Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Capped at the national average excluding unemployed if they are taken into account when getting the average...idk.lol

    We are paying their wages, so why should we pay them more than the average person? It doesn't make any sense.

    For a start it gets rid of the dead wood career politicians who can't think of anything else they can do that gets them £70k+ a year or what ever they earn these days.lol

    We would get MPs who actually want to be there, not some Oxbridge graduate who wants their name in the paper.

    When you think about it, nobody should actually complain (maybe the liberals but they are basically finished as a party now anyway) after all, Labour will look hypocritical if they refuse to work for the average wage while the preach about equality etc. Torries will simply look greedy as most are from well off backgrounds anyway, not to mention they too will look hypocritical refusing to live off a wage which is apparently so easy to do.

    I mean, I find it funny they are cutting all these wages, jobs, pensions etc. yet no one seems to question why they don't take a decent cut out of their out pocket? Seems they are the only people immune to the cuts. Irish TDs took pay cuts of a few thousand euro (how thoughtful) so why can't MPs take a cut to the average wage?

    If not a pay cut, then their pay would remain at £70k+ but they would only receive the national wage. The rest would be donated to their party or to some kind of fund in their constituency, so at least their voters are repaid. Sinn Fein can do it, so why can't everyone else? For ex-terrorists, they sure do set an example.lol
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bestofyou)
    Capped at the national average excluding unemployed if they are taken into account when getting the average...idk.lol

    We are paying their wages, so why should we pay them more than the average person? It doesn't make any sense.

    For a start it gets rid of the dead wood career politicians who can't think of anything else they can do that gets them £70k+ a year or what ever they earn these days.lol

    We would get MPs who actually want to be there, not some Oxbridge graduate who wants their name in the paper.

    When you think about it, nobody should actually complain (maybe the liberals but they are basically finished as a party now anyway) after all, Labour will look hypocritical if they refuse to work for the average wage while the preach about equality etc. Torries will simply look greedy as most are from well off backgrounds anyway, not to mention they too will look hypocritical refusing to live off a wage which is apparently so easy to do.

    I mean, I find it funny they are cutting all these wages, jobs, pensions etc. yet no one seems to question why they don't take a decent cut out of their out pocket? Seems they are the only people immune to the cuts. Irish TDs took pay cuts of a few thousand euro (how thoughtful) so why can't MPs take a cut to the average wage?

    If not a pay cut, then their pay would remain at £70k+ but they would only receive the national wage. The rest would be donated to their party or to some kind of fund in their constituency, so at least their voters are repaid. Sinn Fein can do it, so why can't everyone else? For ex-terrorists, they sure do set an example.lol
    Maybe they should do this when the following happens:

    1) MPs work only average hours of the week;

    2) MPs only do the average amount of travel per week;

    3) MPs only have the same difficulty of job as the average person;

    4) When all workers' careers could very conceivably end within 5 years;

    5) When no other employment offers a long term pension; or

    6) When MPs no longer make important decisions beyond whatever the average worker makes.

    The truth is that MPs work very hard and very long hours. When compared to the average salary of someone of each MP's experience and educational attainment, MPs are actually paid pretty poorly.

    In addition, being an MP is in theory a temporary position. Each could lose their careers every election. If this fact is enough to justify high footballers' salaries, surely it works for politicians?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    They should be capped the same amount as other public sector workers
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The lesson from history is that if you underpay politicians they will use their influence to make money in ways that could be damaging to the country.

    Saying that I'm not sure how I feel about the issue.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    Maybe they should do this when the following happens:

    1) MPs work only average hours of the week;

    2) MPs only do the average amount of travel per week;

    3) MPs only have the same difficulty of job as the average person;

    4) When all workers' careers could very conceivably end within 5 years;

    5) When no other employment offers a long term pension; or

    6) When MPs no longer make important decisions beyond whatever the average worker makes.

    The truth is that MPs work very hard and very long hours. When compared to the average salary of someone of each MP's experience and educational attainment, MPs are actually paid pretty poorly.

    In addition, being an MP is in theory a temporary position. Each could lose their careers every election. If this fact is enough to justify high footballers' salaries, surely it works for politicians?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I was going to make a list of reasons but here it is done for me.

    Basically: It's not an average job.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    1) MPs work only average hours of the week;
    Anti-social hours are part of the job. Give them an over-time rate if needs be. I worked 0630-2000 6 days a week. I can tell you it was far from £70k a year I earned.


    2) MPs only do the average amount of travel per week;
    Yeah actually, I can understand how annoying it would be to have to leave the dull wet and cold UK for a 12hour 1st class flight to Singapore or where ever, not having to spend a penny too. Poor MPs. There are also domestic flights all across the UK, it doesn't cost them to travel.


    3) MPs only have the same difficulty of job as the average person;
    Well currently they are doing a pretty ****ty job, so they can't be working too hard can they. If their wage reflected the national average I suspect they might do a little more to increase that average.


    4) When all workers' careers could very conceivably end within 5 years;
    A, plenty of other jobs you can get after a time in government. B, if you aren't re-elected you haven't done enough for your constituency. If you can't make the grade you lose your job, the same goes for everywhere, at least MPs are guaranteed 4/5 years, something that few others can enjoy.


    5) When no other employment offers a long term pension;
    So what is wrong with this luxurious state pension that was so ****ing luxurious it needed to be cut?


    6) When MPs no longer make important decisions beyond whatever the average worker makes.
    A builder can make a wrong decision and build an unstable house which could kill an entire family.

    'Important' is subjective. If you use it in one case it can and will be applied to others.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    I'd happily do the job for circa 18k as i'm sure many would.
    Its the pride of representing your population on a national scale and being able to make important decisions that the job should be about. Not the nice fat paycheck.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bestofyou)
    Capped at the national average excluding unemployed if they are taken into account when getting the average...idk.lol

    We are paying their wages, so why should we pay them more than the average person? It doesn't make any sense.

    For a start it gets rid of the dead wood career politicians who can't think of anything else they can do that gets them £70k+ a year or what ever they earn these days.lol

    We would get MPs who actually want to be there, not some Oxbridge graduate who wants their name in the paper.

    When you think about it, nobody should actually complain (maybe the liberals but they are basically finished as a party now anyway) after all, Labour will look hypocritical if they refuse to work for the average wage while the preach about equality etc. Torries will simply look greedy as most are from well off backgrounds anyway, not to mention they too will look hypocritical refusing to live off a wage which is apparently so easy to do.

    I mean, I find it funny they are cutting all these wages, jobs, pensions etc. yet no one seems to question why they don't take a decent cut out of their out pocket? Seems they are the only people immune to the cuts. Irish TDs took pay cuts of a few thousand euro (how thoughtful) so why can't MPs take a cut to the average wage?

    If not a pay cut, then their pay would remain at £70k+ but they would only receive the national wage. The rest would be donated to their party or to some kind of fund in their constituency, so at least their voters are repaid. Sinn Fein can do it, so why can't everyone else? For ex-terrorists, they sure do set an example.lol
    You think like a child!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    They do a very stressful, often difficult job that take a lot of hard work to get. They make a lot of sacrifices especially concerning their personal privacy. Why do they not deserve to be paid more?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bestofyou)
    Anti-social hours are part of the job. Give them an over-time rate if needs be. I worked 0630-2000 6 days a week. I can tell you it was far from £70k a year I earned.



    Yeah actually, I can understand how annoying it would be to have to leave the dull wet and cold UK for a 12hour 1st class flight to Singapore or where ever, not having to spend a penny too. Poor MPs. There are also domestic flights all across the UK, it doesn't cost them to travel.



    Well currently they are doing a pretty ****ty job, so they can't be working too hard can they. If their wage reflected the national average I suspect they might do a little more to increase that average.



    A, plenty of other jobs you can get after a time in government. B, if you aren't re-elected you haven't done enough for your constituency. If you can't make the grade you lose your job, the same goes for everywhere, at least MPs are guaranteed 4/5 years, something that few others can enjoy.



    So what is wrong with this luxurious state pension that was so ****ing luxurious it needed to be cut?



    A builder can make a wrong decision and build an unstable house which could kill an entire family.

    'Important' is subjective. If you use it in one case it can and will be applied to others.
    This post demonstrated your immature, child like reasoning.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LexiswasmyNexis)
    Maybe they should do this when the following happens:

    1) MPs work only average hours of the week;

    2) MPs only do the average amount of travel per week;

    3) MPs only have the same difficulty of job as the average person;

    4) When all workers' careers could very conceivably end within 5 years;

    5) When no other employment offers a long term pension; or

    6) When MPs no longer make important decisions beyond whatever the average worker makes.

    The truth is that MPs work very hard and very long hours. When compared to the average salary of someone of each MP's experience and educational attainment, MPs are actually paid pretty poorly.

    In addition, being an MP is in theory a temporary position. Each could lose their careers every election. If this fact is enough to justify high footballers' salaries, surely it works for politicians? […]
    I will address your legitimate points.

    1 – Most people work more than full-time hours and receive no pay for it. Take anyone working in education or health as a perfect example; the latter often working 12 hour shifts. Likewise, lots of people work unsocial hours and get paid for appropriate remuneration (e.g. healthcare workers and prison officers). All these do a far more useful job than MPs.

    4 - Completely irrelevant. My last contract was four months, then extended by another two. Lots of public service workers have contracts running from one tax year to the next. Lots of graduate schemes are contracted for two years. Yet they get paid three times more than the average graduate, have no personal expenses, and have a budget to employ staff to do the donkey work for them.

    6 – This is actually laughable. Most MPs make no decisions whatsoever. Even those that do are not accountable for their decisions (e.g. those in committees or responsible for running something). Unless they are imprisoned or do something negligent to force an by-election, they could do literally nothing for five years and simply milk the system as many in safe seats do. The whole thing is farcical.

    Your point about their educational attainment and experience is laughable. Lots of MPs have very little or no work experience outside of politics and most are merely graduates. Most are unqualified for the roles they take (Michael Gove is a perfect example). Likewise, your point about footballers is completely irrelevant. We pay to be represented by idiots. If you do not like football then you do not have to pay anything towards their wages. But unlike politicians, footballers are actually skilled and held accountable for their performance.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evantej)
    I will address your legitimate points.

    1 – Most people work more than full-time hours and receive no pay for it. Take anyone working in education or health as a perfect example; the latter often working 12 hour shifts. Likewise, lots of people work unsocial hours and get paid for appropriate remuneration (e.g. healthcare workers and prison officers). All these do a far more useful job than MPs.

    4 - Completely irrelevant. My last contract was four months, then extended by another two. Lots of public service workers have contracts running from one tax year to the next. Lots of graduate schemes are contracted for two years. Yet they get paid three times more than the average graduate, have no personal expenses, and have a budget to employ staff to do the donkey work for them.

    6 – This is actually laughable. Most MPs make no decisions whatsoever. Even those that do are not accountable for their decisions (e.g. those in committees or responsible for running something). Unless they are imprisoned or do something negligent to force an by-election, they could do literally nothing for five years and simply milk the system as many in safe seats do. The whole thing is farcical.

    Your point about their educational attainment and experience is laughable. Lots of MPs have very little or no work experience outside of politics and most are merely graduates. Most are unqualified for the roles they take (Michael Gove is a perfect example). Likewise, your point about footballers is completely irrelevant. We pay to be represented by idiots. If you do not like football then you do not have to pay anything towards their wages. But unlike politicians, footballers are actually skilled and held accountable for their performance.
    Let me get this straight... You ask for views and then don't engage with them? I never said I agreed with what I posted- I just offered counter points.

    MEGA EDIT- sorry I mis-attributed your response.


    *hangs head*


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    This post demonstrated your immature, child like reasoning.
    Do not be so patronising. His points are perfectly valid.

    The whole political system is farcical. The only politicians who do anything worthwhile are local councillors who often do not get a wage and can only claim expenses up to something like £15,000. My local council pays councillors a basic allowance of £12,624 per year. They get paid a responsibility allowance if they have more work and claim for basic travel and subsistence on an individual basis. For example, my local councillor only got his basic allowance last year. He is far better value for money than my local MP.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evantej)
    We pay to be represented by idiots.
    That we choose..
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evantej)
    Do not be so patronising. His points are perfectly valid.

    The whole political system is farcical. The only politicians who do anything worthwhile are local councillors who often do not get a wage and can only claim expenses up to something like £15,000. My local council pays councillors a basic allowance of £12,624 per year. They get paid a responsibility allowance if they have more work and claim for basic travel and subsistence on an individual basis. For example, my local councillor only got his basic allowance last year. He is far better value for money than my local MP.
    Oh please, go crawl back under your rock. I was not talking to you, and regardless of whether or not his points are valid (they aren't), his pathetic and offensive comments clearly show he's not someone worth listening too.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Oh please, go crawl back under your rock. I was not talking to you, and regardless of whether or not his points are valid (they aren't), his pathetic and offensive comments clearly show he's not someone worth listening too.
    And you're really proving yourself to be better...
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anonstudent1)
    And you're really proving yourself to be better...
    Was that a question? If you can't read a post in context, that's your problem.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1011)
    Oh please, go crawl back under your rock. I was not talking to you, and regardless of whether or not his points are valid (they aren't), his pathetic and offensive comments clearly show he's not someone worth listening too.
    The OP has 'immature, child like reasoning'. His points are invalid. He is pathetic and offensive and not someone worth listening to. All because you say so...

    Now anonstudent1 is stupid for failing to understand your irrational hatred...

    Explain why bestofyou is wrong.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Idle)
    That we choose..
    Do we though? I think you seriously overemphasis the effectiveness of our democratic process, which most people choose not engage with out of complete apathy. That tells you a lot.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by evantej)
    Do we though? I think you seriously overemphasis the effectiveness of our democratic process, which most people choose not engage with out of complete apathy. That tells you a lot.
    It's not a perfect system but if people choose not to engage they don't have much right to then moan if their views are not represented.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.