Politics

[Sweep]

24 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

 

Nearly as thick as your point of view... and paying bankers big bonuses has nowt to do with cost of living crisis so I am not sure why the 2 are being conflated. 

He knows, as ever, he's just looking to have an argument

[mickbrown]

6 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Who are you to decide what cap is "perfectly fine" - what parameters are you using when you work out what level of cap is sufficient for an individual?

Am I wrong in thinking that the present cap is double their salary?

[Sweep]

9 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

He's fibbing to you.

Indeed, although earning £250K per year, you do lose a whopping £105K of that in tax and NI, which is well over 40%, which is a massive kick in the knackers.

 

 

[Cheese]

14 minutes ago, Sweep said:

"There's a massive cost of living crisis, let's limit the amount of income tax we can take" is one of the thickest arguments I've ever heard

The Government would receive far more tax revenue by increasing public salaries rather than removing the cap on Banker bonuses, just for that cash to be syphoned off into off-shore Tax Havens anyway. Have you been in a coma for 12 years?

Edited September 15, 2022 by Cheese

[mickbrown]

2 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Indeed, although earning £250K per year, you do lose a whopping £105K of that in tax and NI, which is well over 40%, which is a massive kick in the knackers.

 

 

I'm sure they'll cope.

[Sweep]

6 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Am I wrong in thinking that the present cap is double their salary?

The cap is set at double their salary yes. I have a mate who works for one of the big finance houses - his basic is only £80K, and last year he got full bones of £80K (split between cash and shares) - people like Farreli are saying he shouldn't be allowed to earn any more.

[Sweep]

2 minutes ago, Cheese said:

The Government would receive far more income tax by increasing public salaries rather than removing the cap on Banker bonuses, just for that cash to be syphoned off into off-shore Tax Havens anyway. Have you been in a coma for 12 years?

Can the Government not do both?  -  how much somebody is paid working in the private sector has got fuck all to do with what the Government decide to pay those in the private sector.

We're all having our pay reviews at work next month - should I tell my boss that we don't deserve any extra money, because nurses aren't paid enough?

.

[mickbrown]

6 minutes ago, Sweep said:

The cap is set at double their salary yes. I have a mate who works for one of the big finance houses - his basic is only £80K, and last year he got full bones of £80K (split between cash and shares) - people like Farreli are saying he shouldn't be allowed to earn any more.

So he could have got 160k bonus?

[mickbrown]

Isn't the fact there's a cap in place because we bailed out their sorry arses after the banking crash?

[Sweep]

Just now, mickbrown said:

So he could have got 160k bonus?

I'm not 100% sure - it might be the terms of his particular contract - he basically can't do more than double his wage. He's in Pensions, which may be a bit different to actual banking   - either way, it's nuts that his bonus is capped. By his own admission, once he hit the 100% mark, with about 2 months to go, he just took his foot off the gas, as there was no point busting a gut, as he'd not get anymore reward for it.

I can see why some don't agree with the cap being removed, I just personally, as stated above, don't think anybody should have their potential earnings capped. I've said at work, I'd rather we paid our sale sales people £100 a week and then everything else was paid based on performance (which is ultimately results)....but sadly, that's not legal anymore.

 

The removal of any cap, whilst the timing may not be great, has absolutely fuck all to do with any cost of living crisis and/or what public sector employees are paid though

[Sweep]

4 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Isn't the fact there's a cap in place because we bailed out their sorry arses after the banking crash?

I honestly don't know, sounds likely. 

[Farrelli]

27 minutes ago, Sweep said:

Who are you to decide what cap is "perfectly fine" - what parameters are you using when you work out what level of cap is sufficient for an individual?

The cap was made to protect the global economy from financial institutions paying ridiculous bonuses and gambling on cheap credit like that which caused the crash in 2008. If you don’t like it I suggest you take it up with those that implemented the cap. I’m satisfied it is a reasonable safeguard.

[Farrelli]

19 minutes ago, Sweep said:

The cap is set at double their salary yes. I have a mate who works for one of the big finance houses - his basic is only £80K, and last year he got full bones of £80K (split between cash and shares) - people like Farreli are saying he shouldn't be allowed to earn any more.

What a shame, he has two options like it or get a higher paid job. 

[Not in Crawley]

17 minutes ago, Sweep said:

The cap is set at double their salary yes. I have a mate who works for one of the big finance houses - his basic is only £80K, and last year he got full bones of £80K (split between cash and shares) - people like Farreli are saying he shouldn't be allowed to earn any more.

Only 80K? My heart bleeds.

Got a friend, bought his massive house with bonuses said from his basic and did a pretty standard job in the city with RBS.

Got no sympathy with 'bankers' - many of whom aren't anything special (this one got a 2:2 in History from Newcastle) but we inflate their jobs.

Listen I'm not earning much shy of 80, and we're not living a lavish lifestyle, but what sticks in people's thought is that our 'market' values these average jobs more than others, and therein lies the imbalance.

[Sweep]

1 minute ago, Farrelli said:

The cap was made to protect the global economy from financial institutions paying ridiculous bonuses and gambling on cheap credit like that which caused the crash in 2008. If you don’t like it I suggest you take it up with those that implemented the cap. I’m satisfied it is a reasonable safeguard.

I'm not keen on it, as I don't like the thought of people being restricted in what they can earn if they are good at their job, but it doesn't affect me as I'm not in that particluar industry and I'm not capped on my earnings.

I'm assuming, when the cap is scrapped, as you're so upset about it, that you'll be taking it up with the Government?

 

[Farrelli]

Just now, Sweep said:

I'm not keen on it, as I don't like the thought of people being restricted in what they can earn if they are good at their job, but it doesn't affect me as I'm not in that particluar industry and I'm not capped on my earnings.

I'm assuming, when the cap is scrapped, as you're so upset about it, that you'll be taking it up with the Government?

 

All I have is a vote the same as everyone else.

[Mounts Kipper]

1 minute ago, Not in Crawley said:

Only 80K? My heart bleeds.

Got a friend, bought his massive house with bonuses said from his basic and did a pretty standard job in the city with RBS.

Got no sympathy with 'bankers' - many of whom aren't anything special (this one got a 2:2 in History from Newcastle) but we inflate their jobs.

Listen I'm not earning much shy of 80, and we're not living a lavish lifestyle, but what sticks in people's thought is that our 'market' values these average jobs more than others, and therein lies the imbalance.

Go take a job in banking then. Limiting folks earnings is absolutely bonkers.  

[Sweep]

2 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

What a shame, he has two options like it or get a higher paid job. 

Indeed, and I think he's quite happy at present as he's pretty lazy and only has to work about 30 hours per week, he's on a fairly cushy number

But to be clear - you're saying 100%, he should not ever, ever be allowed to earn anything extra than he does now, if he stays in his current job.......based, I'm assuming, on your thoughts that he doesn't need anymore.

[mickbrown]

1 minute ago, Sweep said:

I'm not 100% sure - it might be the terms of his particular contract - he basically can't do more than double his wage. He's in Pensions, which may be a bit different to actual banking   - either way, it's nuts that his bonus is capped. By his own admission, once he hit the 100% mark, with about 2 months to go, he just took his foot off the gas, as there was no point busting a gut, as he'd not get anymore reward for it.

I can see why some don't agree with the cap being removed, I just personally, as stated above, don't think anybody should have their potential earnings capped. I've said at work, I'd rather we paid our sale sales people £100 a week and then everything else was paid based on performance (which is ultimately results)....but sadly, that's not legal anymore.

 

The removal of any cap, whilst the timing may not be great, has absolutely fuck all to do with any cost of living crisis and/or what public sector employees are paid though

Nobody was linking the cap with cost of living. Just Mounts being  fucking thick for a change. The point people were making was the message it sends out. Everybody else's  pay must be limited to avoid an  inflationary spiral but these fuckers can have more than 200% of their salary? Aye alright. Guess where the Chancellor used to work? 

Personally double your salary in bonus seems plenty to me and unless it's causing a massive shortage in personnel (which it ain't) I'd leave it

If they do decide to up sticks and fuck off (they rarely do), then fuck em. They'll be plenty of folk happy with a 200% bonus to replace them.

 

[Farrelli]

Just now, Sweep said:

Indeed, and I think he's quite happy at present as he's pretty lazy and only has to work about 30 hours per week, he's on a fairly cushy number

But to be clear - you're saying 100%, he should not ever, ever be allowed to earn anything extra than he does now, if he stays in his current job.......based, I'm assuming, on your thoughts that he doesn't need anymore.

I’ve never said anything of the sort. I agree with the cap as a safeguard for financial institutions. If he gets himself a major increase on his basic salary well done to him.

[Farrelli]

2 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Nobody was linking the cap with cost of living. Just Mounts being  fucking thick for a change. The point people were making was the message it sends out. Everybody else's  pay must be limited to avoid an  inflationary spiral but these fuckers can have more than 200% of their salary? Aye alright. Guess where the Chancellor used to work? 

Personally double your salary in bonus seems plenty to me and unless it's causing a massive shortage in personnel (which it ain't) I'd leave it

If they do decide to up sticks and fuck off (they rarely do), then fuck em. They'll be plenty of folk happy with a 200% bonus to replace them.

 

👍

[tomski]

46 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

He's fibbing to you.

To be fair was a few year back and I can’t remember word for word so you might be right but the point still stands even if we split hair on percentages.

[Sweep]

2 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

Nobody was linking the cap with cost of living. Just Mounts being  fucking thick for a change. The point people were making was the message it sends out. Everybody else's  pay must be limited to avoid an  inflationary spiral but these fuckers can have more than 200% of their salary? Aye alright. Guess where the Chancellor used to work? 

Personally double your salary in bonus seems plenty to me and unless it's causing a massive shortage in personnel (which it ain't) I'd leave it

If they do decide to up sticks and fuck off (they rarely do), then fuck em. They'll be plenty of folk happy with a 200% bonus to replace them.

 

I think Cheese decided to mention the cost of living crisis and the cap together, not Mounts.

I do agree with you about the timing (and the message it sends out) - but if Florist in Grimsby is going to get shirty about how much a banker in London earns, they can just fuck off.

As Farrelli alludes to above, we all have a vote, so if they remove the cap, then we as a collective get to vote in a party that will put it back on in circa 2 years (if any of the major parties put it in their manifesto)

[Not in Crawley]

7 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Go take a job in banking then. Limiting folks earnings is absolutely bonkers.  

Mick got the response in first

[mickbrown]

Just now, Sweep said:

I think Cheese decided to mention the cost of living crisis and the cap together, not Mounts.

I do agree with you about the timing (and the message it sends out) - but if Florist in Grimsby is going to get shirty about how much a banker in London earns, they can just fuck off.

As Farrelli alludes to above, we all have a vote, so if they remove the cap, then we as a collective get to vote in a party that will put it back on in circa 2 years (if any of the major parties put it in their manifesto)

Cheese mentioned it, Mounts papped on about him conflating the two. Which I'm pretty sure he didn't.