Welcome to Over50sForum! The site for people over 50 to chat, make friends, discuss, share, and generally be part of something that's fun and friendly :)
Yes, a cap should be in place, as it wouldn’t matter anyway to the top execs as they have massive bonuses as well
We live in a crazy society where top people can earn big money
Yet the carer who looks after your loved one, feeds them, dresses them and takes them to the toilet on a 12 hour shift, for£8.72 an hour...
My understanding of it is that the brainy think tank is claiming that it will help redistribute wealth and allow funding for pay rises in the lower/middle income bracket whilst helping to protect against unemployment.
It doesn't follow that it'll work that way at all. It's la-la land stuff, like the idea of a universal income .... and all any 'ceiling' does is stifle the really ambitious. They'd do better to hunt down and catch high earner tax dodgers.
Yes, a cap should be in place, as it wouldn’t matter anyway to the top execs as they have massive bonuses as well
We live in a crazy society where top people can earn big money
Yet the carer who looks after your loved one, feeds them, dresses them and takes them to the toilet on a 12 hour shift, for£8.72 an hour...
It comes down to financial added value. A competent CEO will earn big bucks for the business that employed him or increasingly her whereas the carer is a financial cost to the business that employs him or her.
It comes down to financial added value. A competent CEO will earn big bucks for the business that employed him or increasingly her whereas the carer is a financial cost to the business that employs him or her.
Sadly this is true. A nurse who puts his or her life at risk treating patients doesn't earn any revenue for the NHS, so will never receive a good wage in return. Highly paid footballers earn a lot of dosh for their club.