Using the following formula....

A=lost worker's wage/salary
B=no of lost workers
X=CEO's salary & bonuses
Y=(AxB)
Z=CEO's net pay

X-Y=Z

Supply & demand will correct all in time, it just takes time.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

And dont forget the big ass bonus they get for offshoreing jobs. Id say every job that gets off shored the CEO should get payed less.

Using the following formula....

A=lost worker's wage/salary
B=no of lost workers
X=CEO's salary & bonuses
Y=(AxB)
Z=CEO's net pay

X-Y=Z

Now back to the home front......

A mission too far?

Sale of another public service botched

Liebour jumps on Del-boy's bandwagon

Heathrow calls price cap draconian

Hmmn, wonder if the turnabout muppet is involved here?

"Colin Matthews, Heathrow's chief executive, said: "In October the CAA accepted the need for changes to its April proposals, but has now reverted to a draconian position."

---

That could be fixed by saying the top paid person(s) wage package can be no higher than K * lowest wage package. Package to ensure all benefits and bonuses are included.

In the US the ratio was about 20:1 in the 1950's, 40:1 by the 1980's, up to 120:1 by 2000 and now approaches 170:1.

And dont forget the big ass bonus they get for offshoreing jobs. Id say every job that gets off shored the CEO should get payed less.

---

[/quote]

Old James

That could be fixed by saying the top paid person(s) wage package can be no higher than K * lowest wage package. Package to ensure all benefits and bonuses are included.

In the US the ratio was about 20:1 in the 1950's, 40:1 by the 1980's, up to 120:1 by 2000 and now approaches 170:1.

Personally we should forget about the minimum wage and really start to think about setting limits on the maximum wages/salaries of those in the upper end.

Some might not agree with me, but let's face it that at the upper end those wages/salaries are getting excessive, outrageous (greedy even) and can't be sustained in the long run.

Cheers.

I don't see this self-defeating argument, over min wage. The people on min wage at the moment are so hard up it will be spent. Therefore putting more money into the economic cycle. He will also get a large chunk of it back in VAT, and maybe even some in direct tax. It should also cut the benefits bill.

And there are many studies that show that increases in min wages only show up as a very small increase in retail prices.

Well, it's started, get ready for more pre-election soundbites......

Minimum wage set to become pre-election battleground

Ozzie cautious on "self-defeating" rises

"For their part, Labour strategists believe the debate demonstrates that David Cameron is being forced to fight on their territory - that is, he's battling over the cost of living and not the improving state of the economy."

That's Liebour and the Con-Artists spoken for, this is what the wally woofter has to say about it.....

"He refused to spell out his red lines - the policies he would "die in a trench for" in coalition negotiations."

More than likely too afraid that the electorate would turn on him viciously after the turnabouts he has already committed.

Full report on Cleggie's views

---

Well the Three Stooges often put out a more intelligent program than the comedians in Westminster.

Edit for latest:

Another good one gone

And now for the latest on the BBC......

...it seems someone on these boards works for them....

...sorry, you're months out of date....

No wedding ring?

"Some have put this down to the sartorial conservatism of the Tory male. Or a certain upper crust insouciance."

---

Exactly, next time round we will have a stronger part to play.

We'll see.

You have unfairly cherry picked just one item, and one which I also think he was wrong for.

Okay then, how about VAT, the NHS, the 'Mansion Tax', the police, removing 'special advisers', Sure Start, taxing millionaires, need i go on?

Then don't. And be careful of the Libel laws.

Saying i don't like Clegg comes under fair comment, so i'm safe.

The Liberal Democrats being in coalition with the Conservatives means that The Lib Dem leader is the Deputy Prime Minister. Are you seriously suggesting that you want that clown as DPM? Just look at the controversies surrounding him at this link. Farrage.

Given that i'm dubious about what i read in the papers, i see nothing in that list that concerns me.

And you want Farrage to be in charge of all that? You three are just wind up merchants, that have got together to bait me, and I'm not prepared to waste any more of my time on you. Go and vote for what the hell you like, I couldn't care less any more.

Now come on, you know me better than to accuse me of baiting or collusion. My views are my own and no one else will induce me to pretend otherwise.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Go and vote for what the hell you like, I couldn't care less any more.

Who we vote for really is of no concern to you. That's what democracy is all about. The choice to elect those we think are fit to govern, and as you rightly say, if that fails vote them out next time around.

To publicly state that we are deliberately baiting you is totally out of order. We have our opinions which you dislike and tell us so publicly and in a manner that leaves a lot to be desired.

I'll say it again.....

"Opinions are like *********, everyone has one, including the wally currently serving as the worst DPM in history.

---

Of course they are!!! The Lib Dems are in Government, the UKIP is a Johnny come lately protest party.

Got to start somewhere.

Exactly, next time round we will have a stronger part to play.

but Clegg hasn't backed up the policies he stood for, well certainly not tuition fees, which was the policy i voted for.

You have unfairly cherry picked just one item, and one which I also think he was wrong for.

But with a weasel as their frontman, i can't trust them.

Then don't. And be careful of the Libel laws.

The Liberal Democrats being in coalition with the Conservatives means that The Lib Dem leader is the Deputy Prime Minister. Are you seriously suggesting that you want that clown as DPM? Just look at the controversies surrounding him at this link. Farrage.

The Deputy Prime Minister is the deputy head of the UK government, supporting the Prime Minister on the full range of government policy and initiatives. Within government, the Deputy Prime Minister also has responsibility for:

implementing the government’s strategy to increase social mobility
overseeing the government’s drive to rebalance the economy
leading the government’s political and constitutional reform agenda
chairing the Home Affairs Committee, co-chairing the Coalition Committee and deputy-chairing the National Security Council
building strategic relationships in Europe and across the world

And you want Farrage to be in charge of all that? You three are just wind up merchants, that have got together to bait me, and I'm not prepared to waste any more of my time on you. Go and vote for what the hell you like, I couldn't care less any more.

+1 as I totally agree.

---

Of course they are!!! The Lib Dems are in Government, the UKIP is a Johnny come lately protest party.

Got to start somewhere.

Simon, I think you are in danger of falling into the common trap of thinking and/or voting for an individual, rather than the policies that they stand for.

Nice idea, but Clegg hasn't backed up the policies he stood for, well certainly not tuition fees, which was the policy i voted for.

Any party leader is a front-person, the public face of their party, look behind them at what they represent, and then see if your views are the same.

I do like much of what the Lib Dems stand for, well, the things listed on this page anyway. But with a weasel as their frontman, i can't trust them.

Parties generally tend to stay and keep generally to their policies, leaders come and go.

Hence, if Farage came in and Clegg left (not the verb i'd like to use) then we'd have a decent party.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Now then, if two-face Clegg were replaced by Farage, there's a party i'd vote for!

Now that has to be the best sensible suggestion heard so far this year :)

---

The Lib-dems and UKIP are opposites to me

Of course they are!!! The Lib Dems are in Government, the UKIP is a Johnny come lately protest party.

Simon, I think you are in danger of falling into the common trap of thinking and/or voting for an individual, rather than the policies that they stand for. Any party leader is a front-person, the public face of their party, look behind them at what they represent, and then see if your views are the same. Parties generally tend to stay and keep generally to their policies, leaders come and go.

The Lib-dems and UKIP are opposites to me.
LD, i like most of the party, but their leader betrayed us.
UKIP, their leader seems a reasonable sort, but the rest of the party (Godfrey bloom comes to mind) aren't.
Now then, if two-face Clegg were replaced by Farage, there's a party i'd vote for!

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

@ Guy -

I find it fascinating how you blokes across the pond discuss the good and the bad about the Lib-Dem and the UKIP. Rather civilized, I must admit. I wish there was more civilized debate about the differences between the democrats and the republicans over here on this side of the pond.

Why on earth shouldn't it be civilised? Politics and how your country is run is a serious matter, not one to be squabbling about like children, and taking cheap pot shots.

Our Labour and Tory parties are the equivalent of your Democrats and Republicans as the big two, and UKIP are the equivalent of the Tea party. As the third party I would guess that our Lib Dems are the same as your Libertarians. We have the Commons with MP's and the Lords with Peers, you have the House of Representatives and the Senate. Both lower houses have a Speaker and a political head of state as in our Prime Minister and your President. Plus we also have a Monarchy with a Queen that devolves her political role to Parliament. Broadly similar systems.

@Nick -

Sirius and myself can only really see true change in how our country is run by seeing in a new party such as the UKIP. Chris see's it differently, he feels change can come from within via the existing three party system.

Looks like I have to dispel another misconception. I've always been interested in politics but until I fully retired 3 years ago, I didn't have the time to get involved. Change from within is the best way that I see for me as an individual to alter the status quo, using my years of experience, and hopefully a wiser old head. Persuasive arguments at Committee level can often work better than banner waving in demonstrations. There may be better ways for others more youthful and active . Sitting back and waiting for the results of an election means that you haven't influenced the outcome, you are just saddled with the result, and for 5 years. Any point you hoped you might have made by the way you voted, will be likely overtaken by world events by the next election anyway.

For the first time in 70 years, the UK has found that there is an alternative to the old two party system, it may be far from perfect and currently unpopular, but it is better than giving free rein to either of the big two for 5 years. But we only have coalitions during wartime people say? We ARE fighting a war today, an economic one in a worldwide recession. The difference between the Netherlands and us is that they CAN'T find a majority government, we didn't WANT one. UKIP and the Tea party have become a third player that has thrown their hat into the two party arena. In the case of UKIP they have no funding and no real policies other than to champion current public dislikes such as Europe and immigration, and as such are a protest vote. We are lucky in the UK in that our constitution allows for a hung parliament and a coalition, and a damn good job too.

I find it fascinating how you blokes across the pond discuss the good and the bad about the Lib-Dem and the UKIP. Rather civilized, I must admit. I wish there was more civilized debate about the differences between the democrats and the republicans over here on this side of the pond.

It really comes down to the question of how much government you need/want. One side always wants more; the other side always wants less.

Guy, Sirius and myself can only really see true change in how our country is
run by seeing in a new party such as the UKIP. Chris see's it differently, he
feels change can come from within via the existing three party system.
In the end, true to fashion, the electorate will decide on this outcome.

---

The Kite Fliers

--------------------
Kite fliers: An imaginary club of solo members, those who don't yet
belong to a formal team so "fly their own kites" - as the saying goes.

And you think you have problems with your MP, mine