Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

People in poorer parts of Britain to be paid less

Announcements Posted on
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Lady)
    £60k is an average income (depending on where you live).

    As najinaji said, an MP has a lot of responsibilities. Giving them a pay cut would make them even more inefficient.
    If you narrow the parameters enough you could say that about any income. To say that £60k is an average income depending on where in the UK you live is an absolutely meaningless statement especially when you're discussing the salaries of people who represent the whole of the UK. The average UK income is far lower than £60k.

    And as I've said in a previous post. MPs who are on 60k will not (on the whole) have a lot of say on matters of policy. They do in reality have a very limited amount of power. And as such have a very limited amount of responsibility.

    The MPs who do have power (and therefore responsibility) are payed significantly more than 60k. So the justification of it as a salary is ludicrous. Besides being an MP isn't the only job with responsibility. Take a teacher for example. Not only are they personally responsible for the safety of children in their classroom, they are also responsible for the quality of education their pupils receive. And by extension are very much responsible for what happens to their pupils after they leave school. Massive responsibility and a pretty **** salary.

    If a low level MP screws up. Other than maybe a media scandal not a lot really happens. As you've not had the power to screw anything that drastic up.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raducan)
    I think an issue with this is that it's going to discourage people from moving to poorer areas as they will essentially be 'trapped' and struggle to move to a richer area later, limiting overall economic mobility.

    I want to become a teacher after university, probably with Teach First. How on earth are they going to get people to apply for the Northern regions if those will mean they get paid less? Why would I stay in Leicester, if a 20 mile move to Nottingham would see me several thousand pounds more?
    Because relatively speaking, the money is the same. It's less in absolute terms, but costs are cheaper, so you end up being able to get the same amount of stuff with your money. In theory.

    (Original post by Raducan)
    This idea completely fails to take into account population mobility: it's as if Osborne actually wants to see an even bigger and more insurmountable rich-poor (more like poor-middle class) divide than there already is.
    But I think you're right about this. We should be trying to reduce the difference between rich and poor areas where as this will reinforce those differences. Although in relative terms your money is worth the same in your local area, it means you might end up stuck in that area. For example you might save up enough for a deposit on a house in the north of England, but that's not going to be anywhere near enough to afford a comparable house in south east England.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Why should public sector salaries be the same across the country, all set at the highest level?!

    Private sector salaries aren't?! This unfair damaging status quo drains staff from the much needed private sector who are unable to compete with the artificially high public sector wages. This puts up their costs making them economy uncompetitive internationally; further adding to our woes!

    Public sector again shielded from commercial realities the rest of us are subjected to.

    How can the unions claim this is anything other than greed? If the cost of living varies then overall everyone is getting the same amount of disposable income if they are paid according to living standards.

    What's the problem?!

    Death to the greedy unions!
    • Thread Starter
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanRBlake)
    Why should public sector salaries be the same across the country all set at the highest level?!

    Private sector salaries aren't?! This unfair damaging status quo drains staff from the much needed private sector unable to compete with the artificially high public sector wages. This puts up costs making the economy uncompetitive international further adding to our woes!

    Public sector again shielded from commercial realities the rest of us ate subjected to.

    How can the unions claim this is anything other than greed? If the cost of living varies then overall everyone is getting the same amount of disposable income if they are paid according to living standards.

    What's the problem?!

    Death to the greedy unions!
    Death to DanRBlake and the Tory voters! :mob:
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Biased articles are biased. They were whining when we made them have the same pensions as the rest of us, now they're bitching about having the same pay as every one of us. What's next, are they going to bitch about not being able to afford going to the cinema three times more than us or having to buy supermarket popcorn instead of cinema popcorn? It's not like these people were living off Asda smart price and now have to eat half as much, Jesus Christ.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Iron Lady)
    £60k is an average income (depending on where you live).

    As najinaji said, an MP has a lot of responsibilities. Giving them a pay cut would make them even more inefficient.
    Are you kidding me?..where? which areas?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jevon177)
    I honestly think this is a very bad idea, it can only worsen the North South divide and class divisions. Also, as far as I know.. say a Car is not cheaper in the North and neither is food or other items. One last thing, do you think the pay scale would be based off where your home address is, or where you actually work i.e. Central Manchester worker, but live in the suburbs.
    No you're right, house prices are the same in the North as in the South of course!

    Only the biggest expense you will ever have!

    The market in an area offers prices that the area can bear, why should public sector pay scales be immune to this reality? Especially when the people suject to this pay for the inflated salaries.

    The rest of the working population are subject to this, do you want a 2 tier system with public sector workers having preferential treatment?

    They already have more holidays, less hours, better pensions, easier jobs.

    Is having a featherbedded section of society out of kilter with the rest (who fund the featherbedded) fair?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scriggy)
    These plan's won't give more pay to anyone, they'll just give some people much less. It essentially translates as pay cuts for everyone outside the South East of England.
    No it restores fairness.

    These artificially higher wages drain staff from the private sector which is what we need to grow the economy and get out of labour's mess.

    This damages the competitiveness of an area and ultimately the country. Why would businesses invest in an area if they have to pay higher than average wages to compete with the public sector?!

    This national pay bargaining is past government policy; supported by the unions actually discouraging jobs and investment to an area which will ultimatley improve wealth and quality of life in poorer areas due to personal greed!
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jakemittle)
    Are you kidding me?..where? which areas?
    Kensington and Chelsea probably. Even the area to the south east of England has an average wage of £30,000 so I don't know what this ****er is talking about.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scriggy)
    Well they're talking about freezing wages until they fall in line with the private sector, so with inflation that translates into a pay cut.
    Why shouldn't the wages be at the same level as those in the private sector whose taxes must they pay them?

    All this means is that they been too high for too long.

    It's a perversion to have wages artificially higher in the public sector as it acts as a disincentive to go into the private sector which is what generates the wealth for the country which pays for the public sector.

    That is fundamentally wrong! It's like wanting a bigger fire to more keep people warm while removing the people adding the fuel.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sony-pony)
    Death to DanRBlake and the Tory voters! :mob:
    Ignore every point raised and cut straight to the death threats eh?!

    Not surprising from people with your stance!

    Before you point to my "death to the unions" It was in response to the OPs sign off.

    You however made a personal death threat and to millions of tory voters in the country who outnumber labour voters BTW!

    Thankfully confirming that some level of sanity exists in this country!
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    This is so Hypocritical.

    Tory Government want to penalise individuals for not working.

    Cuts wages for X individuals who do the same amount of work as Y individuals.

    and don't even get me started on child benefit and the Tax cut for the rich!

    I didnt like the tories before the election but saying that I didnt like labour either.

    Now I want Osbornes head on a stick outside the tower of London and the only party who i would have supported before the election have bastardised themselves.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by OSharp)
    This is so Hypocritical.

    Tory Government want to penalise individuals for not working.

    Cuts wages for X individuals who do the same amount of work as Y individuals.
    What's wrong with that if X individuals (public sector) are already getting paid more than Y individuals (private sector) who do the same amount of work as them?

    That is correcting an injustice introducing fairness surely.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    so your saying that two wrongs make a right?

    There's alot of differences, the very fact that they can be paid whatever the hell their employers want because they are in the private sector is Cardinal, many people chose to work for the public sector for this reason. I'm not compared to side up on this issue until the full picture is seen, though its true the private sector may earn less base pay its also entirely possible that overtime pay, bonuses and holidays are longer promotion prospects may also be better. Im not saying its right that Private sector workers get paid less I am saying that if two public sector workers do the same job they should get the same pay.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jakemittle)
    Are you kidding me?..where? which areas?
    Downing Street

    I can't imagine there being many significantly large areas where the average earning is £60k. That's quite a lot. Household earnings possibly, considering many homes will have 2 or more people working. Still seems like a lot.

    Maybe there are some places with a few really, really rich people that push the mean average up. But typically you use the median for things like this.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DanRBlake)
    What's wrong with that if X individuals (public sector) are already getting paid more than Y individuals (private sector) who do the same amount of work as them?

    That is correcting an injustice introducing fairness surely.
    Nah, he's being selective about the payment differences. He's comparing his public sector friends down south to those up north. As usual they've ignored the private sector.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Snagprophet)
    Kensington and Chelsea probably. Even the area to the south east of England has an average wage of £30,000 so I don't know what this ****er is talking about.
    Kensington and Chelsea..you mean the richest area in London :P come on now
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jakemittle)
    Kensington and Chelsea..you mean the richest area in London :P come on now
    Well where else will the average person earns £60,000, apart from a random village?
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Left Hand Drive)
    How much do MP's earn? This should be the first wage to be cut!
    Very little, only about £60k.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Typical blinkered leftie reponses... property values in London are literally twice those in certain areas of the North so Londoners should be paid more.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: March 23, 2012
New on TSR

Student crowdfunds degree

Graduate raises £26,000 online for Masters course

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.