Tesco - another fail
Discussion
I definitely meant nob, maybe its a midland spelling 
The guy in question may have run a 3bn business but he didn't found it and he was clearly incapable of the job whether he was paid £25k or £25m. The point is when you get to the top job you should be able to recognise the bloody obvious. Tesco don't [didn't] have anything apart from convenience and price. Now aldi and lidl are expanding they don't have the latter and increasingly haven't got the former. Incompetence at the top is going to cost a lot of peons their livelihoods.
The guy in question may have run a 3bn business but he didn't found it and he was clearly incapable of the job whether he was paid £25k or £25m. The point is when you get to the top job you should be able to recognise the bloody obvious. Tesco don't [didn't] have anything apart from convenience and price. Now aldi and lidl are expanding they don't have the latter and increasingly haven't got the former. Incompetence at the top is going to cost a lot of peons their livelihoods.
wolves_wanderer said:
I definitely meant nob, maybe its a midland spelling
The guy in question may have run a 3bn business but he didn't found it and he was clearly incapable of the job whether he was paid £25k or £25m. The point is when you get to the top job you should be able to recognise the bloody obvious. Tesco don't [didn't] have anything apart from convenience and price. Now aldi and lidl are expanding they don't have the latter and increasingly haven't got the former. Incompetence at the top is going to cost a lot of peons their livelihoods.
I imagine trying to make big changes at a company the size of Tesco is like doing a U Turn in an Oil tankerThe guy in question may have run a 3bn business but he didn't found it and he was clearly incapable of the job whether he was paid £25k or £25m. The point is when you get to the top job you should be able to recognise the bloody obvious. Tesco don't [didn't] have anything apart from convenience and price. Now aldi and lidl are expanding they don't have the latter and increasingly haven't got the former. Incompetence at the top is going to cost a lot of peons their livelihoods.
I have no experience of working for such an employer at any kind of level though
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Dracoro said:
crankedup said:
Dracoro said:
crankedup said:
Good to see humour alive and well on PH, wonderfully amusing to read a post advocating the merits of a failed C.E.O. How he worked his way up from a shelf stacker to C.E.O. over a forty year period within the Company. Its admirable for such sensitivity to be openly displayed and heart warming to read such posts. Honestly I took Heppers to be a rather hard nosed character, clearly he is not, how sweet.
It's the "He's more successful than me so I must not like him" mentality.Ultimately driven by envy.
If the CEO was on £25k a year, would he still receive the same vitriol? I somehow doubt it. He gets paid a fortune because that's what the shareholders/board think he's worth when employing him.
Whether or not the chief was any good or not is determined by his qualities as a CEO. That's not in question, however for a lot they are simply easy targets. Who put them there is then the real question. The "game" is broken yet everyone still blames the players.
Yes I am being flippant d**k... Because so are you by criticising someone who has run a company that has made a £3bn profit and received a tiny fraction of that as reward. You only care about the fact he got a certain number, you have a problem with that because you can't do it and you think it is by some moral compass you hold wrong. You are f**king boring to be honest and you need to just wind your neck in and understand that people do things you neither understand or think are valuable because you don't understand them.
Hello its Mystic Meg again, the all knowing glass ball person. Look into my eyes, you are a factory worker who worked on the factory floor,
a lovely plated gold watch after 45 years service. (Nought wrong with that, where there's muck there's brass). At times during my working life I wished I had been that person. Its the old adage 'spend half your life getting to the top and the second half wishing you hadn't bothered'. Much the same as running a business. Quite pleased really that my thread generated 7 pages thus far. Most posters have had a few negatives regarding Tesco, this is a perception of how well/poorly the Company is doing from 'the peoples' perception. It is the C.E.O. THAT HAS THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY for the performance of the Company. Why is it you seem to have difficulty separating poor performance from reasonable or good performance? As a Director of seven Companies I would have thought you had an understanding of this issue.
heppers75 said:
wolves_wanderer said:
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Dracoro said:
crankedup said:
Dracoro said:
crankedup said:
Good to see humour alive and well on PH, wonderfully amusing to read a post advocating the merits of a failed C.E.O. How he worked his way up from a shelf stacker to C.E.O. over a forty year period within the Company. Its admirable for such sensitivity to be openly displayed and heart warming to read such posts. Honestly I took Heppers to be a rather hard nosed character, clearly he is not, how sweet.
It's the "He's more successful than me so I must not like him" mentality.Ultimately driven by envy.
If the CEO was on £25k a year, would he still receive the same vitriol? I somehow doubt it. He gets paid a fortune because that's what the shareholders/board think he's worth when employing him.
Whether or not the chief was any good or not is determined by his qualities as a CEO. That's not in question, however for a lot they are simply easy targets. Who put them there is then the real question. The "game" is broken yet everyone still blames the players.
Yes I am being flippant d**k... Because so are you by criticising someone who has run a company that has made a £3bn profit and received a tiny fraction of that as reward. You only care about the fact he got a certain number, you have a problem with that because you can't do it and you think it is by some moral compass you hold wrong. You are f**king boring to be honest and you need to just wind your neck in and understand that people do things you neither understand or think are valuable because you don't understand them.
You mean knob not nob!!
ETA - Just because as much of a knob as I am sure I am it is worth making a stand where you can.
The left wing nutter that started this thread just hates the world, he thinks that there is some daft ceiling on earnings that is derived from some arbitrary fraction he alone possess based on a calculation that he alone should arbitrate and never really share.
I will tell you all right now if crankedup can give us his "fair equation" with regards to CEO pay and we can all understand and agree it I will personally donate £1000 the charity of his choice.
Edited by heppers75 on Thursday 24th July 22:28
As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
crankedup said:
Yup Tesco have always been good at driving down prices from their suppliers chain. Its just one of the aspects of the business that has annoyed ordinary shoppers, rightly or wrongly.
That's an interesting point.I think there's a huge disconnect between what angers people and how they actually shop.
On the one hand you'll read in the news about the masses of perfectly good fruit and veg that's thrown away because it's the wrong shape or size.
Yet if that makes it to the shelves it will remain there because no-one buys it.
People complain about confusing pricing, or being overwhelmed by promotions yet if a retailer / brand didn't promote they'd lose out. (Asda tried it, yet pulled back from it)
We like to complain about the monopoly that is Tesco, that £1 in every £3 spent on grocery is in Tesco but it's us that put it there. It's us that made Tesco (and Asda, JS, Morrisons) the way they are. And they are all the same no-one's strategy is different from the others... except Morrisons perhaps who are 5 years behind in online and convenience but avoided the whole horsemeat scandal as they actually own their own farms. Something they didn't shout about at all!
Why is there a Tesco in every town, why is there an Express on every high street... because we demand them.
OllieC said:
wolves_wanderer said:
I definitely meant nob, maybe its a midland spelling
The guy in question may have run a 3bn business but he didn't found it and he was clearly incapable of the job whether he was paid £25k or £25m. The point is when you get to the top job you should be able to recognise the bloody obvious. Tesco don't [didn't] have anything apart from convenience and price. Now aldi and lidl are expanding they don't have the latter and increasingly haven't got the former. Incompetence at the top is going to cost a lot of peons their livelihoods.
I imagine trying to make big changes at a company the size of Tesco is like doing a U Turn in an Oil tankerThe guy in question may have run a 3bn business but he didn't found it and he was clearly incapable of the job whether he was paid £25k or £25m. The point is when you get to the top job you should be able to recognise the bloody obvious. Tesco don't [didn't] have anything apart from convenience and price. Now aldi and lidl are expanding they don't have the latter and increasingly haven't got the former. Incompetence at the top is going to cost a lot of peons their livelihoods.
I have no experience of working for such an employer at any kind of level though
Hackney said:
crankedup said:
Yup Tesco have always been good at driving down prices from their suppliers chain. Its just one of the aspects of the business that has annoyed ordinary shoppers, rightly or wrongly.
That's an interesting point.I think there's a huge disconnect between what angers people and how they actually shop.
On the one hand you'll read in the news about the masses of perfectly good fruit and veg that's thrown away because it's the wrong shape or size.
Yet if that makes it to the shelves it will remain there because no-one buys it.
People complain about confusing pricing, or being overwhelmed by promotions yet if a retailer / brand didn't promote they'd lose out. (Asda tried it, yet pulled back from it)
We like to complain about the monopoly that is Tesco, that £1 in every £3 spent on grocery is in Tesco but it's us that put it there. It's us that made Tesco (and Asda, JS, Morrisons) the way they are. And they are all the same no-one's strategy is different from the others... except Morrisons perhaps who are 5 years behind in online and convenience but avoided the whole horsemeat scandal as they actually own their own farms. Something they didn't shout about at all!
Why is there a Tesco in every town, why is there an Express on every high street... because we demand them.
Can't say I've ever really had a bad experience with Tesco, they usually have what we are after, the produce seems more than acceptable (although meat is better from Sainsbury's), staff are helpful enough, always plenty of parking. Not sure what else I'm supposed to be looking for in a supermarket?
Pretty sure the only supermarket I'd go to instead would be Sainsbury's, but their selection of nice stuff means the shopping bill usually doubles when we go there. But then to me, they're supermarkets, so you go in, get what you need, and get out again.
The only one I have a particular dislike of is Waitrose, mainly as it's too expensive for what it is and full of people who refer to Custard as Creme Anglais, or pretentious arses as I like to call them. Staff are friendly enough, but when they desecrate their sandwich section in the name of 475 varieties of cold, dead fish, I can really tell it's not my sort of place.
Pretty sure the only supermarket I'd go to instead would be Sainsbury's, but their selection of nice stuff means the shopping bill usually doubles when we go there. But then to me, they're supermarkets, so you go in, get what you need, and get out again.
The only one I have a particular dislike of is Waitrose, mainly as it's too expensive for what it is and full of people who refer to Custard as Creme Anglais, or pretentious arses as I like to call them. Staff are friendly enough, but when they desecrate their sandwich section in the name of 475 varieties of cold, dead fish, I can really tell it's not my sort of place.
bodhi said:
The only one I have a particular dislike of is Waitrose, mainly as it's too expensive for what it is and full of people who refer to Custard as Creme Anglais, or pretentious arses as I like to call them. Staff are friendly enough, but when they desecrate their sandwich section in the name of 475 varieties of cold, dead fish, I can really tell it's not my sort of place.
You'd be surprised at how much of what they stock is the same price as Tesco.Aside from meat and fish they price match Tesco. We internet shop from them simply because the pickers don't throw any old fruit and veg into the bags so it lasts the week, I used to find that internet bought fresh produce from Sainsbury's was only in date by two or three days.
When you confirm your order it shows what's priced matched with Tesco, which generally amounts to 80% of our weekly shop. Probably costs £10 a week more than Sainsbury's but then I'm not throwing away a load of food which is either off, badly bruised, squashed, etc.
They also have better product lines, the only downside is it's too easy to buy stuff you don't need.
bodhi said:
Can't say I've ever really had a bad experience with Tesco, they usually have what we are after, the produce seems more than acceptable (although meat is better from Sainsbury's), staff are helpful enough, always plenty of parking. Not sure what else I'm supposed to be looking for in a supermarket?
Pretty sure the only supermarket I'd go to instead would be Sainsbury's, but their selection of nice stuff means the shopping bill usually doubles when we go there. But then to me, they're supermarkets, so you go in, get what you need, and get out again.
The only one I have a particular dislike of is Waitrose, mainly as it's too expensive for what it is and full of people who refer to Custard as Creme Anglais, or pretentious arses as I like to call them. Staff are friendly enough, but when they desecrate their sandwich section in the name of 475 varieties of cold, dead fish, I can really tell it's not my sort of place.
The simple fact is that you don't care about the supermarkets, and they don't care about you, as your choice is largely unaffected by what they do.Pretty sure the only supermarket I'd go to instead would be Sainsbury's, but their selection of nice stuff means the shopping bill usually doubles when we go there. But then to me, they're supermarkets, so you go in, get what you need, and get out again.
The only one I have a particular dislike of is Waitrose, mainly as it's too expensive for what it is and full of people who refer to Custard as Creme Anglais, or pretentious arses as I like to call them. Staff are friendly enough, but when they desecrate their sandwich section in the name of 475 varieties of cold, dead fish, I can really tell it's not my sort of place.
They are interested in the marginal shopper who changes brand due to service, quality or price, and who can therefore be persuaded away from competitors with the right offer.
This is where Tesco fail - they are great for the mass market commodity shopper and poor at gaining the choosy shopper, which often has higher spend amd margins.
Fun Bus said:
crankedup said:
.(didn't know Morrisons had their own farms!)
And slaughter house, bakery (I don't mean instore) and a flower wholesaler.
Hackney said:
Why is there a Tesco in every town, why is there an Express on every high street... because we demand them.
Nobody demands a Tesco, indeed the papers are regularly full of people demanding they don't build them. The only reason they are everywhere is because they know people are lazy.Tesco: Sloth
Waitrose: Pride
M&S: Envy
Aldi: Gluttony
Lidl: Greed
Asda: Wrath
Whole Foods: Lust
crankedup said:
Heppers, you need to get a grip and accept that we have differing POV. Your rantings are not a sign of a person who proclaims to hold numerous Boardroom seats, this belittles your status.
As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
If you genuinely think that every CEO and board members package of remuneration should be subject to the agreement of 100% of all shareholders of every company then you have no idea whatsoever of the sheer stupidity and the mechanics that statement entails. I think you will find as we live in a democracy at best it should be like a majority of other decisions which get hived into any shareholder agreement of many companies based on an agreed percentage of shareholders. This is quite common practice for a vast majority of companies particularly around fiscal matters; had you been involved at this level you would perhaps have an appreciation of that! As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
Yes we do have differing POV's clearly, however my objection to yours is based on having experience on both sides of the fence, yours seems simply to be driven by a core, fundamental and ideological disagreement to a level of earnings above a given level. Which I might add no matter how hard pressed you are you seem unable to articulate, outside of a single suggestion that is so hideously impractical and unworkable it is actually laughable! For reference you are very much like a large majority of people in my personal life from whom as I have progressed in life I have for the most part left behind as they have no concept of the realities of the situations on which they seem to hold such vehement opinions.
Like many it is a disagreement based on a chronically flawed ideology, a dogmatic belief in an opposing view and one that cannot be explained in rational terms as it has no rational basis. It is, as much as you dislike and wish to pick on the statement envy driven stupidity and a desire to rally against the big bad boss and it never matters if they worked their way up from the shop floor, are self made men who started something from nothing or were born into royalty it all boils down to the same thing - hate/dislike based on someone having more than your ideology and personal opinion deems is right.
FYI as you at least made an attempt and even though I don't think it was even 10% worthy of an answer I have donated 10% of my offer! Make a better argument and you might see the rest.
ETA - just in case the validity of my donation is questioned...
Edited by heppers75 on Sunday 27th July 17:19
Funkycoldribena said:
The trouble is Tesco got too greedy.Prices even now are way dearer than some other equal stores,a lot of people ditched Tesco because of this (myself inc.)and its very hard to turn that around,especially with the likes of B and M,Homebargains even Poundland cutting into the market.
the big supermarkets relaxed when kwik save went under - they thought deep discounting was dead in groceries , after all at that time NETTO , Aldi and Lidl only sold weird foreign food ... Aldi and Lidl raised their game and developed a somewhat more UK shopper friendly stock holding pattern, Netto reached for the handle with their carrier bag wrapped round it and banged out - with Wallyworld picking up a ready made 'metro' estate for Asda
thechain pound shops started carrying more and more food lines ( and not just sweets and short dated fizzy pop) ...
add in the squeeze from the side from 'non-w
ky' fram shops and the farmers markets and the squeeze from the top from waitrose gaining momentum with it's ex-safeway stores and the growth of M+S Simply Food standalone food stores ... add in the adverse stuff like the differential pricing strategies between local / metro/ large stores ....
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Heppers, you need to get a grip and accept that we have differing POV. Your rantings are not a sign of a person who proclaims to hold numerous Boardroom seats, this belittles your status.
As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
If you genuinely think that every CEO and board members package of remuneration should be subject to the agreement of 100% of all shareholders of every company then you have no idea whatsoever of the sheer stupidity and the mechanics that statement entails. I think you will find as we live in a democracy at best it should be like a majority of other decisions which get hived into any shareholder agreement of many companies based on an agreed percentage of shareholders. This is quite common practice for a vast majority of companies particularly around fiscal matters; had you been involved at this level you would perhaps have an appreciation of that! As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
Yes we do have differing POV's clearly, however my objection to yours is based on having experience on both sides of the fence, yours seems simply to be driven by a core, fundamental and ideological disagreement to a level of earnings above a given level. Which I might add no matter how hard pressed you are you seem unable to articulate, outside of a single suggestion that is so hideously impractical and unworkable it is actually laughable! For reference you are very much like a large majority of people in my personal life from whom as I have progressed in life I have for the most part left behind as they have no concept of the realities of the situations on which they seem to hold such vehement opinions.
Like many it is a disagreement based on a chronically flawed ideology, a dogmatic belief in an opposing view and one that cannot be explained in rational terms as it has no rational basis. It is, as much as you dislike and wish to pick on the statement envy driven stupidity and a desire to rally against the big bad boss and it never matters if they worked their way up from the shop floor, are self made men who started something from nothing or were born into royalty it all boils down to the same thing - hate/dislike based on someone having more than your ideology and personal opinion deems is right.
FYI as you at least made an attempt and even though I don't think it was even 10% worthy of an answer I have donated 10% of my offer! Make a better argument and you might see the rest.
ETA - just in case the validity of my donation is questioned...
Edited by heppers75 on Sunday 27th July 17:19
.
Should have made this clearer, what I mean is that it would have been quite usual for a Corporation to offer incentives ON performance turning the business around. Although this is plainly not always the case.Hang on, isn't that exactly what the board have done... incentives = bonuses etc. So no turnaround, no bonus, that's what they have done - what are you complaining about exactly?
I do suspect that you are just simply banging the same old drum about anyone that gets paid more as a basic salary than some arbitrary limit you deem acceptable is some sort of robber baron!
I wasn't going to bother with a reply initially, but upon reflection. Should this Boardroom require an incentive for improved Company performance. Seems to me that is quite wrong, poor performance over a sustained period should mean dismissal. The only people who should further benefit should be the Company owners. Shareholders, those people like me that risk their own money.
Yes there would be exceptions, for instance if the basic remuneration package is modest and the built in incentives then clearly work as a true incentive to performance.
I long for the day when the greedy self serving Boards of those Companies owned by non family shareholders are cut back to sane levels of reward. Shareholder pressure is slowly beginning to have an impact but it will take some years yet, unfortunately. My opinion is a broad narrative not necessarily including the Company we are discussing in this thread.
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Wilmslowboy said:
crankedup said:
Will he be passing back all the incentives offered to turn around the mighty Titanic that is Tesco's, of course not!
Pretty much non of the board (and directors) received any bonuses for the past three years, one of the positives was PHil had the sense not to award himself a bonus whist the shareholder suffered.I do suspect that you are just simply banging the same old drum about anyone that gets paid more as a basic salary than some arbitrary limit you deem acceptable is some sort of robber baron!
Edited by heppers75 on Monday 21st July 23:35
Yes there would be exceptions, for instance if the basic remuneration package is modest and the built in incentives then clearly work as a true incentive to performance.
I long for the day when the greedy self serving Boards of those Companies owned by non family shareholders are cut back to sane levels of reward. Shareholder pressure is slowly beginning to have an impact but it will take some years yet, unfortunately. My opinion is a broad narrative not necessarily including the Company we are discussing in this thread.
crankedup said:
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Heppers, you need to get a grip and accept that we have differing POV. Your rantings are not a sign of a person who proclaims to hold numerous Boardroom seats, this belittles your status.
As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
If you genuinely think that every CEO and board members package of remuneration should be subject to the agreement of 100% of all shareholders of every company then you have no idea whatsoever of the sheer stupidity and the mechanics that statement entails. I think you will find as we live in a democracy at best it should be like a majority of other decisions which get hived into any shareholder agreement of many companies based on an agreed percentage of shareholders. This is quite common practice for a vast majority of companies particularly around fiscal matters; had you been involved at this level you would perhaps have an appreciation of that! As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
Yes we do have differing POV's clearly, however my objection to yours is based on having experience on both sides of the fence, yours seems simply to be driven by a core, fundamental and ideological disagreement to a level of earnings above a given level. Which I might add no matter how hard pressed you are you seem unable to articulate, outside of a single suggestion that is so hideously impractical and unworkable it is actually laughable! For reference you are very much like a large majority of people in my personal life from whom as I have progressed in life I have for the most part left behind as they have no concept of the realities of the situations on which they seem to hold such vehement opinions.
Like many it is a disagreement based on a chronically flawed ideology, a dogmatic belief in an opposing view and one that cannot be explained in rational terms as it has no rational basis. It is, as much as you dislike and wish to pick on the statement envy driven stupidity and a desire to rally against the big bad boss and it never matters if they worked their way up from the shop floor, are self made men who started something from nothing or were born into royalty it all boils down to the same thing - hate/dislike based on someone having more than your ideology and personal opinion deems is right.
FYI as you at least made an attempt and even though I don't think it was even 10% worthy of an answer I have donated 10% of my offer! Make a better argument and you might see the rest.
ETA - just in case the validity of my donation is questioned...
Edited by heppers75 on Sunday 27th July 17:19
JensenA said:
crankedup said:
heppers75 said:
crankedup said:
Heppers, you need to get a grip and accept that we have differing POV. Your rantings are not a sign of a person who proclaims to hold numerous Boardroom seats, this belittles your status.
As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
If you genuinely think that every CEO and board members package of remuneration should be subject to the agreement of 100% of all shareholders of every company then you have no idea whatsoever of the sheer stupidity and the mechanics that statement entails. I think you will find as we live in a democracy at best it should be like a majority of other decisions which get hived into any shareholder agreement of many companies based on an agreed percentage of shareholders. This is quite common practice for a vast majority of companies particularly around fiscal matters; had you been involved at this level you would perhaps have an appreciation of that! As for the equation of a fair C.E.O. remuneration package, simple enough, its at the point of 100% of the shareholders signing off the pay board recommendations. Now that 1k, please donate this money to EACH (East Anglia's Childrens Hospice).
Registration Company : 03550187
Charity No : 1069284
VAT No : 784571785
Yes we do have differing POV's clearly, however my objection to yours is based on having experience on both sides of the fence, yours seems simply to be driven by a core, fundamental and ideological disagreement to a level of earnings above a given level. Which I might add no matter how hard pressed you are you seem unable to articulate, outside of a single suggestion that is so hideously impractical and unworkable it is actually laughable! For reference you are very much like a large majority of people in my personal life from whom as I have progressed in life I have for the most part left behind as they have no concept of the realities of the situations on which they seem to hold such vehement opinions.
Like many it is a disagreement based on a chronically flawed ideology, a dogmatic belief in an opposing view and one that cannot be explained in rational terms as it has no rational basis. It is, as much as you dislike and wish to pick on the statement envy driven stupidity and a desire to rally against the big bad boss and it never matters if they worked their way up from the shop floor, are self made men who started something from nothing or were born into royalty it all boils down to the same thing - hate/dislike based on someone having more than your ideology and personal opinion deems is right.
FYI as you at least made an attempt and even though I don't think it was even 10% worthy of an answer I have donated 10% of my offer! Make a better argument and you might see the rest.
ETA - just in case the validity of my donation is questioned...
Edited by heppers75 on Sunday 27th July 17:19
Nope I do not buy any Lottery tickets and I have absolutely no intention of giving more money (or assistance) to any charity.
Immoral earnings amongst sports people, film stars, F1 drivers, pop stars, you ask am I going to 'rant on' about those people. I can only quote Andy Murray 'yes I am grossly overpaid' refreshingly honest imo.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff