James. Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 I think £110,000 is fair, if we dont pay them well we lose our best ones to the EU while it's there. They hold weekend surgerys as well, the idea MP's do nothing all day couldn't be further from the truth. I've said before on here that I'd pay them double and just have less of them. Might actually attract half decent talent then as opposed to the corrupt, inept, self-serving, egotistical, unskilled idiots currently in office.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Seems pointless, who'd trust an MP as their doctor? They only talk not actually do anything. So maybe Psychologist would be better. I've said before on here that I'd pay them double and just have less of them. Might actually attract half decent talent then as opposed to the corrupt, inept, self-serving, egotistical, unskilled idiots currently in office. Or just money loving pigs.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 you may want politicians who make policy and decisions for the country because it earns them big money. I'd prefer politicians who do it because they think it's the right thing to do. It shouldn't be treated as a privatised market otherwise you'll get the inevitable crash when which is the ultimate destination of all capitalism.
ADK Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Good luck with that. If i do a job for someone i'd expect to be paid the going rate.
Guest BlueBrett Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 think £110,000 is fair, if we dont pay them well we lose our best ones to the EU while it's there. Best ones? What does that mean? All they have to do is listen to their constituents and turn up to debates and votes - which many of them fail to do unless subjected to a 3 line whip. At least half of the population could do it with ease.
davieG Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Good luck with that. If i do a job for someone i'd expect to be paid the going rate. Err it is the going rate, when they apply to become a candidate and stand for election they know what the pay is just like anyone else applying for a job. Maybe they deserve a rise in-line with inflation but why should they be treated as special when everyone else is expected to accept the going rate or look for another job. Like any other role supply and demand is what is preached, well when there's a shortage of candidates and they can't find enough people who want to be an MP then that might be the time to reconsider the salary structure until then they should shut up or resign.
Jon the Hat Posted 19 October 2012 Author Posted 19 October 2012 I would not be an MP for £65k, and I not sure I would for £110k either. As a middle ranking professional I have much better earning prospects outside politics, and a hell of a lot less stress and intrusion. I have sometimes thought that it would be good to be involved, and I think I could bring a lot to the job, but the hassle that comes with it is simply too much. I can imagine a lot of others would feel the same.
ADK Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Err it is the going rate, when they apply to become a candidate and stand for election they know what the pay is just like anyone else applying for a job. Maybe they deserve a rise in-line with inflation but why should they be treated as special when everyone else is expected to accept the going rate or look for another job. Like any other role supply and demand is what is preached, well when there's a shortage of candidates and they can't find enough people who want to be an MP then that might be the time to reconsider the salary structure until then they should shut up or resign. My point is that the going rate in the private sector for people with the knowledge and leadership skills required to be great politicians (both in terms of winning an election and being good at the job) is much higher. Therefore those people with talent run companies or work elsewhere and politics is entirely full of bullshitters. Not saying the system is perfect or anything but that's the theory.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Good luck with that. If i do a job for someone i'd expect to be paid the going rate. Well the going rate is a very high £65K plus expenses. But merely your view that being a politician is the same as being any other employee is to me, ridiculous. There are many people who shouldn't be given the power to decide a nation's fate and many of those are high paid employees.
Jon the Hat Posted 19 October 2012 Author Posted 19 October 2012 Best ones? What does that mean? All they have to do is listen to their constituents and turn up to debates and votes - which many of them fail to do unless subjected to a 3 line whip. At least half of the population could do it with ease. I look forward to seeing you in Parliament. Good luck!
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 I would not be an MP for £65k, and I not sure I would for £110k either. As a middle ranking professional I have much better earning prospects outside politics, and a hell of a lot less stress and intrusion. I have sometimes thought that it would be good to be involved, and I think I could bring a lot to the job, but the hassle that comes with it is simply too much. I can imagine a lot of others would feel the same. Which makes you unfit to be a politician. Don't worry about it. Continue earning your ridiculous wage for less stress and intrusion.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 I look forward to seeing you in Parliament. Good luck! Again you seem to be confused. You don't really think that all of those politicians in parliament are any good at what they do , do you? But paying extra money for a job that many do want to do won't imrove the those doing the job.
Guest MattP Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Which makes you unfit to be a politician. Don't worry about it. Continue earning your ridiculous wage for less stress and intrusion. Ridiculous? 65k isn't exactly much in this day and age is it for someone the age of your average politician?
davieG Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 My point is that the going rate in the private sector for people with the knowledge and leadership skills required to be great politicians (both in terms of winning an election and being good at the job) is much higher. Therefore those people with talent run companies or work elsewhere and politics is entirely full of bullshitters. Not saying the system is perfect or anything but that's the theory. But those people in the private sector have to prove they have the abilities you mention and go through stringent recruitment processes where their qualifications and experience are vetted. None of that applies to MPs and judging from some of the rubbish some come out with, the mess they make of things, the complete lack of integrity many show they obviously haven't got the skills you mention and therefore wouldn't get a job in the private sector at the level you suggest. When the day comes that they have to prove they have those skills before being considered for election maybe that will be the time to reconsider until then if they want more money then like everyone else they should look for another job in life.
ADK Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 But those people in the private sector have to prove they have the abilities you mention and go through stringent recruitment processes where their qualifications and experience are vetted. None of that applies to MPs and judging from some of the rubbish some come out with, the mess they make of things, the complete lack of integrity many show they obviously haven't got the skills you mention and therefore wouldn't get a job in the private sector at the level you suggest. When the day comes that they have to prove they have those skills before being considered for election maybe that will be the time to reconsider until then if they want more money then like everyone else they should look for another job in life. Thats one way of looking at it i suppose. That most Mp's are public schoolboys too thick to get a job in the real world. My point was that i wouldn't be tempted to even try to be an mp unless they were well paid. That dosn't solve the problem of the best candidates not being elected But what is the solution? How can we have a democracy where candidates are elected on merit? Who has the authority to vet the candidates and make an unbiased judgement? This is my problem with democracy.
Jon the Hat Posted 19 October 2012 Author Posted 19 October 2012 Which makes you unfit to be a politician. Don't worry about it. Continue earning your ridiculous wage for less stress and intrusion. Haha. Well unlike your views on said politicians I need plenty of qualifications, skills and experience for my job, and it certainly isn't stress free. It does however have the benefit of its perfomance being judged by people who know something about the role, rather than the public who it seems know very little about the role, workload and pressures of being an MP.
Guest MattP Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Thats one way of looking at it i suppose. That most Mp's are public schoolboys too thick to get a job in the real world. If that's the case why do Public schools get better grades than State schools?
Guest BlueBrett Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 I look forward to seeing you in Parliament. Good to know I can count on your vote
Jon the Hat Posted 19 October 2012 Author Posted 19 October 2012 Politicians shouldn't be doing it for money. You might well be right, but on the other hand, not paying a reasonable amount means that a lot of people in many walks of life are ruled out of the job because they cannot afford to make the sacrifices required to do the job properly for that salary. I know that may be a difficult concept to many people who think £65k is a fortune, but 1) you pay a hell of a lot of tax at that income 2) you have generally cut your cloth to match your income and selling your house and moving into something smaller for example is not likely to endear the career in politics plan to your family, and 3) people do not like to take pay cuts.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Haha. Well unlike your views on said politicians I need plenty of qualifications, skills and experience for my job, and it certainly isn't stress free. It does however have the benefit of its perfomance being judged by people who know something about the role, rather than the public who it seems know very little about the role, workload and pressures of being an MP. I'm sure that your job is important and that you are good at it. You seem to be an intelligent and educated person. My comments were only drawn from your own concerning stress. I'm saying the same as you about unfit politicians. We merely disagree about the reasons that one should become a politician and the financial remuneration. Of course if they are good at being politicians they'll be able to earn a lot more money from private means after they finish being politicians.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 You might well be right, but on the other hand, not paying a reasonable amount means that a lot of people in many walks of life are ruled out of the job because they cannot afford to make the sacrifices required to do the job properly for that salary. I know that may be a difficult concept to many people who think £65k is a fortune, but 1) you pay a hell of a lot of tax at that income 2) you have generally cut your cloth to match your income and selling your house and moving into something smaller for example is not likely to endear the career in politics plan to your family, and 3) people do not like to take pay cuts. If a person can't live on a salary of £65K plus expenses I would suggest that they have a serious problem - especially when you take into account that this is the salary for only 1 person. If they can't then they really shouldn't become a politician in GB. 1) extra tax is only paid on amounts about certain thresholds, those who don't think that £65K for a single person's salary should perhaps visit the real world and see what it's like to live on a minimum wage or on a state pension. 2) again if you or your family need an excessively large house to live you are probably not made to be a politician in a country like the UK. If your wife isn't happy with that then again you shouldn't become an MP. 3) For most people in Britain £65k (and don't forget the expenses) would not be a pay cut it would be a pay rise. If you're earning more than that and feel that money is your driving force in life I'd again suggest that you don't become a politician. In short we have a major difference in our view of why you should become a politician, you seem to be saying it's about the money and I believe it should be because you want to serve the public and make your country a better place for everyone in it.
Guest MattP Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Who are you to say who can live on what? I could live on 65k a year yes but I have a couple if friends who could never sustain their lifestyles on that amount.
Guest Posted 19 October 2012 Posted 19 October 2012 Who are you to say who can live on what? I could live on 65k a year yes but I have a couple if friends who could never sustain their lifestyles on that amount. "Live on" and "sustain lifestyles". Don't you see how silly you sound?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.