More envy gripes about excessive salaries.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Globs said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I don't like chat shows

And I don't force you to pay for them or go to prison.
Clearly there is no reasoning with you, perhaps you are a Lib Dem?

So you're forced to buy a licence to pay for Lineker....but somehow I'm not forced to buy a licence for Ross (when he was at the beeb) and the One show and all the other stuff I don't enjoy??

Idiot!

[otolith]

The BBC is in a cleft stick. Why should the masses pay for minority television? On the other hand, why should anyone have to pay a tax to provide output which the private sector already provides? The position is indefensible, the compromise inevitably distasteful.

[Globs]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Globs said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I don't like chat shows

And I don't force you to pay for them or go to prison.

but somehow I'm not forced to buy a licence for Ross

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Idiot!

Perhaps you should drink less and study basic reading comprehension.

[Murph7355]

If the BBC feel the need to pay "commercially competitive" salaries to such figure heads, they should go off and be a fully commercial enterprise.

They seem to be drawn into wage escalation when surely they don't need to be? As things currently stand, they get their revenue regardless of viewing figures. So should surely be spending such amounts on other things OR giving any surplus back by way of a drop in the license fee.

...

[Bing o]

I think everyone in the uk should be forced to disclose their salaries and job roles, and then the rest of the country can have a mass debate over what other people get paid.




Pathetic country.

[dandarez]

Spiritual_Beggar said:

Jimboka said:

I rather hoped this thread was going to slag off 'salary envy'. Good luck to him I say.

Oh, completely agree.....


This damned 'socialist' agenda you constantly hear in the media these days is a joke!

If people earn RECEIVE that money because they worked hard, got lucky, or whatever.....Good luck to them!


However, with the BBC being one of the more vociferous voices in this Salary Envy agenda, it seems a bit hypocritical that they are willing to pay people like Linekar such large amounts, when they really don't add value to the programme they are on.

EFA.

[Globs]

Bing o said:

I think everyone in the uk should be forced to disclose their salaries and job roles, and then the rest of the country can have a mass debate over what other people get paid.

For publicly funder jobs yes.
After all, why should a football pundit get paid more than 10x the prime minister?

For privately funded jobs, I don't give a toss because I'm not paying for it, or if I am I have a choice.

[loafer123]

TorqueVR said:

So if I'm correct the BBC pays Linekar more than Lloyds pays Heston. So if a TV presenter is worth so much why is Heston wasting his time at Lloyds?

Do you mean "...more than RBS pays Hester..." or has "The Chemistry Chef" started working for "The Listening Bank"...?

[markcoznottz]

Get rid of the dorks, just show us the football. As said do you need any of it? News readers, weather girls etc..

[pilchardthecat]

Jimboka said:

I rather hoped this thread was going to slag off 'salary envy'. Good luck to him I say.

If he was earning it from private enterprise i would agree.

Nothing envious about not wanting to see public money being pissed away on 'celebrity'

[thinfourth2]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Globs said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I don't like chat shows

And I don't force you to pay for them or go to prison.
Clearly there is no reasoning with you, perhaps you are a Lib Dem?

So you're forced to buy a licence to pay for Lineker....but somehow I'm not forced to buy a licence for Ross (when he was at the beeb) and the One show and all the other stuff I don't enjoy??

Idiot!

But neither of you are forced to own a telly

It is perfectly legal to have a house without a telly

I lived in a house without a telly and at no point did a load of armed telly inspectors kick down the front door and install a telly

So seeing you aren't forced to own a telly then you aren't forced to get a TV license


Of course you never break any laws at any point.

If you did break the occasional law like speeding then you might look at how likely you are to go to jail for not paying the telly tax. Also you might look into how difficult it is to evade the telly inspectors

[Globs]

pilchardthecat said:

Jimboka said:

I rather hoped this thread was going to slag off 'salary envy'. Good luck to him I say.

If he was earning it from private enterprise i would agree.

Nothing envious about not wanting to see public money being pissed away on 'celebrity'

Exactly, it's a simple value for money request.
The BBC is irresponsible in spending so many licence fees on one man of limited important to a single sport.
People want to see the football anyway, not some multi-millionaire pundit.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Globs said:

Exactly, it's a simple value for money request.
The BBC is irresponsible in spending so many licence fees on one man of limited important to a single sport.
People want to see the football anyway, not some multi-millionaire pundit.

The fact that you keep going on about how he's a millionaire shows that your resentment is based on pure envy, and with no consideration for anything else.

Just calm down, stand in front of the mirror and keep saying "Gary Lineker is far more successful and talented than I am, but that doesn't make me completely worthless." Sooner or later your self esteem will rise and you'll be far less jealous of those who have made more of their lives than you.

Trust me...I'm a failure just like you, but I can live with it, and have no wish to get someone else the sack for being successful and popular.

[Globs]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I'm a failure

This knew already. You also appear to be extremely bitter about this.

The BBC could employ 57 people on 35k a year for that money.
Paying people who don't need the money 57 jobs is pointless, and does the country no good at all.

[ExChrispy Porker]

Globs said:

This knew already. You also appear to be extremely bitter about this.

The BBC could employ 57 people on 35k a year for that money.
Paying people who don't need the money 57 jobs is pointless, and does the country no good at all.

The country gets more tax off Lineker, than 57 people on 35k surely?

[DSM2]

ExChrispy Porker said:

Globs said:

This knew already. You also appear to be extremely bitter about this.

The BBC could employ 57 people on 35k a year for that money.
Paying people who don't need the money 57 jobs is pointless, and does the country no good at all.

The country gets more tax off Lineker, than 57 people on 35k surely?

No FFS. There is no tax from Lineker's BEEB pay. He is paid with tax from others earnings and hands some of it back, nothing more.

[ExChrispy Porker]

DSM2 said:

No FFS. There is no tax from Lineker's BEEB pay. He is paid with tax from others earnings and hands some of it back, nothing more.

But he hands more back than the 57 on 35k would.

[Globs]

ExChrispy Porker said:

DSM2 said:

No FFS. There is no tax from Lineker's BEEB pay. He is paid with tax from others earnings and hands some of it back, nothing more.

But he hands more back than the 57 on 35k would.

I very much doubt it, the effective tax rate is huge on lower incomes, and Lineker will have a decent accountant.

You also have to factor in fuel duty, VED, VAT on essentials, airport tax, insurance tax, TV licence(sic), council tax etc.
Also the lower incomes would go via PAYE, whereas I suspect Lineker pays 20% through a shell company.

[ExChrispy Porker]

Globs said:

I very much doubt it, the effective tax rate is huge on lower incomes, and Lineker will have a decent accountant.

You also have to factor in fuel duty, VED, VAT on essentials, airport tax, insurance tax, TV licence(sic), council tax etc.
Also the lower incomes would go via PAYE, whereas I suspect Lineker pays 20% through a shell company.

and Lineker doesn't pay VAT and the rest?

[crankedup]

I just hope that one sunny day the BeeB will be allowed/pushed to go fully commercial. That will open up all the competition needed to slim down this monolith. At the same time I would expect program quality to remain unaffected. For me ITV seem to be banging out high quality drama that used to be the preserve of the Beeb.