O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[Magpies1959]

EP I am saying that the programmes I watch on GB News are ones in which news topics of the day are debated with a guest from the right and a guest from the left. They both give their views on whatever the news story is they are discussing, and the viewers or listeners can email with their views. All very grown up if you ask me. Lots of times the guests agree to disagree, but it is good to listen to both sides of a story, something the other news channels could do well to try. There are no left wing presenters as far as I know, but that doesn't matter as the the presenters are merely the referees in the debate, although obviously do have there say.

I presume this would be a left wing view, in that the pay gap between the top earners and low income workers should be greatly reduced, as I see everyone having an important part to play in society. Not everyone can be a Company boss, Lawyer, Doctor etc, but these people need check out girls, delivery guys etc so I do think wages should be raised for the 'poorer' jobs and lowered for the 'high end' ones. That will do for a start lol.

[magpie_mania]

EP I am saying that the programmes I watch on GB News are ones in which news topics of the day are debated with a guest from the right and a guest from the left. They both give their views on whatever the news story is they are discussing, and the viewers or listeners can email with their views. All very grown up if you ask me. Lots of times the guests agree to disagree, but it is good to listen to both sides of a story, something the other news channels could do well to try. There are no left wing presenters as far as I know, but that doesn't matter as the the presenters are merely the referees in the debate, although obviously do have there say.

I presume this would be a left wing view, in that the pay gap between the top earners and low income workers should be greatly reduced, as I see everyone having an important part to play in society. Not everyone can be a Company boss, Lawyer, Doctor etc, but these people need check out girls, delivery guys etc so I do think wages should be raised for the 'poorer' jobs and lowered for the 'high end' ones. That will do for a start lol.

'the presenters are merely the referees in the debate, although obviously do have there say.'

Not sure how that works when considering balance.

Would we be happy having a referee next season who says, before the game, 'Obviously I want Sutton to win and will do what I can to make sure that happens'!

[upthemaggies]

sounds plausible-ish, maybe. So, some entity/entities had the power to stop a pandemic, but didn't because profit?

I'd phrase it as "some entities had the power to shut down a very dangerous research programme, or at least tighten security, but didn't because profit"

[BigFatPie]

I presume this would be a left wing view, in that the pay gap between the top earners and low income workers should be greatly reduced, as I see everyone having an important part to play in society. Not everyone can be a Company boss, Lawyer, Doctor etc, but these people need check out girls, delivery guys etc so I do think wages should be raised for the 'poorer' jobs and lowered for the 'high end' ones. That will do for a start lol.

I agree with this sentiment. How do you think we can make it happen in reality? Higher rates of union membership have been proved to raise the wages and terms and conditions of lower paid workers, so I presume you’d go along with that?

[magpie_mania]

I agree with this sentiment. How do you think we can make it happen in reality? Higher rates of union membership have been proved to raise the wages and terms and conditions of lower paid workers, so I presume you’d go along with that?

I get where he is coming from, but ...

There is no way that higher paid workers would take a pay reduction, so the only way to close the gap would be to considerably raise pay for the lower paid workers. But the problem then is that the gaps between various groups will close, and the next group up will want considerably more and so it would go on, until you reach the top earners and they will want to keep the gap.

Or do you keep the middle earners where they are and increase those below and reduce those above?

It's not only about what you earn, pensions, house and car etc you could afford would all be affected.

Oh - before anyone says I am looking for reasons not to do that because it would mean me taking a reduction ...... I'd be in those getting an increase!

[BigFatPie]

I get where he is coming from, but ...

There is no way that higher paid workers would take a pay reduction, so the only way to close the gap would be to considerably raise pay for the lower paid workers. But the problem then is that the gaps between various groups will close, and the next group up will want considerably more and so it would go on, until you reach the top earners and they will want to keep the gap.

Or do you keep the middle earners where they are and increase those below and reduce those above?

It's not only about what you earn, pensions, house and car etc you could afford would all be affected.

Oh - before anyone says I am looking for reasons not to do that because it would mean me taking a reduction ...... I'd be in those getting an increase!

We could bring in wage ratio laws so that the highest earning employee in a company couldn’t earn more than 10 or even 15 times the wage of the lowest earner.

For the largest UK companies, such as those listed in the FTSE 100, the median CEO-to-employee pay ratio in 2020/21 was 67:1, while CEOs earned 93 times more than employees on the lowest levels of pay. This is clearly morally abhorrent as well as making no sense from an economic point of view.

[Magpies1959]

I am anti unions really as they tend to end up holding the country to ransom. If people were paid as I have suggested then in a perfect world the now, not so low paid workers would have terms and conditions that matched their new pay status.
Sadly I don't think there is a cat in hell's chance of this happening, but I just wanted to get over that just because I like to watch GB News I am not a raving Nazi lol.

[BigFatPie]

I am anti unions really as they tend to end up holding the country to ransom. If people were paid as I have suggested then in a perfect world the now, not so low paid workers would have terms and conditions that matched their new pay status.
Sadly I don't think there is a cat in hell's chance of this happening, but I just wanted to get over that just because I like to watch GB News I am not a raving Nazi lol.

It’s fairly meaningless to say you’re in favour of something if you’re not prepared to support/vote for ways of making it happen.

I wouldn’t say you’re a Nazi, you’re just hugely ill informed. But then billionaires don’t own newspapers and tv stations for nothing.

[magpie_mania]

We could bring in wage ratio laws so that the highest earning employee in a company couldn’t earn more than 10 or even 15 times the wage of the lowest earner.

For the largest UK companies, such as those listed in the FTSE 100, the median CEO-to-employee pay ratio in 2020/21 was 67:1, while CEOs earned 93 times more than employees on the lowest levels of pay. This is clearly morally abhorrent as well as making no sense from an economic point of view.

Who is going to tell Premier League players that they can only earn 15 x the pay of, say, someone working in the ticket office?

Totally unworkable!

[Magpies1959]

BFP I think I am well enough informed thanks. There is nobody to vote for that will make what I have suggested happen. The nearest we got was when Corbyn was leader of Labour, but even he was outed by his own party for being too left wing. I often find whistling Imagine by John Lennon helps