The Student Room Group

Nick Clegg says he will limit executive pay

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Bobifier
I would be intrigued to know how you define meaningless, given that these 'meaningless' numbers caused a financial crisis that is still having ramifications everywhere now. If you consider affecting almost everyone in the entire western world over a course of years to be meaningless, I would be genuinely interested to know what you consider to be meaningful.


They caused a financial crises because someone decided an instrument would be worth something based on a model that they had based on risk assessments that a rating's agency gave based on no real foundation and coloured with bias due to the business model they employed.

I would be genuinely interested to know what you consider to be meaningful

Science and technology is what I consider meaningful. Doesn't mean I think there's no place for finance, just that it should not be supported by the government the way it has been.
Reply 41
Original post by james22
This interferes with supply and demand.


:rofl: Because it's such a perfect free market that is obviously working so well isn't it? :rolleyes:
Reply 42
Original post by PendulumBoB
Silly populist policies like this always do more harm than good.


Maybe so, but can the government really be seen to be doing nothing about it? It's unjust when it's to the extent that it is; British and american executives get paid many more times the amount of the average worker than in other countries like China and Japan, and they don't seem to have problems with their CEOs.
Reply 43
Original post by Tateco
:rofl: Because it's such a perfect free market that is obviously working so well isn't it? :rolleyes:


After some researrch I have seen that my comment was proably unfounded, however there is no need to be so patronizing.
Reply 44
Original post by ckingalt
I say let him do it. Then we will hire some of the UK's best talent when flee to nations that appreciate their contributions.


uh huh, they will flee...

Leaving their families, friends and the country they tell us they love... a minor sacrifice for MONEYYYYY!!!

EVERYTHING HAS A PRICE, EVEN SELLING YOUR FAMILY DOWN THE RIVER FOR A QUICK BUCK
Reply 45
Original post by Aj12
Sorry what does the private sector have to do with this? For that matter why should the government have anything to do with what private companies do with their cash?


To prevent exploitation, slavery and to make sure they pay their fair share since they use the country's public utilites and services - they don't pay for themselves
Reply 46
Original post by Square
this really is just a stunt to try and please the uneducated masses.

the government can and should do **** all about executive pay in the private sector.

let's not forget that these 'rich people' who are so deominised by morons on this site and in the guardian, the top 10% of earners account for over 50% of the entire income tax taking in this country, surely the 90% of the rest of us can pick up the rest. Are these people not contributing enough already?


No, the top few don't actually work for that money

they just charge the 90% more and more for doing anything imaginable, it doesn't take any skill to raise the number on prices
Reply 47
Original post by tehFrance
I have to ask but why do the government have to put limits on the pay that executives receive within the private sector? I get the public sector limits but the private sector? :confused:


Private sector CANNOT make money without the public sector

nothing wrong with paying for access to services the country provides... they certainly make sure everyone pays to access their services

make note, private and public are not separate or else it wouldnt have supposedly damaged the economy for one days strike
Reply 48
Argh, 40% tax not enough?
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 49
Original post by Taggart
why should there pay be cut, if their employees are suffering then why don't they just work harder and become an "executive", these people who earn millions didnt just randomly get the job, they are among the most intelligent hard working people in the world or they wouldn't be in those jobs.


Most people can very easily become a CEO

It's the company boss's decision to only have minimum CEOs or else the job of "CEO" will become a minimum wage job like the rest

Funny... for "the most intelligent hard working people in the world" They sure know how to fail at their job so badly they cause a worldwide recession and destroy billions of underpaid, overworked peoples lives

they really are the most intelligent, they can destroy the world, really ****ing SUCK at their jobs and still get paid billions in bonuses along with their salary

But no worries, just make the poor people pay (we don't stay rich by paying for our own mistakes)
Reply 50
Original post by M.R.
People actually support this? UK will lose a lot of talented people to other places in europe/Asia which are much more investment friendly and you will be the ones suffering when UK runs to the ground. A just system should reward aptitude.


We have talented people?

Flip me, I thought we were in a recession with record levels of unemployment

but seriously, any talent we had has already left due to lack of opportunity, underpayment for jobs that don't require connections/nepotism and falling living standards/rising living costs for recieving less
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 51
Original post by Disastor
uh huh, they will flee...

Leaving their families, friends and the country they tell us they love... a minor sacrifice for MONEYYYYY!!!

EVERYTHING HAS A PRICE, EVEN SELLING YOUR FAMILY DOWN THE RIVER FOR A QUICK BUCK


Well shoot! It didn't really consider there are in fact many providers who would otherwise leave in the face of unfair treatment, except that for some bringing their families would be impossible or impractical. That means you can really take advantage of them and they will still be trapped. What a great opportunity for all the people who want to benefit from the effort and good fortune of others.

So maybe it will work out for you, but don't try to be all righteous about it. It sounds as though you are the latter of the groups I referred to, and not the former.
Reply 52
Original post by Disastor
We have talented people?

Flip me, I thought we were in a recession with record levels of unemployment

but seriously, any talent we had has already left due to lack of opportunity, underpayment for jobs that don't require connections/nepotism and falling living standards/rising living costs for recieving less

Someone studying economics would know better, there are many different events that lead to the current state of the economy, I don't get why you imply that the vast majority of CEOs have had anything to do with this (besides just saying they don't do any work with no proof), or why it warrants slashing their salaries which come from the money they are making for their own companies.
Reply 53
British businesses probably agree with this it means they have an excuse to pay less to executives and have more for shareholders.

So in summary wants to lower the salary of the rich so that the very rich can have more.
Reply 54
Original post by ckingalt
Well shoot! It didn't really consider there are in fact many providers who would otherwise leave in the face of unfair treatment, except that for some bringing their families would be impossible or impractical. That means you can really take advantage of them and they will still be trapped. What a great opportunity for all the people who want to benefit from the effort and good fortune of others.

So maybe it will work out for you, but don't try to be all righteous about it. It sounds as though you are the latter of the groups I referred to, and not the former.


We would if we could cause after all, they do what they do out of the kindness of their hearts and not for the money...

nah, there is absolutely no evidence to support this but there is plenty of evidence to support the provider taking advantage of the people and apparently that is not a problem :smile:
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 55
Original post by Disastor
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16022162

To tell you the absolute truth, executive pay should have been the first to be cut since the rich won't starve as fast as their employees

Oh well, they are in charge and the poor, sick and disabled are vulnerable to upper class bullying bastards


Good those bankers need to be taught a lesson.
Reply 56
Original post by M.R.
Someone studying economics would know better, there are many different events that lead to the current state of the economy, I don't get why you imply that the vast majority of CEOs have had anything to do with this (besides just saying they don't do any work with no proof), or why it warrants slashing their salaries which come from the money they are making for their own companies.


Studying economics is just guesswork, for every claim made you can find an economist who claims the exact opposite

Plus, it's not like studying economics is valued by corporate bosses as there are plenty of unemployed graduates with degrees in economics so why should we value them?

As for CEO not doing any work? it's not hard to just raise prices and fire people to make any remaining staff cover the work they did, the CEO gets paid farrr too much for this
Reply 57
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
...productive industries - ones where we actually build and sell stuff rather than just push meaningless numbers around from one computer to another.



This is exactly right, however this country, the United States and the rest of Europe doesn't manufacture anymore, and they never will again because we don't have any natural resources.

It's cheaper in China, Vietnam and other SE Asian countries - not entirely by coincidence where all the world economic growth currently is.

The West, bar Canada (geographically) and Australia (politically) are majority service sectors which rely on confidence to sell. When confidence is low, money is too. A city banker can manipulate investors confidence in shares or bonds, but he can't conjure and destroy gold/silver/oil.

The more economic confidence drops (currency wise), the more people will ask for real things they can put their hands on; in an extreme case they could even bring back a gold standard. If this happened, the primary economies will explode into growth, and some European countries including ours which flogged our gold (Cheers Gordy) will be reduced to developing countries. Germany will probably be OK, AFAIK it's got quite a lot of manufacturing and plenty of gold. Let's hope David Cameron doesn't upset Angela Merkel anytime soon since she's the kin maker in this EU/Eurozone crisis.

Apologies for going off topic slightly but there isn't much to answer about the executive pay - it's more the bankers but some of them are amongst the most corrupt people in the world, but banking/Investment banking is based on manipulation; how else are they still earning these outrageous sums? If they capped exec pay it could end up doing more harm than good.
(edited 12 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending