Sheffield Forum
Your message here

Corbyn suggests earnings limit

Home > General > General Discussions

Reply To Topic
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
10-01-2017, 13:55   #41
tinfoilhat
Registered User
tinfoilhat's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 12,438
He's not finished today either. Despite the brexit result, and a lot of leavers are in old labour constituencies he's now said that immigration isn't too high. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38561501

Did he wake up this morning and decide to kill the Labour Party?
_______
We get the world we deserve.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:04   #42
solero
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Total Posts: 154
the really big speech is apparently coming up later this afternoon. That's not an interview. It's an actual public speech, in Peterborough, a massively Leave area but which is exactly the seat Labour need to win if they have a chance to form a government - unlike the Copeland by-election seat coming up which is not a marginal and which Labour, can and do win even when they lose General Elections, Peterborough really IS a marginal. Labour have to get Peterborough if they are ever going to govern again.

of course with Corbyn they have no chance of getting even Copeland never mind Peterborough.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:06   #43
L00b
Registered User
L00b's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: Sur la Toile
Total Posts: 15,457
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).
Valls made him see the error of his ways reasonably quickly (as French political pace goes), so it never turned out as bad as it could have. But the damage was done. The measure was political hara-kiri for Hollande either way: do it and kill off the golden goose; don't do it and renege a main electoral promise. He managed to do both! Stylin'

It certainly made much of the electoral bed of Juppé Fillon. Arguably more so than the sentiment of insecurity on the back of terror attacks, because the middle classes ended up copping for most of the measure (in total revenue/tax ratio terms, relative to the 'properly' wealthy).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinfoilhat View Post
Did he wake up this morning and decide to kill the Labour Party?
That was pretty much my insta-assessment on watching Breakfast news this morning (...and so I still think he's a really Tory plant )

Last edited by L00b; 10-01-2017 at 14:08.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 14:22   #44
Penistone999
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2011
Location: In The Countryside
Total Posts: 8,025
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?
The man is a complete nutcase . His far left socialism views have no place in modern society.

---------- Post added 10-01-2017 at 14:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by tinfoilhat View Post
He's not finished today either. Despite the brexit result, and a lot of leavers are in old labour constituencies he's now said that immigration isn't too high. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38561501

Did he wake up this morning and decide to kill the Labour Party?
He did that when he was elected their leader.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 15:44   #45
spilldig
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 2,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin-H View Post
It just so deluded and unworkable it's laughable.

I read an article the other day that said that Lord Sugar paid himself £181 million in dividends last year (before the rise in tax on dividends). He still paid around £40 million in tax from that sale.

What is Corbyn proposing? If he isn't included things like income from dividends from his cap then it is absolutely pointless, as that is how the super wealthy pay themselves - very few people actually have a salary in excess of £1million say, and anyway if they did, they'd just make sure they they were paid in dividends (or some other method) in the future.

If Corbyn is including dividends, then he must be willing to let the country lose a hell of a lot of money in tax revenue. Alan Sugar wouldn't have paid the £40million he did for example.

How can a man who clearly has no idea about how the economy works be in charge of the opposition.

Precisely. It didn't work the last time. We just got the brain drain, and it wouldn't work a next time.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 16:36   #46
Robin-H
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Total Posts: 1,837
Apparently he's just done a U turn and says he doesn't want to cap wages after all, hours after saying that was what he wanted.

Perhaps somebody told him what a stupid idea it is - shame somebody didn't tell him before he announced his intention on national television..
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 16:38   #47
The Joker
Registered User
The Joker's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Location: Elizabeth Arkham Asylum for the Criminally Insane
Total Posts: 3,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbeliever View Post
What spending would you cut when tax revenue goes down as a result?
Trident
Foreign wars
Rail subsidies
Farming subsidies
_______
I wanted to question Our Nige' and BoJo the Clown about the £350million a week promised to our NHS, but the pair of cowards quit the political arena
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 16:47   #48
sgtkate
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Total Posts: 3,620
Unfortunately as much as I love his ideals and him, Corbyn is losing the plot. This isn't the first time he's his own opinion as Jeremy Corbyn and not as the leader of the Labour party and it's come back to bite him. In work I give my opinions as the employee SgtKate, not the online ranter, I'd be sacked if I did that. If I can learn to separate the 2 then I would have thought he'd have got the idea by now.

I think he needs to go, and hopefully be replaced by someone with similar ideals but perhaps a slightly more professional demeanour. Either that or keep going and hope the LibDems become the opposition.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 16:50   #49
3 Tuns
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2017
Total Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin-H View Post
It would be completely unworkable anyway. Hopefully nobody is deluded enough to think that it is remotely possible.
Clearly Jeremy Corbyn is, although on a positive note it would remove top level football from the United Kingdom which must be good news.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 16:53   #50
L00b
Registered User
L00b's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: Sur la Toile
Total Posts: 15,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Joker View Post
Trident
Foreign wars
Rail subsidies
Farming subsidies
What farming subsidies (other than the EU's)?

A couple of years or so after large axes were taken to the CAP benefits paid in France and Italy (perhaps elsewhere as well, but I'm not as familiar with elsewhere as these 2 on the topic), there's an ongoing epidemic of farmer suicides in France and Italy atm. Not kidding. And very under-reported, perhaps unsurprisingly.

Be careful what you wish for.

Particularly considering the forthcoming exit of the UK from the EU and the associated loss of CAP payments to UK farmers. May's government hasn't exactly been forthright in promising bridging subsidies.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 18:59   #51
Bob Arctor
Registered User
Bob Arctor's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Total Posts: 1,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbeliever View Post
He's essentially talking about 100% income tax (and presumably CGT) above a certain income. Not at all surprising as I always assumed these were his ideals.
The real world effect of this is to ensure that nobody with earning power over this limit takes up or retains residence in the UK, thereby devastating the economy.
Socialism makes everybody equally poor.
This assertion relies on the assumption that executive earnings are linked to performance, which is false
_______
If I'd known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 19:50   #52
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 8,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Arctor View Post
This assertion relies on the assumption that executive earnings are linked to performance, which is false
Earnings are linked to performance. They may not be perfectly coupled to it, but they are certainly linked to it.
The field of high earners is not made up even primarily of "executives" anyway.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 20:14   #53
tzijlstra
Registered User
tzijlstra's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Hillsborough
Total Posts: 11,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Arctor View Post
This assertion relies on the assumption that executive earnings are linked to performance, which is false
Is it? I always find this a very simple assumption that is common with socialists. Having worked with some people that run highly innovative companies (one of which was described as the dynamo of the Rheinland economy and created over 500 high-tech jobs in the area within 2 years) I know how much effort and work they put in to keep the place going - a lot of people depend on the work of these people, wouldn't you agree?

An Italian director, very much a socialist, handled an interesting formula - all employees earned a very solid income, based on a (from memory) ratio of retrieving 60% of their contribution to the whole revenue of the company. Non-salaried overhead was around 25%, taxes on profit and corporation tax around 12% and he earned the 3% left after that (around 4 million euros a year). His justification was straightforward and incredibly fair - he employed hundreds of people and paid them a very generous salary, but without him, their jobs wouldn't exist. He also didn't flinch at paying full Italian taxes over his income.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 20:32   #54
Bob Arctor
Registered User
Bob Arctor's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Total Posts: 1,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbeliever View Post
Earnings are linked to performance. They may not be perfectly coupled to it, but they are certainly linked to it.
The field of high earners is not made up even primarily of "executives" anyway.
How many non-exec earners are on more than £350k? That's what Corbyn calculates the cap would be where the lowest paid are on £16k.

---------- Post added 10-01-2017 at 20:40 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by tzijlstra View Post
Is it? I always find this a very simple assumption that is common with socialists. Having worked with some people that run highly innovative companies (one of which was described as the dynamo of the Rheinland economy and created over 500 high-tech jobs in the area within 2 years) I know how much effort and work they put in to keep the place going - a lot of people depend on the work of these people, wouldn't you agree?

An Italian director, very much a socialist, handled an interesting formula - all employees earned a very solid income, based on a (from memory) ratio of retrieving 60% of their contribution to the whole revenue of the company. Non-salaried overhead was around 25%, taxes on profit and corporation tax around 12% and he earned the 3% left after that (around 4 million euros a year). His justification was straightforward and incredibly fair - he employed hundreds of people and paid them a very generous salary, but without him, their jobs wouldn't exist. He also didn't flinch at paying full Italian taxes over his income.
Apparently yes http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanada.../#3458a05c293a although as unbeliever says it's probably more accurate to say that exec pay is not strongly linked to performance, rather than not linked to performance at all. A 'negligible' link according to the Lancaster study

More recent study here https://www.ft.com/content/abc7085e-...3-7e34c07b46ef

You'll note in the FT article that Theresa May is also considering curbs on exec pay, business-hating socialist that she is.
_______
If I'd known it was harmless, I would have killed it myself

Last edited by Bob Arctor; 10-01-2017 at 20:42.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 20:45   #55
mossdog
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Total Posts: 3,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by tzijlstra View Post
Is it? I always find this a very simple assumption that is common with socialists. Having worked with some people that run highly innovative companies (one of which was described as the dynamo of the Rheinland economy and created over 500 high-tech jobs in the area within 2 years) I know how much effort and work they put in to keep the place going - a lot of people depend on the work of these people, wouldn't you agree?

An Italian director, very much a socialist, handled an interesting formula - all employees earned a very solid income, based on a (from memory) ratio of retrieving 60% of their contribution to the whole revenue of the company. Non-salaried overhead was around 25%, taxes on profit and corporation tax around 12% and he earned the 3% left after that (around 4 million euros a year). His justification was straightforward and incredibly fair - he employed hundreds of people and paid them a very generous salary, but without him, their jobs wouldn't exist. He also didn't flinch at paying full Italian taxes over his income.
..........but most socialists want to think every company boss is a so called fat cat like Phillip Green because it suits their take on Socialism!
Actually there may be more Phillip Greens drinking coffee and hiding in the public sector than we know about!..........I have met a few £150k types over the years that would not have lasted 6 weeks in some of the companies I have run.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 21:14   #56
BHRemovals
Registered User
BHRemovals's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 2,069
our CEO's earn more than there French , Dutch or German counterparts. WHY.
_______
Man and Van in Sheffield
Phone: 0114 2660829 — 07920 223518
Email: contact@broomhillremovals.com
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 21:24   #57
3 Tuns
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2017
Total Posts: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Arctor View Post
How many non-exec earners are on more than £350k? That's what Corbyn calculates the cap would be where the lowest paid are on £16k.
Well I suppose if a Brit founded the next Google, Apple or Microsoft and started to earn some serious wedge, he could always jump on the first plane out of here and take the business with him.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 21:26   #58
Jacktari
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2017
Location: Itinerant Yorkshireman
Total Posts: 666
I think Jezza is used to a more sedate kind of politics.
He seems to get flustered when confronted.
Not an ideal trait for a politician in this country at this time.
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 21:27   #59
unbeliever
Registered User
unbeliever's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: Sitting in front of my laptop
Total Posts: 8,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHRemovals View Post
our CEO's earn more than there French , Dutch or German counterparts. WHY.
Any evidence?
  Reply With Quote
10-01-2017, 21:37   #60
Mister M
Registered User
Mister M's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Location: In my own world
Total Posts: 8,547
Quote:
Originally Posted by BHRemovals View Post
our CEO's earn more than there French , Dutch or German counterparts. WHY.
Quote:
Originally Posted by unbeliever View Post
Any evidence?
Here you go

https://www.ft.com/content/585f41d4-...3-7e34c07b46ef

Study also fails to find link between higher pay and better performance.

---------- Post added 10-01-2017 at 21:53 ----------

Just clicked again on link to FT article &it's a pay per view so I'll copy & paste it here:


UK chief executives earn much more than European peers
Study also fails to find link between higher pay and better performance


Chief executives of big UK companies are part of a pay “premier league”, earning substantially more than their continental European peers.
But unlike in football, where total spending on players is reflected in team performance, paying a UK chief executive more does not guarantee improved results, according to new comparative research by Vlerick Business School’s Executive Remuneration Centre. Xavier Baeten, the centre’s founder, said: “People say ‘if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys’. Our study doesn’t show that you can pay peanuts, but it does show that you won’t get the best chief executives by overpaying them.” The study of 701 companies also found that UK chief executives receive a higher proportion of their total remuneration as variable pay, relative to continental European business leaders. Such bonuses and long-term incentive plans are often tied to earnings per share and total share holder return, which Prof Baeten warned could encourage short-termism and “may even be dangerous”. Executive pay has become a lightning rod for discontent about inequality and unfairness in the UK. Theresa May, the UK prime minister, has promised to tackle the problem, though last month the government watered down plans for an annual binding shareholder vote on pay at UK companies. The Vlerick study found that the median total pay, incentives and pension contributions of chief executives of the biggest UK companies by market value was €6.175m in 2015. That was almost 50 per cent higher than chief executives of similarly sized German companies, who were the next best paid, and almost one and a half times the overall earnings of chief executives at Sweden’s biggest companies. UK pay figures were translated into euros at the exchange rate before the referendum on Brexit, which has pushed down the value of sterling against the European currency.A higher percentage of chief executives in the UK received pay rises than those in Belgium, France, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands, which were the other countries studied. A total of 70 FTSE 100 chief executives saw an increase in short-term incentives in 2015, 73 saw long-term rewards increase, and all but two received a rise in fixed salary. The research also found that, across Europe, better performing companies do not pay their chief executives more. “Differences in pay are very clearly explained by difference in firm size, much more than by difference in performance,” said Prof Baeten. Well-paid executives occasionally echo that view. John Cryan, Deutsche Bank’s chief executive, told a conference in 2015 that he did not understand why he had a bonus clause in his contract, because “I will not work any harder or any less hard in any year, in any day because someone is going to pay me more or less”. The Vlerick research also points to the increasing complexity of executive pay. To take account of the various elements in remuneration reports at the 701 companies, researchers had to analyse 120,000 spreadsheet cells.
_______
"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/

Last edited by Mister M; 10-01-2017 at 21:54.
  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 03:43.
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