Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
executive pay
last reply
62 replies
3.1k views
0 watchers
0 likes
Quote by deancannock
How sad is it...that people measure success by how much money they earn !!!
so i presume you measure sucess by values then? sucess is measured in many ways and that includes how much a person earns. that is the way of life.
Quote by deancannock
I'm not jealous at all. I am happy and content in my life, my daughter is well balanced and happy in her life, and I would never swap that for a million pounds.
nobody probably would swap that but your comments here i am afraid have more than a tinge of jealousy in there the tone of how you write.
Quote by deancannock
What I do feel, is compassion. There are people being put out of work, plunging families into debt and despair, while the cheif executive of thet company earns a 6 million pound bonus !!! No..in my eyes that is not right. They are indeed at the bottom of the rung, in the company structure. However it is not their fault the company has taken the wrong decisions and not making the profits they used to do. Yet it is them that have to suffer, whilst the ones that made those decisions continue to feather their nest.
of course feel compassion by all meens but why do you feel that this persons salary is unjust? because you are not earning it? would you decline that kind of money if it was offered to you? you will probably say yopu would, and i would not beleeve you for a is very easy to try and stifle what someone earns when you earn far less, but change it around and i am sure you would happily pick up that six figure check.
Quote by deancannock
Jealous....NO
Sad........NO
Compassionate....YES
All this I'm alright Jack...fuck you... is what exactly gets us in this mess in the first place.
Money does not make you a successful person.
jealous....i think you are
sad......i dont know you well enough to answer that one
compassionate......you may well be as and when it suits to be. that is human nature.
im alright jack...fuck you, is another human instinct but you make it seem as though it is common practise of which i do not think it is. many peeple put others first almost i would say as those that put them selves first.
of course money can make you sucessful and happy, and it can also make peeple sad and lonely. depends on the person but your generalisation of peeple is inaccurate on so many counts. you have a very poor judgement on the human race or maybe i am just seeing what you write all wrong.
People turn down money for happiness every day.
I am a good example
Minx is too.
I was chatting to a lass who works at our local bank the other day. Ever so clever n bright one of those real "assets" when you run a business that deals with the public. Anyways I asked about her ambitions and she said "Yes its a fantastic career path here but I am happy doing what I do. I would never want a job that I had to take home with me."
It is usually a mistake to assume that others share ones views or values. To accuse those who take a differing view of life of being motivated by greed, hate or jealousy is simply asinine.
I am a good example
Minx is too.
I was chatting to a lass who works at our local bank the other day. Ever so clever n bright one of those real "assets" when you run a business that deals with the public. Anyways I asked about her ambitions and she said "Yes its a fantastic career path here but I am happy doing what I do. I would never want a job that I had to take home with me."
It is usually a mistake to assume that others share ones views or values. To accuse those who take a differing view of life of being motivated by greed, hate or jealousy is simply asinine.
Sex God
Totally agree with Ben, money ain't everything.
About 18 years ago was offered a job in Houston, it came with a house, swimming pool, car, full works and probably doubled my money.
Problem was, I'd have to be working away all over USA and Canada, so while wife and kids might be sitting round the pool, I wouldn't be seeing the kids enjoying it or them growing up. So turned it down, stayed on Tyneside.
A case of "Love over Gold"
John
About 18 years ago was offered a job in Houston, it came with a house, swimming pool, car, full works and probably doubled my money.
Problem was, I'd have to be working away all over USA and Canada, so while wife and kids might be sitting round the pool, I wouldn't be seeing the kids enjoying it or them growing up. So turned it down, stayed on Tyneside.
A case of "Love over Gold"
John
Quote by Geordiecpl2001
Totally agree with Ben, money ain't everything.
About 18 years ago was offered a job in Houston, it came with a house, swimming pool, car, full works and probably doubled my money.
Problem was, I'd have to be working away all over USA and Canada, so while wife and kids might be sitting round the pool, I wouldn't be seeing the kids enjoying it or them growing up. So turned it down, stayed on Tyneside.
A case of "Love over Gold"
John
let us hope one day they forgive you.
Sex God
Quote by Ben_Minx
People turn down money for happiness every day.
I am a good example
Minx is too.
I was chatting to a lass who works at our local bank the other day. Ever so clever n bright one of those real "assets" when you run a business that deals with the public. Anyways I asked about her ambitions and she said "Yes its a fantastic career path here but I am happy doing what I do. I would never want a job that I had to take home with me."
It is usually a mistake to assume that others share ones views or values. To accuse those who take a differing view of life of being motivated by greed, hate or jealousy is simply asinine.
Assumption is the mother of all feck ups!
You make assumptions also Ben! It is not the reserve of us lesser mortals
We have all seen that, you assume the mechanics I know are gullible, maybe they are and may be they are not. but you have made that judgement
Sex God
Quote by starlightcouple
Totally agree with Ben, money ain't everything.
About 18 years ago was offered a job in Houston, it came with a house, swimming pool, car, full works and probably doubled my money.
Problem was, I'd have to be working away all over USA and Canada, so while wife and kids might be sitting round the pool, I wouldn't be seeing the kids enjoying it or them growing up. So turned it down, stayed on Tyneside.
A case of "Love over Gold"
John
let us hope one day they forgive you.
So why are these silly beggars striking over loosing a little of it
if it was so unimportant, they would just let it go? Sex God
if money is so unimportant all of a sudden why are we having this debate
Sex God
Quote by MidsCouple24
As for thge Swiss 'loophole', then the HMRC/Swiss withholding tax of 48% on investment income and 27% on gains will be levied by banks on any accounts held by UK residents in Switzerland doesn't become effective until May 2013, And then it's only applicable to those who still have assets in Swiss bank accounts at that time, giving people months in which to move their assets into one of the many other tax havens available.
Eh! what's this all about please, I have a few pennies in my suisse account can someone please tell me what is going to happen and what I should do about it, all advice greatfully recieved.
if you have money in a off shore account then you would have already had a letter stating that you can pay a 10% tax Levey to legally free up that money to use in the uk etc with no further action necessary
if you do not then you will be subject to a tax investigation as to how the money was obtained or what tax was paid on it when it was obtained and could be subjected to a 40% tax on it
but if you have a Swiss account then you would have had this letter and would know this
ps the inland revenue will also freeze all accounts until investigations prove it is legit money
Sex God
I am certainly not jealous of people with stupid amounts of money - I have made choices in my life that have gone to contenment rather than stress - they tend to lead away from large earnings.
My objections in previous posts have all been to the huge gulf between the lower paid producers of wealth and the higher paid 'directors of action'.
Without one group the other would be meaningless. But the balance should be a damned sight more even. I'm not just talking about the wage packet - I'm talking about the risk of losing that income, the availability of progression, the acknowledgement and respect for one's abilities and contribution.
My objections in previous posts have all been to the huge gulf between the lower paid producers of wealth and the higher paid 'directors of action'.
Without one group the other would be meaningless. But the balance should be a damned sight more even. I'm not just talking about the wage packet - I'm talking about the risk of losing that income, the availability of progression, the acknowledgement and respect for one's abilities and contribution.
Sex God
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
Quote by Lizaleanrob
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
Sometimes the same company in phoenix (as in 'rising from the ashes') form
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
Quote by Lizaleanrob
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
So how come Thomas Cook have been given a 'new' lease of life? The amount of money they owe is colossal.
Sex God
Quote by GnV
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
So how come Thomas Cook have been given a 'new' lease of life? The amount of money they owe is colossal.
i believe money owed for holidays off sets the debt this is provided every one pays when its due and not cancels their holidays before hand
Thomas Cook is also one of the biggest European holidays firms, we often we see them as just being a British travel agent
iirc they was bailed out by a bank and not a government
Quote by GnV
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
So how come Thomas Cook have been given a 'new' lease of life? The amount of money they owe is colossal.
Thomas Cook are not insolvent. They have just restructured their debt.
Quote by Lizaleanrob
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
Rob, had a couple of the big banks gone to the wall, the knock on effects would have been catastrophic. There would very likely have been a domino effect on other banks and quite possibly the complete collapse of the entire banking system. What would then happen to industry. How many companies would go to the wall. How many people would be thrown into unemployment? It's a doomsday scenario which the Labour Government rightly avoided.
Sex God
Quote by Max777
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
Rob, had a couple of the big banks gone to the wall, the knock on effects would have been catastrophic. There would very likely have been a domino effect on other banks and quite possibly the complete collapse of the entire banking system. What would then happen to industry. How many companies would go to the wall. How many people would be thrown into unemployment? It's a doomsday scenario which the Labour Government rightly avoided.
Sounds sensible to me max, but I shall await the difinitive answer on this one from Gulsonroad
Quote by Bluefish2009
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
I'm still struggling to understand why some business is propped up IE the banks yet others are allowed to fall
i would imagine if it was challenged in the European court then the government and tax payers would be either propping up every business or the banks like rbs and Loyds would be asset striped and sold off
Rob, had a couple of the big banks gone to the wall, the knock on effects would have been catastrophic. There would very likely have been a domino effect on other banks and quite possibly the complete collapse of the entire banking system. What would then happen to industry. How many companies would go to the wall. How many people would be thrown into unemployment? It's a doomsday scenario which the Labour Government rightly avoided.
Sounds sensible to me max, but I shall await the difinitive answer on this one from Gulsonroad
It's Saturday night........I'm sure he'll be along any minute
Sex God
so what we're saying then max is open a bank a business and you can't fail based on the knock on effect to the financial industry :sad:
a bank is like any other business if it folds then others can take a big hit investors, employees ect ect all the bailouts have done it allowed those that run the banks to feel untouchable
yet in the states a few of the largest financial institutions where allowed to fold this i think sent a very strong message to the others that otherwise would have continued to lend recklessly, this in turn never! brought down the usa's banking system ?
i strongly doubt that the british taxpayer will ever recover the monies used by brown to bail out these bank lloyds and rbs owe the tax payer over 65 billion pounds
i don't even think we've received interest payments on our loan to them
I'm sorry but i still don't see how a bank is any different to any other business even if it takes a few others with it ,as the banks are still not lending to business or home owners and most business run overdrafts then these would have been transferred to either other banks or written off had the banks been allowed to collapse
yet funny that the very banks we bailed out continue to charge above average interest rates for loans and mortgages and northern rock offering to transfer mortgages to lloyds tsb with no charges out of the frying pan springs to mind
i also Doubt that 100 billion pounds would have been enough to bring down the financial system and i also doubt that the industry has learnt anything other than regardless of what they do one way or another they will get a share of our money being through the front door as savings and loans or the back door as a bailout
a bank is like any other business if it folds then others can take a big hit investors, employees ect ect all the bailouts have done it allowed those that run the banks to feel untouchable
yet in the states a few of the largest financial institutions where allowed to fold this i think sent a very strong message to the others that otherwise would have continued to lend recklessly, this in turn never! brought down the usa's banking system ?
i strongly doubt that the british taxpayer will ever recover the monies used by brown to bail out these bank lloyds and rbs owe the tax payer over 65 billion pounds
i don't even think we've received interest payments on our loan to them
I'm sorry but i still don't see how a bank is any different to any other business even if it takes a few others with it ,as the banks are still not lending to business or home owners and most business run overdrafts then these would have been transferred to either other banks or written off had the banks been allowed to collapse
yet funny that the very banks we bailed out continue to charge above average interest rates for loans and mortgages and northern rock offering to transfer mortgages to lloyds tsb with no charges out of the frying pan springs to mind
i also Doubt that 100 billion pounds would have been enough to bring down the financial system and i also doubt that the industry has learnt anything other than regardless of what they do one way or another they will get a share of our money being through the front door as savings and loans or the back door as a bailout
No Rob, that's not what I'm saying. In theory, a bank is just like any other business and should be allowed to fail but due to the current set up of the banks, I believe that the government made the right decision at the time. That's why I believe that the merchant and retail arms of the banks have to be separated in order that such bailouts are never again necessary.
Lehman Brothers was allowed to go to the wall but to the best of my knowledge was purely a merchant bank and it's bankruptcy subsequently played a major role in the global financial crisis. How bad would the crisis have been if other major banks had also been allowed to go bust.
Do you honestly believe that RBS and Lloyds going bust would have had no impact on the other major UK banks? And let's not forget that most of Lloyds problems arose due to it being "encouraged" by the government to absorb HBOS.
What would have happened to the retail arms of RBS and Lloyds had they gone bust? For starters, the government would have been left with an astronomical bill to refund depositors, although many depositors would have incurred substantial losses due to the level of the deposits guaranteed at that time. What implications would that have had on savers' confidence at other banks? It's highly probable other banks would have suffered runs on the bank.
What would have happened to industry if 2 of the main 4 high street banks had gone bust? Most probably the the bank payment system would have failed, causing massive disruption to industry. What would have happened to companies holding funds at these banks as I don't believe they would be covered by government's guarantee? What would happen to companies reliant upon overdrafts for their financing? The failure of the banks would take many corporations with them and if major corporations start to fail they do have a domino effect upon their suppliers.
I'm no supporter of the banks and am angry at both the Labour government and the current government for not demanding stricter control in return for all the taxpayers cash they have received but I still believe that the measures taken by GB and AD were the correct ones at the time.
Lehman Brothers was allowed to go to the wall but to the best of my knowledge was purely a merchant bank and it's bankruptcy subsequently played a major role in the global financial crisis. How bad would the crisis have been if other major banks had also been allowed to go bust.
Do you honestly believe that RBS and Lloyds going bust would have had no impact on the other major UK banks? And let's not forget that most of Lloyds problems arose due to it being "encouraged" by the government to absorb HBOS.
What would have happened to the retail arms of RBS and Lloyds had they gone bust? For starters, the government would have been left with an astronomical bill to refund depositors, although many depositors would have incurred substantial losses due to the level of the deposits guaranteed at that time. What implications would that have had on savers' confidence at other banks? It's highly probable other banks would have suffered runs on the bank.
What would have happened to industry if 2 of the main 4 high street banks had gone bust? Most probably the the bank payment system would have failed, causing massive disruption to industry. What would have happened to companies holding funds at these banks as I don't believe they would be covered by government's guarantee? What would happen to companies reliant upon overdrafts for their financing? The failure of the banks would take many corporations with them and if major corporations start to fail they do have a domino effect upon their suppliers.
I'm no supporter of the banks and am angry at both the Labour government and the current government for not demanding stricter control in return for all the taxpayers cash they have received but I still believe that the measures taken by GB and AD were the correct ones at the time.
Sex God
Quote by Max777
I'm no supporter of the banks and am angry at both the Labour government and the current government for not demanding stricter control in return for all the taxpayers cash they have received but I still believe that the measures taken by GB and AD were the correct ones at the time.
This is probably the same reason I'm angry about it :sad: if another bank had bailed them out it would have been a take over with the said new owners running the banks for a profit which they would well deserve
brown just bailed them out and brown and the present government has allowed them to return to profit without even a fair amount of the profits being returned to the tax payer as interest
my own opinion is that the banks should belong to the treasury with profits being pumped back into the economy or at least a percentage comparable to that of the percentage of shares we own in the bank (if that makes sense
)i think the worst thing is these banks are amongst the worst rated for offering business loans or mortgages yet we own the largest independent chunk of these banks now we hear the government is underwriting such loans if they do lets hope they only underwrite them to the banks we already own so that the near future could mean a hastier return to larger profits and the return of our bailout funds
Quote by Max777
Rob, had a couple of the big banks gone to the wall, the knock on effects would have been catastrophic.
Probably been said before, but if they were too big to fail, they were too big. Whatever happened to the good old British Building Society? :-)
On the subject of executive pay... whilst I agree some of it is rather excessive, the "super rich" are job creators in their own right. They usually have more than one home, a fleet of cars and maybe even a yacht. All these require maintenance and makeovers, providing work to a niche market of people, be it housekeepers, chauffeurs, florists and gardeners etc.
As an example, a friend used to be a facilities manager for a certain Hungarian investor and was responsible for his London/UK homes. Even when the owner wasn't there large bouquets and floral displays were delivered every week by a local florist because his wife loved fresh flowers. This was the same at his other homes dotted around the globe.
Okay it's not mass employment but it is a kind of distribution of wealth.
Sex God
The government should not be setting pay rates, Mr Clegg stressed, while making clear he supported top executives being well rewarded if their companies were successful.
But he said "greater transparency" was needed over the process of setting pay and that top bosses should not be rewarded for poor performance.
Quote by GnV
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
Sometimes the same company in phoenix (as in 'rising from the ashes') form
That is very true, but quite often at the expense of all their creditors. often ensuring that many people lose their jobs, and plunging smaller hard working businesses into receivership.
Quote by Onthebeach_1
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
Sometimes the same company in phoenix (as in 'rising from the ashes') form
That is very true, but quite often at the expense of all their creditors. often ensuring that many people lose their jobs, and plunging smaller hard working businesses into receivership.
That's business for ya I am afraid.
Their business model was set up as a gamble if all their eggs were in one basket.
Dave_Notts
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
You are right.
Dave_Notts
Hold on i think Dave's account has been hacked
:rotflmao::rotflmao: Quote by Dave__Notts
just to confirm there is no guarantee that the rich will always be rich :doh:
You are right.
I look at recession as a redistribution of wealth. While some lose money, others get it. For example, I have seen some big high street names bite the dust but in their place comes other companies selling the same products and making money.
Dave_Notts
Sometimes the same company in phoenix (as in 'rising from the ashes') form
That is very true, but quite often at the expense of all their creditors. often ensuring that many people lose their jobs, and plunging smaller hard working businesses into receivership.
That's business for ya I am afraid.
Their business model was set up as a gamble if all their eggs were in one basket.
Dave_Notts
Nope! not disputing that, however to let your company go bust surely indicates their bad business model?
I was thinking more along the lines of the the large busineses that know their going to the wall, and deliberately carry on screwiing the smaller businesses because they cannot pull out. Again "f*ck you jack, i am alright" a sad attitude to have and by all accounts now more prevelent than ever, and people wonder why society is like it is!!
Quote by Onthebeach_1
Nope! not disputing that, however to let your company go bust surely indicates their bad business model?
I was thinking more along the lines of the the large busineses that know their going to the wall, and deliberately carry on screwiing the smaller businesses because they cannot pull out. Again "f*ck you jack, i am alright" a sad attitude to have and by all accounts now more prevelent than ever, and people wonder why society is like it is!!
Business has always been able to go belly up then re-start. Wonder what would happen if on their 3rd attempt they are disqualified from being a director? I suspect it will be the same as a licensee where it gets passed from one family member to another
Dave_Notts