if people like me and other people in important but relatively poorly paid jobs chose to do something else, we'd all be screwed.



    But it isn't going to happen. People don't join the NHS, Police, Fire Service, Military, e.t.c. for the money, certainly didn't. I knew from the start that my wage would be fixed from now until I retire. I joined because of the nature of the job, nurses are nurses because they want to help people, and Firemen do it because they know they are saving lives whilst soldiers do it to protect the country.

    If I WANTED to I could have stayed on at uni and done a course in buisness and could be on my way to earning hundreds of thousands a year, it's certainly what my cousin is doing. He's a year younger than me, just left uni and he's on double what I am. But he enjoys the buisness world, to me it would be pretty soul destroying stuff.

    And Aladdin, sorry but bollocks, if the government said to you they were going to take an extra 40% of your wages so the slacker who couldn't be arsed at school gets a couple of quid an hour extra for mopping a floor you'd tell them to fuck off.
    As for mid-wives and other public serveants, yes we deserve some more money, it's a difficult job but we knew that when we started.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Most city transactions are gambling, they dont like to think of it that way but thats basically what it is, you give money out and hope it comes back with interest, or you gamble on stocks/bonds/currencies/etc.

    The more you win for your investors the more you earn, simple really and given up until about a month ago the stock market was on a big big high its hardly surprising people made loads of money.

    What isnt mentioned is a lot of that money will have been in 'stock options' and after £60bn+ was wiped off the market, how much do you think they are really worth now?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    And Aladdin, sorry but bollocks, if the government said to you they were going to take an extra 40% of your wages so the slacker who couldn't be arsed at school gets a couple of quid an hour extra for mopping a floor you'd tell them to fuck off.
    Of course I would. But then again I don't earn hundreds of thousands of Pounds a year, or even a five figure salary that's worth writing home about, so I'd be naturally pissed off if another 40% was taken off my wages.

    If I was earning 100k basic wage with 200k annual bonuses, on the other hand, and 95% of my company were paid slave wages...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some wise words by some of the correspondants to today's Guardian (emphasis mine):
    So the City rewards itself with some £14bn of bonuses for a successful year in financial services? Yet we still have a pensions black hole and these hugely successful and skilful investors and manipulators recently plunged the pensions funds into deeper trouble due largely to their own pusillanimity. Since Mr Brown found it so easy to snatch several billions of tax benefits out of the pension funds as chancellor, maybe he could find it just as easy to take back a similar sum from these troughing types now he is PM, and use it to correct the crisis he caused for ordinary people?

    If Tony Blair was conspicuous in his failure to address the obscene levels of pay at board level, Gordon Brown has to be conspicuous in addressing them if he is to maintain his persona as "son of the manse". We can start by dispensing with the myth that wealth has a trickle-down effect. If it did, the cleaners at Goldman Sachs would be paid £20 an hour. There needs to be nothing too drastic, merely ensuring that whatever bonuses paid are not subject to any form of tax break and are liable to 50% taxation under a newly simplified tax system. However, taxation is not the only answer to the widening pay gap. Brown would perhaps like to consider legislation to ensure that companies treat their workers in the same way they treat the board.
    note yet again the enormous bonuses being paid out because "profits are at a record high at British firms following several years of strong growth in the world economy". So can anyone explain why my endowment mortgage is failing to hit its target? Small wonder one in four people have no savings. What's the point? It's obvious where the money goes.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,2157782,00.html


    Enough said, I think...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Actually many companies had filled their so called pension black holes, they were caused in large part by the big losses on stocks after Sept 11th, these have reversed recently. Although I suppose they are probably bad again after the beating of the FTSE over the last couple of weeks, not that thats really pension managers faults, its US banks.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    i've got nothing against taxing the rich, but there's something inherently wrong imho of the opinion that people who do less work somehow deserve more money. Is a city trader worth £300,000 a year? If you're basing it on how much money they generate then it's probably a bargain, and people will always be paid more if they earn their bosses more money, it works from the lowliest of parking attendants up to the chaps in the ivory towers. It's the whole basis of the capitalist system. Work hard at school and the office and you'll be paid more than those who don't.
    The only exceptions are those who work for the rewards, ie public serveants, where more money is earnt by putting in more hours or going for promotion.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    beanbag wrote: »
    I'm not saying there is. What i'm saying is, don't tell me they deserve thier high money because they work so hard. It might just be life, and that's that, and I made my choice and they made theirs. But don't tell me they deserve it, because that's an insult to me and all people like me.
    Not trying to contradict my earlier points, but just because City people get paid 10x more than you doesn't mean they don't deserve it, it's that you are vastly underpaid for the work you do rather than that they are overpaid. In my hedonistic world where economics wouldn't matter anyone who works hard would be on at least £30k, no reason for anyone to suffer having to make ends meet et al.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    Work hard at school and the office and you'll be paid more than those who don't.
    Your constant argument about working hard at school is irrelevant given how much people earn has more to do with what industry they're in than how hard they've worked.
    - Get 10A*, 5As, go get a 1st from English at Cambridge, start in media/PR and you'll start on £17k.
    - Get 5Cs, CCC at A-Level, don't bother with uni, go to a City brokerage firm and you can get £30-40k in your 1st year.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ricardo R wrote: »

    - Get 10A*, 5As, go get a 1st from English at Cambridge, start in media/PR and you'll start on £17k.

    17K? Try 12K :) Although granted, I didn't go to Cambridge, I do work with people who did.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    noone can argue it's an unequal distribution of wealth, but if the money is there to be made you can't blame people for trying to make something of themself. most people in the city are not sitting about on their arse all day and if/when you get to CEO arguably you deserve it.....plus with the credit cycle turning a lot of bankers are going to end up jobless soon so i wouldn't get too jealous.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    But it isn't going to happen. People don't join the NHS, Police, Fire Service, Military, e.t.c. for the money, certainly didn't. I knew from the start that my wage would be fixed from now until I retire. I joined because of the nature of the job, nurses are nurses because they want to help people, and Firemen do it because they know they are saving lives whilst soldiers do it to protect the country.
    Your probably right. But I think its a really depressing and negative attitude to look at something in the world that you think is unfair, and say oh well, thats life, its never going to be any better so we might just as well stop complaining and get on with it. Fair enough if you think people deserve to earn millions while others slog their guts out for comparatively little. But if you don't think its deserved then you should complain about it without being accused of it all being about envy, because its not, its about having a sense of fairness. I'm not being naive and say we can have a perfect world. But I dont think we should just accpet all its massive imperfections either.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ricardo R wrote: »
    Not trying to contradict my earlier points, but just because City people get paid 10x more than you doesn't mean they don't deserve it, it's that you are vastly underpaid for the work you do rather than that they are overpaid. In my hedonistic world where economics wouldn't matter anyone who works hard would be on at least £30k, no reason for anyone to suffer having to make ends meet et al.

    On what basis do they deserve it though? They work long hours? Me too. Thier job is stressful? Ditto. Add to that I work 13 hour shifts on my feet running round like a headless chicken, and the fact that if I mess up, a woman or her baby might die, and I still cant work out why they might deserve it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    It's the whole basis of the capitalist system. Work hard at school and the office and you'll be paid more than those who don't.
    The only exceptions are those who work for the rewards, ie public serveants, where more money is earnt by putting in more hours or going for promotion.

    Thats bollocks and an insult to all the people who work bloody hard and dont earn massive salaries. And their not all public sector workers, plenty of private secotr employees slog thier guts out daily and could never dream of earning anything like £100k.

    It seems the basis of the capitalist system is about telling everyone that myth, that everyone can get rich just as long as they work hard enough. Its not true though, is it? Anyone might be able to, but not everyone can, thats the truth of how capitalism works, only a very few people can. But because we all buy into the dream, we dont get angry when some people earn obscene amounts of money, because secretly we hope it will happen to us one day.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ricardo R wrote: »
    Your constant argument about working hard at school is irrelevant given how much people earn has more to do with what industry they're in than how hard they've worked.
    - Get 10A*, 5As, go get a 1st from English at Cambridge, start in media/PR and you'll start on £17k.

    Sour grapes.....? ;)
    Seriously, media/PR is a saturated buisness, every other person at uni is doing media or a variation of it, you'll only earn the mega bucks if you stick at it for a few years and rise above the rest.
    - Get 5Cs, CCC at A-Level, don't bother with uni, go to a City brokerage firm and you can get £30-40k in your 1st year.

    From what I understand, £30k in London isn't really that much, starting wage for police with London weighting is £26k.
    And your argument doesn't stand up, if it was as easy as you imply everyone would be flunking out of college and becoming brokers. Noone tells you about the sheer number of hours you have to work, i've heard 15-16 a day isn't uncommon. When you do the maths that works out at £8.30 an hour before tax, yearly I earn a lot less but i have great hours and no stress at all.


    Beanbags, i'm not insulting the blue collar people who do as best they can at school and then go onto working in a factory or whatever. What i'm saying is that if they stick at it long enough opportunities with much better prospects will open up. You can't just turn up in London and walk into Citibank and earn £30k from the outset, methinks a lengthy probation/apprenticeship would be in order first with wages much lower.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whowhere wrote: »
    Sour grapes.....? ;)
    Heh..I work for a London investment bank actually, I'm one of the city bonus boys you hear about in the papers. Just, like most of us, I know damn well that other people work just as hard / harder than we do for a fraction of the salary. Admittedly I'm not going to protest about how unjust this is like.
    Whowhere wrote: »
    From what I understand, £30k in London isn't really that much, starting wage for police with London weighting is £26k.
    Most of the 7m Londoners make less than £30k. More than comfortable to live on if you're single, fine if you're married/kids and both of you are earning, will be a stretch if one partner isn't. £30k London is equivalent to £20-22k UK, plenty of households get by OK on that.
    Whowhere wrote: »
    And your argument doesn't stand up, if it was as easy as you imply everyone would be flunking out of college and becoming brokers. Noone tells you about the sheer number of hours you have to work, i've heard 15-16 a day isn't uncommon. When you do the maths that works out at £8.30 an hour before tax, yearly I earn a lot less but i have great hours and no stress at all.
    My main argument, which stands up entirely, is that salary varies so massively by industry that it renders 'hard work' utterly useless. I have lots of friends who worked hard, graduated from Oxford, and are earning under £20k because they've gone for newspaper journalism, local radio, PR, small consultancy firms, academia (PhD/research), small accountancy firms, the list goes on. Lots of them work just as hard as I do, longer hours in some cases, for many multiple times less money. It's to do with their industry and availability of profit in it rather than how hard they work.
Sign In or Register to comment.