Sheffield Forum

Corbyn suggests earnings limit

Home > General > General Discussions

Reply To Topic
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
10-01-2017, 12:39   #21
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 7,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister M View Post
I don't know the exact details of Jeremy Corbyn's speech, however as someone who has worked in the public sector for many years previous, I've seen the creation of so many 'jobs' at the top of these organisations by people paid an absolute fortune ( in public bodies like Executives of Councils, Hospitals, Colleges). So many people working on the front line of these services are facing redundancies, wage freezes - yet this doesn't apply to those in senior positions.

Unfortunately I only have anecdotal evidence, rather than hard facts. But it would be very interesting to find out the composition of these organisations in terms of their workforce, their salaries, and where the axe falls.
This is what happens when government throw money at the state sector rather than reforming it. It's why Labour keep getting kicked out of government.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:42   #22
Robin-H
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Total Posts: 1,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopkins View Post
Bring back the higher tax rates.
What? Why?

You realise that when Labour increased the top rate of tax to 50% the total amount of tax revenue fell.

It was only when the Conservatives cut it again that tax revenue increased again. Indeed now the wealthiest in this country are paying a higher percentage of the total tax revenue than ever before.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2015/04...ancellor-ever/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...-rate-cut.html
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:46   #23
Mister M
Registered User
Mister M's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: In my own world
Total Posts: 8,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtkate View Post
To achieve what? If it's to get more tax then you'll need to look very carefully at how best to do that as it's diminishing returns. If it's simply to make a point then go ahead but you might end up reducing tax returns which I don't think benefits anyone.
There has been much made of the costs of a widely unequal society - both the social and economic costs. I think they should be considered as well.
It is said to impact on issues like social mobility, educational outcomes, criminality, economic growth and health. Even the OECD last year pointed out the impact of inequality on Growth stating that:

"....the UK economy would have been more than 20% bigger had the gap between rich and poor not widened since the 1980s".
_______
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." Malcolm X

http://calumslist.org/
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:47   #24
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 7,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister M View Post
There has been much made of the costs of a widely unequal society - both the social and economic costs. I think they should be considered as well.
It is said to impact on issues like social mobility, educational outcomes, criminality, economic growth and health. Even the OECD last year pointed out the impact of inequality on Growth stating that:

"....the UK economy would have been more than 20% bigger had the gap between rich and poor not widened since the 1980s".
Can we have a reference for this quote please? I'm pretty sure it's false.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:48   #25
Mister M
Registered User
Mister M's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: In my own world
Total Posts: 8,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbeliever View Post
This is what happens when government throw money at the state sector rather than reforming it. It's why Labour keep getting kicked out of government.
Actually many of the public services have been in a permanent state of flux and change throughout the last 20 years.
_______
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." Malcolm X

http://calumslist.org/
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:48   #26
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 7,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister M View Post
Actually many of the public services have been in a permanent state of flux and change throughout the last 20 years.
As has the world. Adapt or die.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:48   #27
Mister M
Registered User
Mister M's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: In my own world
Total Posts: 8,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbeliever View Post
Can we have a reference for this quote please? I'm pretty sure it's false.
http://www.oecd.org/newsroom/inequal...mic-growth.htm
_______
"If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing." Malcolm X

http://calumslist.org/
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:50   #28
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 7,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister M View Post
Where's the 20%?
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 12:58   #29
sgtkate
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 3,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister M View Post
How does the OECD suggest fixing it? Evening out the current GDP more evenly? Reducing the wealth income to a less wealthy average? Somehow paying the poor more without reducing the wealthy? I'm all for better equality but this seems a little pie in the sky...
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:09   #30
harvey19
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Total Posts: 6,361
I hope he doesn't only target bankers and the like but includes footballers.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:11   #31
Robin-H
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Total Posts: 1,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey19 View Post
I hope he doesn't only target bankers and the like but includes footballers.
It's just meaningless rhetoric.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:11   #32
pintor
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Total Posts: 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jpeters View Post
Do you have any evidence of this?

The evidence I have seen (world happiness reort 2016)highlights a strong postie correlation between wealth and happiness.

All of the top 10 countries are European, save Australia, New Zealand and Canada. The highest country that falls below the average GDP of the world is Guatemala, in poisition 39. The only countries in the bottom 50 of average or better GDP is South Africa, Bulgaria and Gabon (none of which are wealthy). The bottom "rich" country is Greece at number 99.

Corbyn is dangerous, more dangerous than Trump.
Beat me to it!
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:16   #33
L00b
Registered User
L00b's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: Sur la Toile
Total Posts: 14,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey19 View Post
I hope he doesn't only target bankers and the like but includes footballers.
I hope he does too. That'd be the end of the premiership, a very severe haircut to the bookmaking business, broadcast licensing money freed up to commission more quality TV programming <etc.>: positives end on end, as far as the eye can see
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:18   #34
tinfoilhat
Registered User
tinfoilhat's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 12,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by harvey19 View Post
I hope he doesn't only target bankers and the like but includes footballers.
Why? They pay tax. There was an image knocking about of Louis Suarez pay slip - no accounting flim flam just a wage slip with a whacking amount of tax paid. Thank you very much Louis I thought. Saint corbyn probably hast seen it.

Now if you want to close loopholes I'm all over that.
_______
We get the world we deserve.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:23   #35
Robin-H
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Total Posts: 1,435
Denmark is apparently the happiest country in the world.

If I'm reading the Gini coefficients correctly, it also has one of the highest levels of wealth distribution inequality in the world (only Zimbabwe and Namibia are worse).

It does however have a low level of income distribution inequality - although not as good as Afghanistan..
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 13:27   #36
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 7,071
I think there's a lot off confusion here as to cause and effect.

Wealthy countries can afford to support low earners by supplementing their income. Most do as people who are doing well are generally inclined to help out their fellow citizens. This makes both groups of people happier.
Wealthy countries do not become or remain wealthy by taxing their economy back to the stone age.
Supplements for the income of the lowest earners is the first thing to do, no matter who is in government, when the economy tanks.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:04   #37
El Cid
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2013
Location: Wakefield
Total Posts: 5,856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister M View Post
I don't know the exact details of Jeremy Corbyn's speech, however as someone who has worked in the public sector for many years previous, I've seen the creation of so many 'jobs' at the top of these organisations by people paid an absolute fortune ( in public bodies like Executives of Councils, Hospitals, Colleges). So many people working on the front line of these services are facing redundancies, wage freezes - yet this doesn't apply to those in senior positions.
West Yorkshire councils increase the minimum wage they pay from 7.19 per hour, to 8.25; we did have below inflation increases for a few years though.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:04   #38
sgtkate
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 3,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin-H View Post
Denmark is apparently the happiest country in the world.

If I'm reading the Gini coefficients correctly, it also has one of the highest levels of wealth distribution inequality in the world (only Zimbabwe and Namibia are worse).

It does however have a low level of income distribution inequality - although not as good as Afghanistan..
Yes, it's the Gini coefficients that I was basing it on. I'm not saying that all poor countries are happiner, far from it, but in general those with lower inequality are happier than an equivalent with higher inequality.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:29   #39
tzijlstra
Registered User
tzijlstra's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Hillsborough
Total Posts: 11,749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jpeters View Post
Left wing odd ball Jeremy Corbyn has suggested today that there should be an arbitrary earnings limit, conveniently in excess of his six figure salary.

This is dangerously naive in economic terms. Should this man be in control of the nation's opposition? This is the kind of rhetoric that drunk students spout.

Does anyone on here think Corbyn is right on this one?
It is a pretty ludicrous idea. Without knowing what he actually proposed (sorry not going through the whole thread!), so correct me if I am wrong, but he seems to think that what Hollande did in France was a great idea. Again, without knowing all the ins and outs, Hollande effectively taxed the socks out of anyone earning more than X. Rather than solve the countries urgent fiscal deficits it led to a capital flight that nearly crippled the country (correct me if I am wrong L00b).

What Corbyn ought to strive for is a more balanced economy, but he clearly does not know how to achieve that. He is rapidly becoming a Conservative Socialist on the political spectrum, without realising it. He is most certainly not a Progressive Socialist...

---------- Post added 10-01-2017 at 13:35 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by sgtkate View Post
Yes, it's the Gini coefficients that I was basing it on. I'm not saying that all poor countries are happiner, far from it, but in general those with lower inequality are happier than an equivalent with higher inequality.
Google the Gross National Happiness index. It is a very interesting piece of work, developed by the king of Bhutan in 1974 of all people. Financial wellbeing plays a tiny part in that and completely flips the trendy 'National Happiness' studies that emerged like mushrooms in the last decade on its head. The problem with more modern measures being that they have been devised by economists who, not surprisingly, think a certain amount of Pecunia are relevant to happiness.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:47   #40
sgtkate
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 3,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzijlstra View Post
It is a pretty ludicrous idea. Without knowing what he actually proposed (sorry not going through the whole thread!), so correct me if I am wrong, but he seems to think that what Hollande did in France was a great idea. Again, without knowing all the ins and outs, Hollande effectively taxed the socks out of anyone earning more than X. Rather than solve the countries urgent fiscal deficits it led to a capital flight that nearly crippled the country (correct me if I am wrong L00b).

What Corbyn ought to strive for is a more balanced economy, but he clearly does not know how to achieve that. He is rapidly becoming a Conservative Socialist on the political spectrum, without realising it. He is most certainly not a Progressive Socialist...

---------- Post added 10-01-2017 at 13:35 ----------


Google the Gross National Happiness index. It is a very interesting piece of work, developed by the king of Bhutan in 1974 of all people. Financial wellbeing plays a tiny part in that and completely flips the trendy 'National Happiness' studies that emerged like mushrooms in the last decade on its head. The problem with more modern measures being that they have been devised by economists who, not surprisingly, think a certain amount of Pecunia are relevant to happiness.
Thanks Tim, I'll look it up. I was saying something vaguely similar further up the thread about how we look at money in isolation and that's silly.
  Reply With Quote
Reply To Topic

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:50.
POSTS ON THIS FORUM ARE NOT ACTIVELY MONITORED
Click "Report Post" under any post which may breach our terms of use.
©2002-2014 Sheffield Forum | Powered by vBulletin ©2017