| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Bashing the bankers? | |
| Posted by: | John Gorst | |
| Date/Time: | 10/12/09 11:50:00 |
| Are you saying therefore that you would reject the offer to earn £1m+ if offered? Perhaps you would, but you are in a small minority. It’s human nature (in fact, not just human) to try to accumulate as much resource as possible. Imposing a 100% income tax on earning of over 200k is saying that that’s the maximum permissible salary anyone can earn. The Russians tried that didn’t they? There may be some advantages to that way of life, but personally I would choose our society any day. I think some of your ideas are very utopian. Nice, but not realistic. Unfortunately people do compete against each other, and do have desires to earn more and more. That just how things are. You said it yourself, we have footballers, musicians, celebrities etc etc who all income a lot of money. Should Paris Hilton earn more than a nurse or a fireman or a teacher? Probably not, but she does. And that brings it back the issue originally proposed by Adam: The issues are not unique to banking. So why are the banks being hit in this case? If I was a used-car salesman, I would be paid a basic salary (if I was lucky!) and the rest of my earnings would be in “bonus” or “OTE” or some other name for performance related pay. Why shouldn’t they be hit with this 50% tax?? Also, just to clarify an earlier post, my comment on not lasting a week was referring to your idea of nationalised banks would invest in manufacturing not financial instruments. It just can’t see it working. |