Although it was for TV, I would expect the guys to dumb down their actual salary, not overstate it. It's worth noting that the company boss knew what everyone declared to the TV, so there's no reason to doubt they're incorrect.Yep. I too would like to see a plumber who earns 74k a year.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/9393303/Show-Me-Your-Money-Channel-4-review.htmlSome of the high-earning plumbers, many of them earning £70-80,000 a year but some said to be on six figure salaries, were reluctant.
Are you a child?You earn £250k?
I want a pint of whatever he is drinking.I never really expected any counterargument from you, booger! Because you've no fückin' idea of what's going on? Because you've succumbed to the idea that Capitalism is the dog's bollix? Despite it (Capitalism) only actually advantaging all folks for 15 years (1950 to 1965) of its over 200-year reign? Ever thought about that, doobie? Typical!
An SO1 will probably have 15 years service behind him and will have been through considerable training and selection to get where he/she is. Compare and contrast to some of the more recently elected MPs. Some in early twenties, one hasn't even completed her degree. Most have been parachuted into safe seats due to family, party or union contacts after following a well practiced route of entry into politics.£74k is what an SO1 is earning, and well below market rates for many positions of similar responsibility in private sector. Most mo's are heavily indebted, as the cost of getting into the Commons is huge - they usually have to fund two or three election campaigns in no hope seats out of their pockets prior to getting a winable seat to run in. By the time they are there, they're usually in a lot of debt.
Its a harder job than it looks, you have to deal with the idiot public all day long - imagine the moonbat FOI people you sometimes see of the 'rmp abdicted my granny' variety, and you know what i mean. You are on call on antisocial hours for voting. Tou have limited to no say in your life, and expected to work seven days per week when required with both house and constituency business. Most mp's i've met seem permanently knackered from the job, which can best be summed up as a more glamorous version of being a punch bag for all and sundry.
I briefly looked into running for Parliament once and realised that i'd be taking on thousands in debt in return for years of dealing with voters, and no power to show for it unless i somehow stabbed enough people in the back to become a minister. I realised a far easier way to climb the greasy pole of backstabbing was to become a Greenjacket instead.
Posted from the ARRSE Mobile app (iOS or Android)
Totally agree here when you say "who calculates that" as it is fundamental to the argument. Oddly, while I don't think you shared his politics you have identified the same logical fallacy that Enoch often challenged when someone said that a particular price was "fair" or "unfair", with the counter question "who decides this price is fair or unfair?".You reckon that they’re worth more, but who actually calculates that? Many folks in normal jobs are genuinely worth far more than they get (nurses, firefighters, ambulance personnel, etc), but for some illogical reason, they’re subject to a different yardstick than managers and MPs. Why is that? And why do MPs get subsidised meals, drinks and many other perks, benefits and privileges that are entirely unique to their job? Why are they such a “special case” with outrageous claims for expenses that normal folks can only dream about? What MPs should be getting is the average wage with justifiable expenses. Then we really would get effective MPs who're there because they're dedicated to the cause of actually improving the lives of folks in the country.
This!!!The independent review panel come up with recommendations for MPs pay and MPs say they have to take it. Other pay review bodies last year recommended rises greater than 1% but the government gave them a BFO and either froze pay or gave a grudging 1%. But MPs pay can't be touched.
One rule for one, one for others. The venal, robbing barstewards!
Fair point, although there is a contradiction between those two statements. I do think that CMD is entirely within his right, given that IPSA is a new agency, to clarify it's remit. I would make such a clarification by issuing P45s all round, but no doubt it will be done gently over a glass of something...think CMD's reasoning for not contesting the IPSA's decision is that if he did, it wouldn't be very independent, would it?
He has already requested/recommended that they come up with an increase less liable to pi$$ off so many, but this decision has already been held over since the last Parliament.
True.CMD tells instead of asking, it undermines the concept of an 'Independent' Parliamentary Standards Authority
Perhaps they'd like to reduce their pensions like they've done to everyone else in the public sector. If everyone else's aren't affordable then I'm quite sure theirs aren't.The argument that if the pay is not high enough the talent will go elsewhere is tosh, see below as regards footballers and bankers, both highly paid.
The fact that no seat has as far as I am aware been empty or had a single candidate to contest it would appear to show that the current package is attracting applicants aplenty.
The late Mr Kennedy went from school to uni to HoC pretty much seamlessly as have many other MPs so I would like to know the going rate for a third year student is. £74k pa is a bit high for a first job no? Bearing in mind that MPs have only been paid since 1911 and no seats before that were empty due pay and conditions being poor.
Although the argument is used that MPs could get more in the real world that doesn't hold up for a couple of reasons:
Firstly how much would say Mr Blair have earned as a lawyer? Or Mr Kinnock as a college lecturer. Milord Patten as a reporter?
Secondly if they can earn huge amounts outside and are working as MPs I would point out that MPing is voluntary so maybe they are doing it from a sense of duty, NOT FOR THE CASH (MPs with integrity, who'd have thought it?)
As for it being an all consuming job, bah humbug. Many MPs have outside 'interests' which require time commitments. One I believe is also a working GP, strangely another job that that profession claims is all day every day.
Maybe if the HoC feels strongly about perhaps they'll go on strike.