Pigs at the trough 2016

[oyster]

eatcustard said:

Private business pay lots of money to top dog and the loopy left cry about it

Forget the amounts for a second.

And focus on the 2nd point in the OP.

Some time ago (perhaps 20 years as the OP says), CEOs were paid approx 250 times the average wage. The ratio now is much greater than that.
Why is that?

Have CEOs become vastly better in comparison to their employees?

Remember we're talking listed company CEOs here, not entrepreneurs.

[oyster]

sidicks said:

Large salary for CEO equals large tax receipts for UK gov to fund welfare.

For every extra £1m paid to the CEO, the government will receive £470k back in direct taxes and benefits (assuming the CEO isn't running a clever tax avoidance wheeze!)

For that same £1m paid to low income workers, the government will receive £730k back in direct taxes and benefits.

[MarshPhantom]

NailedOn said:

Why be a CEO when you can be a PM?
http://gonetworth.com/tony-blair-net-worth/
Blair is now worth £60m. Trust funds. Deals with dictators. The works. Typical leftie hypocrite.

Suprised he's not more popular on PH.

I guess you wouldn't have a problem if he was a current or former Tory PM?

Which is also rather hypocritical.

[London424]

oyster said:

eatcustard said:

Private business pay lots of money to top dog and the loopy left cry about it

Forget the amounts for a second.

And focus on the 2nd point in the OP.

Some time ago (perhaps 20 years as the OP says), CEOs were paid approx 250 times the average wage. The ratio now is much greater than that.
Why is that?

Have CEOs become vastly better in comparison to their employees?

Remember we're talking listed company CEOs here, not entrepreneurs.

What about Actors, or Sports people, how has their pay grown compared to the average wage?

[sidicks]

oyster said:

Forget the amounts for a second.

And focus on the 2nd point in the OP.

Some time ago (perhaps 20 years as the OP says), CEOs were paid approx 250 times the average wage. The ratio now is much greater than that.
Why is that?

Why is that a problem?

oyster said:

Have CEOs become vastly better in comparison to their employees?

Remember we're talking listed company CEOs here, not entrepreneurs.

You don't think that the business landscape, globalisation etc has changed significantly over the last 20 years?

Has the role of the lowest paid worker changed radically over the same period?

[sidicks]

MarshPhantom said:

Suprised he's not more popular on PH.

I guess you wouldn't have a problem if he was a current or former Tory PM?

Which is also rather hypocritical.

You guess wrong. Again.

[sidicks]

oyster said:

For every extra £1m paid to the CEO, the government will receive £470k back in direct taxes and benefits (assuming the CEO isn't running a clever tax avoidance wheeze!)

For that same £1m paid to low income workers, the government will receive £730k back in direct taxes and benefits.

Except you couldn't allocate all of the money to the lowest paid workers and from a practical perspective would have to maintain relative summaries across the scale.

But the above suggests that the lowest paid workers would barely be any better off in the scenario you describe due to the amount of tax being taken off their wages...

[Jockman]

oyster said:

For every extra £1m paid to the CEO, the government will receive £470k back in direct taxes and benefits (assuming the CEO isn't running a clever tax avoidance wheeze!)

For that same £1m paid to low income workers, the government will receive £730k back in direct taxes and benefits.

I'm struggling with your maths. Can you please share?

[NRS]

sidicks said:

oyster said:

Forget the amounts for a second.

And focus on the 2nd point in the OP.

Some time ago (perhaps 20 years as the OP says), CEOs were paid approx 250 times the average wage. The ratio now is much greater than that.
Why is that?

Why is that a problem?

oyster said:

Have CEOs become vastly better in comparison to their employees?

Remember we're talking listed company CEOs here, not entrepreneurs.

You don't think that the business landscape, globalisation etc has changed significantly over the last 20 years?

Has the role of the lowest paid worker changed radically over the same period?

Has a CEO's role actually changed over that period either? Their role is to grow the company in a sustainable way and create value for shareholders. It's still the same as it was. I don't see globalisation etc resulting so much extra work. As mentioned earlier my CEO earns a lot less than other similar competitors and yet delivers a company that is equal to them.

[MarshPhantom]

sidicks said:

MarshPhantom said:

Suprised he's not more popular on PH.

I guess you wouldn't have a problem if he was a current or former Tory PM?

Which is also rather hypocritical.

You guess wrong. Again.

I was asking Nailed On, who made the post about Blair, not you who didn't.

[sidicks]

NRS said:

Has a CEO's role actually changed over that period either? Their role is to grow the company in a sustainable way and create value for shareholders. It's still the same as it was. I don't see globalisation etc resulting so much extra work. As mentioned earlier my CEO earns a lot less than other similar competitors and yet delivers a company that is equal to them.

I think it has, massively, for the biggest companies.

[crankedup]

Rovinghawk said:

crankedup said:

this pig troughing every year continues to undermine Social wellbeing.

Please define what this actually means in terms that can actually be measured.

Then please provide evidence to support your claims.

Difficult to define but if we look at Greece during the last three years Social unrest is very evident. The lack of jobs, basic medications, small businesses bust all leading up to Social unrest. Now I am not suggesting that CEO excessive pay is going to cause a mirror image of the Magnitude we see in Greece, of course not. But comparatively minor social unrest has already been seen which is directly related to the growing wealth gap in the UK.
We know that dissatisfaction is rumbling within workers who have had their wages frozen or reduced over the past eight years, it is not too difficult to understand their frustration seeing the boss decide he/she is worth massive pay increases year on year.
We can say that the boss is responsible for the whole company and their jobs, but the CEO is adequately supported by the Board of Directors sharing that weight. The last point I would like to make is this, if the company goes bust the workers lose their jobs the CEO will be given a golden handshake and walk into the company or retire sitting upon a nice heap of tenners.

Whenever this topic of CEO pay comes along, I usually post it every year, certain posters will swack about the politics of envy, none of my business, sell your shares if you disagree and such like. Personally I don't believe it is these actions that resolve the growing issue.of Social unrest, Fundemental changes are required that will bring about the control of excessive board room pay, such as those changes Vince Cable was discussing when in Government.

[crankedup]

NRS said:

powerstroke said:

crankedup said:

MarshPhantom said:

ellroy said:

Lefty poster in envy post shocker.

Reported recently that excess pay for bosses has a negative effect on staff motivation and performance.

www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/12056337/Pay-gap-...

It's not just the employees of Companies that get demotivated, this pig troughing every year continues to undermine Social wellbeing.
During my working life the average CEO pay was 247x the median, Mr dettol said pay is now 10000x median.

I'm proudly right wing I do however think everybody should benefit from hard work in building up a successful business
sadly while there is a vast amount of cheap labour available the pay gap will widen ....

I would have to agree. I'm very very happy for the best to be paid a decent wage for the effort they put in, but at some point it just gets silly relative to "normal" workers. I work for a big company that has done pretty well in it's industry but because of the system in Norway it pays a lot less for high up positions than elsewhere. It doesn't mean the company does very badly - it's at least equal to competitors overall if not better, and yet surely if CEO pay is linked to performance it should be doing terrible? A lot comes down to "normal" workers doing a good job, and a CEO can influence that but the "normal" workers should also be a part of the reward when a company does well, not just one or two people at the top.

For those saying it's envy then no, I earn a good wage but am happy to live in Norway where it means shop workers/ cleaners etc get a better wage. I pay a bit more as a result, but that is ok to have a system where you look after people but also can afford it (not stupid socialism that is built on massive debt).

Very much agree, I do not begrudge a top salary paid to good people, top salary can be measured against the median average. 250x median can be argued over, 300x perhaps but when workers pay is held back and/or reduced to witness top pay 1000x median raises serious political and Social question imo.

[iphonedyou]

This thread, again, from CrankedUp, again?

Colour me shocked.

[oyster]

London424 said:

oyster said:

eatcustard said:

Private business pay lots of money to top dog and the loopy left cry about it

Forget the amounts for a second.

And focus on the 2nd point in the OP.

Some time ago (perhaps 20 years as the OP says), CEOs were paid approx 250 times the average wage. The ratio now is much greater than that.
Why is that?

Have CEOs become vastly better in comparison to their employees?

Remember we're talking listed company CEOs here, not entrepreneurs.

What about Actors, or Sports people, how has their pay grown compared to the average wage?

I think their industries have grown hugely. Look at the size of the football TV deals now compared to even 10 years ago.

But have the sales of Dettol really gone through the roof?

[iphonedyou]

oyster said:

Forget the amounts for a second.

And focus on the 2nd point in the OP.

Some time ago (perhaps 20 years as the OP says), CEOs were paid approx 250 times the average wage. The ratio now is much greater than that.
Why is that?

Have CEOs become vastly better in comparison to their employees?

Remember we're talking listed company CEOs here, not entrepreneurs.

Maybe they were underpaid 20 years ago?

Why the automatic assumption that the 'correct', or 'better', figure was that paid 20 years ago?

[crankedup]

iphonedyou said:

This thread, again, from CrankedUp, again?

Colour me shocked.

It matters.

[FredClogs]

oyster said:

But have the sales of Dettol really gone through the roof?

They've gone down the toilet.

[oyster]

Jockman said:

oyster said:

For every extra £1m paid to the CEO, the government will receive £608k back in direct taxes and benefits (assuming the CEO isn't running a clever tax avoidance wheeze!)

For that same £1m paid to low income workers, the government will receive £868k back in direct taxes and benefits.

I'm struggling with your maths. Can you please share?

£1m extra to CEO:
45% income tax
2% ee NICs
13.8% er NICs

£1m extra to low earners (say minimum wagers)
20% income tax
12% ee NICs
13.8% er NICs
41% tax credits

[sidicks]

crankedup said:

Difficult to define but if we look at Greece during the last three years Social unrest is very evident. The lack of jobs, basic medications, small businesses bust all leading up to Social unrest. Now I am not suggesting that CEO excessive pay is going to cause a mirror image of the Magnitude we see in Greece, of course not. But comparatively minor social unrest has already been seen which is directly related to the growing wealth gap in the UK.

Directly related??

crankedup said:

We know that dissatisfaction is rumbling within workers who have had their wages frozen or reduced over the past eight years, it is not too difficult to understand their frustration seeing the boss decide he/she is worth massive pay increases year on year.
We can say that the boss is responsible for the whole company and their jobs, but the CEO is adequately supported by the Board of Directors sharing that weight. The last point I would like to make is this, if the company goes bust the workers lose their jobs the CEO will be given a golden handshake and walk into the company or retire sitting upon a nice heap of tenners.

Can you provide examples of when a company has gone bust and the CEO has been given a golden handshake?

crankedup said:

.Whenever this topic of CEO pay comes along, I usually post it every year, certain posters will swack about the politics of envy, none of my business, sell your shares if you disagree and such like. Personally I don't believe it is these actions that resolve the growing issue.of Social unrest,

It feels like monthly...

crankedup said:

Fundemental changes are required that will bring about the control of excessive board room pay, such as those changes Vince Cable was discussing when in Government.

Good old Vince - what's he up to these days?!