Saxondale Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 Hyperbole to an extent but yes, the Lords' and Commons' bars at Westminster come under some tax loophole so the booze is untaxed and dirt cheap. A mate of mine (who isn't an enormous lefty) works for an insurance broker at Bank and had to go with his boss to meet a representative of the House of Lords a few months back and it, literally, he says, involved sitting in the bar for a couple of hours whilst some old boy sunk pints of ale and told them nostalgic stories. Immense. Brilliant!
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 As I've said before, you're unbelievable. So by your logic then, MP's should be paid enough not to commit fraud? So therefore, we should pay everyone huge sums of money so they don't go shoplifting/housebreaking/car stealing/ drug dealing... etc etc etc. We could wipe out crime in a week. you're a fool. If you're going to call me a fool at least spell the sentence right. Again, go back through the thread and actually read what I've said. It was implied in the independant review into the MP's scandal that the culture at the time was to bump up your own wage through claiming some rather dodgy expenses thus to compensate for the wage they were being paid which pretty much everyone agreed was too low. It was stated that it was important to bring there wage upto a standard where such behaviour would not be necessary. I'd understand if you were doing a few shady thing if you were being paid £2.50 an hour for what you do. Would you do an MP's job for 60k a year? I certainly wouldn't.
Orkneyfox Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 As I've said before, you're unbelievable. So by your logic then, MP's should be paid enough not to commit fraud? So therefore, we should pay everyone huge sums of money so they don't go shoplifting/housebreaking/car stealing/ drug dealing... etc etc etc. We could wipe out crime in a week. you're a fool. There is precedent for this, it is one of the reasons that judges are well paid, to avoid temptation to stray.
Parafox Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 If you're going to call me a fool at least spell the sentence right. Again, go back through the thread and actually read what I've said. It was implied in the independant review into the MP's scandal that the culture at the time was to bump up your own wage through claiming some rather dodgy expenses thus to compensate for the wage they were being paid which pretty much everyone agreed was too low. It was stated that it was important to bring there wage upto a standard where such behaviour would not be necessary. I'd understand if you were doing a few shady thing if you were being paid £2.50 an hour for what you do. Would you do an MP's job for 60k a year? I certainly wouldn't. Where is the spelling error? It may be a grammatical error in that I used a lower case 'y' instead of a capital letter. Your earlier statement that "that's exactly what I'm saying" implies that you agree with the principle of theft to support insufficient income. And check you're own spelling.
Guest Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 People who find loopholes or cheat (whichever way you want to see it) would do it whatever the wages as long as the possibility exists. I didn't think you were naive enough to think otherwise. In fact I don't think you are. Would you want to do an MPs job if the salary was higher? I would suggest that people who want to be MPs should be doing it because they want to do what is right for the community and they value the community above personal gain. I would suggest the same for a person who wanted to be a teacher or NHS doctor as well. Those people know that they could earn more in the private sector but choose the public sector (for a variety of reasons). The present salary for MPs is sufficiently ridiculous and doesn't take into account all the extras that they can earn whilst being an MP and afterwards. MPs shouldn't do it for the money and a lower salary could be a way to stop that happening. I also find it funny how a person earning a lot in the private sector would think that they ultimately think this would translate into them doing a good job as an MP. There seems to be a false view in recent years that running the country is comparable to running a private company. There is precedent for this, it is one of the reasons that judges are well paid, to avoid temptation to stray. and of course there is no history of judges being corrupt. How much is enough when more is available?
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 Where is the spelling error? It may be a grammatical error in that I used a lower case 'y' instead of a capital letter. Your earlier statement that "that's exactly what I'm saying" implies that you agree with the principle of theft to support insufficient income. And check you're own spelling. 'your own spelling'. I do support theft if a working man is being ridiculously underpaid. I have no problem with that. I'm a man of the people, working class hero.
Guest Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 And check you're own spelling. I take it that was deliberate.
Guest Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 'your own spelling'. I do support theft if a working man is being ridiculously underpaid. I have no problem with that. That is ridiculous if the person has chosen to do the job knowing the financial remuneration. where can you ever decide what the "correct" pay is anyway? If you really believe that then I assume that you think those overpaid should give back the extra money.
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 That is ridiculous if the person has chosen to do the job knowing the financial remuneration. where can you ever decide what the "correct" pay is anyway? If you really believe that then I assume that you think those overpaid should give back the extra money. Top line is a fair point. I won't argue that. Let's be honest though, who hasn't fiddled some expenses while at work? It's a perk of the job. Politicians win that sort of lifestyle when they get elected.
Guest Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 Top line is a fair point. I won't argue that. Let's be honest though, who hasn't fiddled some expenses while at work? It's a perk of the job. Politicians win that sort of lifestyle when they get elected. And my point is that those that do that will continue to do that whatever the pay level. Human beings are generally greedy and self serving.
sphericalfox Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 The sickening thing about this is, the numbers being quoted are an average, meaning there are some MPs who think they deserve much more than that!
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 And my point is that those that do that will continue to do that whatever the pay level. Human beings are generally greedy and self serving. Maybe so. Where the MP's were different was that they were actively encouraged to do it over the last few years.
Guest Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 Maybe so. Where the MP's were different was that they were actively encouraged to do it over the last few years. That's not true, they just saw that others were doing it and getting away with it and asked themselves why they shouldn't do the same. Greed and Envy - strong human traits.
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 That's not true, they just saw that others were doing it and getting away with it and asked themselves why they shouldn't do the same. Those were the words of a couple of politicians on QT over the last few months.
Guest Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 Those were the words of a couple of politicians on QT over the last few months. and you take as fact words that come from the mouths of politicians.
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 and you take as fact words that come from the mouths of politicians. When criticising themselves and their own conduct I think we can.
Finnegan Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 That pretty much describes every business meeting I've had for the last two years My mate averages about six pints per working day, all on the company card. Every meeting takes place in one of the pubs around Bank. My flatmate and I went to meet him the other week for a beer and the bars round there are so surreal. Full of boozy suits.
Guest MattP Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 My mate averages about six pints per working day, all on the company card. Every meeting takes place in one of the pubs around Bank. My flatmate and I went to meet him the other week for a beer and the bars round there are so surreal. Full of boozy suits. I remember about 2-3 years back three of us met in Birmingham, we were setting up a tipping competition and Bet365 were going to sponsor it, I was going to run it day to day and I met up with the Bet365 representative who was putting up the sponsorship and prize money and the web designer who was coming in for a percentage. I work with him on many projects and some of our pissups get really out of hand. No joke the 'meeting' started as a meal in Anderson's around 6pm in the evening on Tuesday and we finally stopped boozing on Friday morning coming out of a casino on Broad Street. All completely wiped out of cash and needing to sleep it off and start working to claw in some money in to live again for the next month. Still in the same suit as well for four days. Horrific lifestyle looking back but great times anyway. I was never any good at golf so for me it's always been pub>course any day of the week.
Rincewind Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 Can't be bothered to exact quote but many workers if they ask for a pay rise will be told to leave as the boss could get others to do the same job for less money. I had always thought people became MP's so as to help people and improve things by being a voice for the people that they represent. Many have normal everyday jobs such as teachers, doctors and are on the board of companies. If I thought the MP's represented the average general public I would be happy with them having a decent salary but more often than not (all parties) they represent themselves first. The old type politician has died out. As you get older ideals diminish and cynicism take their place.
Parafox Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 'your own spelling'. I do support theft if a working man is being ridiculously underpaid. I have no problem with that. I'm a man of the people, working class hero. Aha... you spotted my dellibberate mystayke
Parafox Posted 12 January 2013 Posted 12 January 2013 I take it that was deliberate. Yes, but I think MattP thought otherwise
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.