[Taijitu]

Although I have a degree in Economics I honestly don't think I know what all the knock-on effects of introducing a maximum wage would be.

What I do feel is that the gap between low earners and high earners can never be addressed when all that happens is those at the top keep increasing their own wages disproportionately.

Edited: If a maximum yearly salary were to be set for those in employment (not those self employed) I honestly feel the country could still be run as I am sure there are enough capable people out there who can and would do the job. Also with the value of money based upon what it can buy those at the top will still have the "best" luxuries.

Argument could be raised that there would be a "brain drain" from the UK into other countries but quite frankly I would say let them go. Whilst these people may be welcomed at first I think, given the current world situation, it would not be long before they are turned away. The directors of companies being the first as in many cases they seem to add little other of value then their reputation.

Allowing the self employed to be exempt from this would encourage entrepreneurs and innovators as there would be a greater incentive to take the riskier route of self employment.

I know full well that this could never be implemented as it would require the support of those in power who would lose out the most but I am interested what people here think.

I haven't put a "cant make up my mind" option as, to be honest, I'm not really interested in seeing that on the poll but it would be very interesting to see posts detailing what you feel and why.

I hope you also find this topic of interest as well.

Edit: I am not going to be on today but if anyone feels they want to post questions before voting then maybe we can all debate them. Though from the looks so far nobody seems bothered either way.

[ILoveTRW]

errrrr no, smart people (like myself) deserve to be paid more than £100,000

[camaleon]

I don't agree with big class differences and England has a big problem with that. I think all the salaries should be in a similar range, including artists, actors..... Why somebody has to live in a big palace when somebody else has to live in a small room when probably the person living in a room has been working much harder than the one living in a mansion?
Why this system encourage people to live of beneficts that the middle class has to pay for, because otherwise people can't affor to live in one salary if they have to work.
I think there is a big lack of equality....

[ILoveTRW]

Originally posted by camaleon
I don't agree with big class differences and England has a big problem with that. I think all the salaries should be in a similar range, including artists, actors..... Why somebody has to live in a big palace when somebody else has to live in a small room when probably the person living in a room has been working much harder than the one living in a mansion?
Why this system encourage people to live of beneficts that the middle class has to pay for, because otherwise people can't affor to live in one salary if they have to work.
I think there is a big lack of equality....

If someone does a harder job then they should be paid more
people who are poor are just lazy, if they wanted a better job then they should of work for it.

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by ILoveMoney
errrrr no, smart people (like myself) deserve to be paid more than £100,000

Fair enough you may not be the only one in such a position however others who are may feel willing to lose a little in order for greater equality.

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by ILoveMoney

If someone does a harder job then they should be paid more
people who are poor are just lazy, if they wanted a better job then they should of work for it.

Do you think camaleon that a such system could therefor help towards better equality and if not do you have any suggestions?

ILoveMoney as you say folk who are poor are just lazy it makes me doubt your previous statement unless you are trying to help bring this debate alive.

In which case thanks.

Now I really must go off. Be interesting if this does pick up a bit.

[ILoveTRW]

do you know what another word of equality in society is?

Communism

[ILoveTRW]

do you know what another word of equality in society is?

Communism

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by ILoveMoney
do you know what another word of equality in society is?

Communism

Not entirely sure why you feel that would be a bad thing as long as it is in its pure form.

That being said I think you have opened my eyes a bit here along with those who say no but have no comments suggesting they agree with you.

Perhaps you are correct and people today who are in debt and on the lower earning scale such as NHS nurses etc. are indeed just too lazy compared to bank directors who clearly do more work hence their incomes.

There is a view by some that banks and investment companies along with regulators are more to blame for the country's current position when in reality it is the lazy poor.

Although I am not entirely sold on the idea I may come round to your way of thinking and blaming the poor and perhaps we can laugh at them as well as it is their fault and it may encourage them to get off their lazy arses.

I guess that is what debate is for to allow one to adjust ones views to that of the more rational majority dispite expectations that it is otherwise.

[Tom]

No, what would be the point in aspirations? 100,000 isn't that much

[Jayson]

No. The people that earn that much work extremely hard for it, putting a cap on it would screw up society.

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by Tom
No, what would be the point in aspirations? 100,000 isn't that much

Where did I suggest that as the cap? It was there as a theoretical example. Make it £250,000 or £10,000,000 the question is to have a max wage or not not if it should be one at £100,000.

I do feel though to some £100,000 a year is a great deal. I dont know anyone in my family who earns less but I am pretty sure that many dont see it your way.

However I am happy to think otherwise given how this thread is turning out. I feel as if Im ranting but honestly I think I am learning a great deal more here then I ever expected to learn.

[Lewis.]

I think if there was a maximum wage, it would screw up a lot of peoples lifes. Take for granted 100,000. There are a lot of people who earn over that and some may have mortgages. Take away a few hundred thousand grand a year and I don't expect they will be able to sustain that mortgage

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by LewisLeona
I think if there was a maximum wage, it would screw up a lot of peoples lifes. Take for granted 100,000. There are a lot of people who earn over that and some may have mortgages. Take away a few hundred thousand grand a year and I don't expect they will be able to sustain that mortgage

Im going to have to go out again but thanks for giving a bit longer reply. Although £35,000 is about UK average you are right that a lot are earning over.

As far as mortgages are concerned though anything that reduces the number especially amongst those who dont need them but have them so they can have £1,000,000+ houses is a good thing as the way debt and mortgages is currently being dealt with is why we are in the position we are in at the moment.

As I say though I was not suggesting £100,000 as the cap, maybe I should go back and edit it?

I think Ill leave this now though and see what may come up after 6pm+ if anything.

[Harry!]

No I would not want to live in a communist-style country.

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by Harry.
No I would not want to live in a communist-style country.

This really isnt about Communism. Also I didnt really expect many to want Communism if it was as only the very wealthy and very poor truely want Communism.

[Nicky.]

No, because people on mega money have worked really hard for years, so they deserve the money

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by Nicky.
No, because people on mega money have worked really hard for years, so they deserve the money

What about someone such as myself who lives solely on unearned income?

Think I may have managed to make the most boring thread in the history of TiBB.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Taijitu

Where did I suggest that as the cap? It was there as a theoretical example. Make it £250,000 or £10,000,000 the question is to have a max wage or not not if it should be one at £100,000.

I do feel though to some £100,000 a year is a great deal. I dont know anyone in my family who earns less but I am pretty sure that many dont see it your way.

However I am happy to think otherwise given how this thread is turning out. I feel as if Im ranting but honestly I think I am learning a great deal more here then I ever expected to learn.

I still think it puts a roof on aspirations and will make those at the higher end not really bothered about progressing if they're not going to gain anything more

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by Tom
I still think it puts a roof on aspirations and will make those at the higher end not really bothered about progressing if they're not going to gain anything more

This is true though in many areas other then science progressing may be a negative thing. Individuals aught not to be encouraged to bankrupt companies and then run off as soon as the **** hits the fan.

The main point I am trying to make though is that there is no point to a minimum wage at the moment.

If say the lowest pay is £5 an hour whilst the highest is £100 there is a £95 gap between worst payed and best.

Set a minimum wage at £10 and the gap becomes £90.

This is great for allowing more equality of pay and making sure nobody earns so little they cannot live by it.

The problem is that wages at the top end can just get increased to £105 so we are at square one and introducing the minimum level has no effect whatsoever while there is no maximum set.

How much the maximum is set to in order to encourage progression could be debated but without any there is little point to having a minimum wage.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Taijitu

This is true though in many areas other then science progressing may be a negative thing. Individuals aught not to be encouraged to bankrupt companies and then run off as soon as the **** hits the fan.

The main point I am trying to make though is that there is no point to a minimum wage at the moment.

If say the lowest pay is £5 an hour whilst the highest is £100 there is a £95 gap between worst payed and best.

Set a minimum wage at £10 and the gap becomes £90.

This is great for allowing more equality of pay and making sure nobody earns so little they cannot live by it.

The problem is that wages at the top end can just get increased to £105 so we are at square one and introducing the minimum level has no effect whatsoever while there is no maximum set.

How much the maximum is set to in order to encourage progression could be debated but without any there is little point to having a minimum wage.

Minimum wage is in place so that along with benefits, the most poor people can just manage to get by. I don't agree that someone who works a lot harder than someone else should be paid nearenough the same. There is a slight difference between being an accountant and working in a chippy. What you suggest is almost communism. If people can get a similar wage to someone else for doing a much easier job, just what is the point and where is the attraction in the harder jobs?

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by Tom
Minimum wage is in place so that along with benefits, the most poor people can just manage to get by. I don't agree that someone who works a lot harder than someone else should be paid nearenough the same. There is a slight difference between being an accountant and working in a chippy. What you suggest is almost communism. If people can get a similar wage to someone else for doing a much easier job, just what is the point and where is the attraction in the harder jobs?

Pay by the amount of work done is so hard to achieve though I do agree that it would be best if this were the case. As is however people are not paid by how hard they work but rather how much demand there is for their work.

An accountant vs a chipshop worker. I dont know but for me accountancy is easier to do but only because I love numbers and am quite good at it and have never worked in a chip shop.

Another example an NHS nurse vs a financial adviser. Personally I think the nurse does much more work while the adviser can actually (with current regulations) gain more by giving bad advice.

I used to work for a stockbrokers back in 1999 and it was clear to pretty much everyone at the time that the technology bubble was about to burst. A friend of my sisters had a reasonable sum of money he had inherited and had invested into technology shares.

When I heard this I tried to advise him to at least be cautious and at least think about switching some or all into more traditional shares or even just selling and holding back for a while.

He didnt do this however as his financial advisor who was on commission told him that there was nothing to worry about. The problem with this is that it isnt in their best interest to say dont invest as they would then lose their income even if that was the best advice at the time.

People being paid due to the work done or value of that work is really too hard to generalise and currently there are many areas where this does not occur. That is why a system that attempts to limit the gap could be the fairest way to go.

Im not saying I am right here, hence being interested in this poll, but it is how I feel.

Need to be up early tomorrow so cant carry on tonight but thanks for your posts. Maybe we can continue it as it is a very complex issue and one I feel that effects to some extent everyone in the UK.

[Tom]

NHS nurse is a grey area. They deserve the same pay as doctors, not a sh*t £18k a year.

[Taijitu]

Originally posted by Tom
NHS nurse is a grey area. They deserve the same pay as doctors, not a sh*t £18k a year.

Yup it was an easy one to use but then doctors or at least surgeons can argue that it takes a lot longer to become one (more years studying so less time earning), less people are capable of doing it (greater pay due to demand) and there is far more of a responsibility for the patient (little incentive unless your only motivation is to help patients).

There are so many areas where folk work harder but get paid less. Just looking it up one list gives top three most stressful jobs as prime minister, brain surgeon and policeman. Yet workers in all three services get quite a lot less then some in the financial sector despite the fact they are directly saving lives.