What is a fair salary as we head into the future?

[JustTheGent]

Economies and types of employment are going to change dramatically in the coming decades. One of the things that the last few months has shown is that many high salary jobs aren't really that important after all. If these jobs didn't exist, no one would really notice. It's been people in less valued jobs that have kept the country running. But surely things will have to change? Many people see those on benefits as a burdon on the nation's finances. But they extract a measly sum from the economy say compared to someone earning £100k per year plus. If the UK's wealth was spread about more evenly you'd have pretty much the whole population living a better life. Most of the problems in society would soon be eliminated. But are those who earn more willing to take less. Or will their greed be an everlasting fixture resulting in a much inferior society to what otherwise could be achieved.

 

[BaronSmoggie]

If the high paying jobs didn't exist though, the tax take would go down making it much harder to provide a safety net for people, surely?

I'm all for the redistribution of wealth, but where do you draw the line. Surgeons who trained for years and years suddenly being limited to 30K a year, which is the same as Dave working in a chippy? Think about what that does to motivation for a lot of people?

 

[jam69]

i dont have any problem people earning up to a million a year, any more than that and its just silly, and the money would be much better distributed.
i understand its a simplistic view of a complicated problem

 

[wilkos_perm]

People in both high and low paid jobs have been improtant for keeping the country running. The real issue is the expolitation of those in low paid jobs by large corporations.. As Baron says we still need the incentive for people to become doctors, dentists, engineers etc etc.

 

[Muttley]

But they extract a measly sum from the economy say compared to someone earning £100k per year plus

The problem is not and never has been people earning £100k pa. The problem is people earning more than that and paying less tax than a binman. The appealing lie of "trickle down wealth" that Billionaires are a good thing. A Billionaire is never a good thing economically, they soak up wealth and keep it, that is why they are Billionaires in the first place. Doctors and Architects and Judges and every other highly paid job that is paid well for the expertise that they have do not get to be Billionaires. (There is another argument to be made about access to these high paid jobs but for now let's concentrate on Billionaires)

Jeff Bezos, makes (according to estimates by Bloomberg) about $275 million PER DAY. In the time it takes me to press the full stop at the end of this sentence he has "earned" $2500.

People earning £100k pa spend a lot, they buy cars, houses, eat in restaurants etc. they don't have (much if any) money sitting in offshore accounts hidden from the tax man.

With the coming of AI and increasing automation we are going to have to consider paying everyone a "Living Wage" whether they are employed or not.

 

[Marvanelli]

To be fair, I don't have a problem with anyone earning as much as they do.

It's when they dodge the tax that I have a problem with.

Fair play to anyone who earns a fortune. Good luck to them. Chances are, they've taken risks and deserve their rewards.

However, anyone who earns a very good sum each year, but then avoid paying their fair share of tax on this amount are the problem.

 

[atypical_boro]

I don't see a need to limit what people earn, but I do want to ensure that public services/welfare are protected and I do believe in progressive taxation. How you go about ensuring that is the hard part, but I'm damn sure this government have no interest in it.

 

[Borobarmy]

A layman’s perception of capitalism but here goes .

Regrettably the seeking of wealth has gone on since we were organisms . Every form of life attempts to surround itself with comforts in order to survive . Like birds gathering winter food stock and safe nests .

A very simplistic view but as long as we breath we seek gain . Today money is a means to survival , the secret is knowing when enough is gathered and can be enjoyed . However gluttony has always and will exist .

 

[boromike85]

I don't think there needs to be a limit but proper taxation laws and enforcement are needed to make it fair. People earning millions, or billions don't pay anywhere near enough tax because they are allowed not to.

The Bezos argument above ignores the fact that his company Amazon employ 840k people and his money isn't in cash, it's invested in businesses like Amazon. He couldn't spend that money because it would mean selling Amazon, and him selling it means it wouldn't be worth what it is now. He is unbelievably rich but valuable assets aren't the same as cash, you can't spend them. The idea behind trickle down is sound but it requires tax and regulation to be properly enforced. A billionaire should pay a huge chunk of tax, invest in companies that provide jobs and spend cash on goods and services which provides more jobs and more tax. Billionaires shouldn't be any better or worse than anyone else but the tax structure means they are worse because they keep a bigger proportion of their income than people on a regular salary.

You can't just get rid of the concept of a billionaire. How do you get people to take the risk in creating something that adds value to society like Amazon (people won't like that statement but they undoubtedly have changed the way we shop) without having any incentive?

 

[Muttley]

No, "trickle down is a lie.

It doesn't work. We have had this since Thatcher and we now have a more divided society than ever. It excuses the rich getting richer (with the unspoken consequence that the poor are oppressed and stigmatised)

 

[1finny]

' One of the things that the last few months has shown is that many high salary jobs aren't really that important after all'

Not sure how you conclude that.

Agree with other posters - all we need is a fair taxation system to ensure enough wealth gets re distributed to support other.
There is a great case for increasing the higher rate of tax and reducing pension benefits for higher earners.
The present government have, of course, said they have no plans to do that and, if they do, it hits the core of their loyal supporters.

Similarly with tax avoidance. Big on words little on action.
There is a real difficulty with those who choose to base businesses elsewhere for tax reasons - it is legal. Jacob Rees Mogg can give you some help if you need it.

And, don't forget one key discussion of what we may do when we leave the EU is around UK becoming a low tax option for businesses.

 

[Corcaigh_the_Cat]

Do you think he took his initial risk with the expectation of becoming a billionaire?

No, neither do I.

The more wealth is redistributed the more will be spent, the more people will be employed.

The differential between high and low earnings is extremely problematic. It puts an enormous burden on the state, both in terms of subsidies for working people and in increased spending on the NHS, poverty and illness go hand in hand.

What we're doing at the moment is subsidising the wealthy by paying part of their wage bill. A realistic living wage coupled with redistribution through taxation, with everyone's earnings/contributions available for public inspection. Far too much is hidden in this corrupt nation of ours.

 

[Muttley]

I was "amused" to read the following Tweet from the "Leave Alliance" this morning...

These days I'm heavily sceptical of #Brexit and the mess it will surely be, but we are where we are primarily because we had to fight for it three times. Voting in good faith in a referendum wasn't enough. Remainers own this mess as much as the Tories.

By "amused" you can take it that I mean "FUKK RIGHT OFF THIS YOUR FAULT"

 

[Erimus74]

The problem is not and never has been people earning £100k pa. The problem is people earning more than that and paying less tax than a binman. The appealing lie of "trickle down wealth" that Billionaires are a good thing. A Billionaire is never a good thing economically, they soak up wealth and keep it, that is why they are Billionaires in the first place. Doctors and Architects and Judges and every other highly paid job that is paid well for the expertise that they have do not get to be Billionaires. (There is another argument to be made about access to these high paid jobs but for now let's concentrate on Billionaires)

Jeff Bezos, makes (according to estimates by Bloomberg) about $275 million PER DAY. In the time it takes me to press the full stop at the end of this sentence he has "earned" $2500.

People earning £100k pa spend a lot, they buy cars, houses, eat in restaurants etc. they don't have (much if any) money sitting in offshore accounts hidden from the tax man.

With the coming of AI and increasing automation we are going to have to consider paying everyone a "Living Wage" whether they are employed or not.

Good post

 

[jam69]

these billionaires have made their money through us though, phillip green makes his millions through selling goods to us, yet he thinks he shouldnt pay any tax that provides hospitals, education, policing etc that allow him to make those profits in the first place.
how many amazon workers are having their pay topped up in the form of tax credits by us ,whilst the owner hordes billions.
if money was food these hoarders would be seen as gluttonous greedy pigs

 

[Caesium137]

With businesses being registered in Luxembourg etc to avoid UK tax would some sort of sales tax replacing an amount of corporation tax, income tax & VAT work? Say, if Amazon and Starbucks for example were taxed on their sales in the UK rather than what they declare as profits (or not) elsewhere.

Purchaser pays 5% seller pays 7% say, on all goods.

 

[Randy]

Love the hate Jeff Bezos gets. The man literally started his business selling books in his garage.

I'm jealous of his success really.

 

[Muttley]

What hate?

 

[boromike85]

No, "trickle down is a lie.

It doesn't work. We have had this since Thatcher and we now have a more divided society than ever. It excuses the rich getting richer (with the unspoken consequence that the poor are oppressed and stigmatised)

You completely ignored the part where I said the idea of trickle down is fine but the current version of it doesn't work because the methods of the trickle are dammed at the top of the hill by an inadequate taxation system. You have never experienced life in a trickle-down economy, it's never been given a go., just something that looks like it.

With businesses being registered in Luxembourg etc to avoid UK tax would some sort of sales tax replacing an amount of corporation tax, income tax & VAT work? Say, if Amazon and Starbucks for example were taxed on their sales in the UK rather than what they declare as profits (or not) elsewhere.

Purchaser pays 5% seller pays 7% say, on all goods.

This is a global problem and one that needs a consensus to fix because the issue is globalised companies moving profits to low tax countries. A sales tax will just see businesses passing on the tax to the customer via price increases. The proper way to do it is to tax transfers between subsidiary companies. The current setup allows for the business in Luxembourg with no tax to pay generating all of the profit by allowing its subsidiaries in the UK to use its intellectual property by paying for the rights. That is seen as a cost to the business in the UK wiping out all profits and leaving no tax to pay. If you tax that transfer then the issue goes away because there is no benefit to making the transfer.

By "amused" you can take it that I mean "FUKK RIGHT OFF THIS YOUR FAULT"

As for this. Your precious EU is fully on board with tax dodging and trickle-down and allows, and even encourages, global businesses to use these methods. It could be the bigger man and set a minimum tax level or blacklist companies that pay no tax but it knows all of the companies would just leave to somewhere outside the EU that will allow it.

 

[festa5]

I was "amused" to read the following Tweet from the "Leave Alliance" this morning...



By "amused" you can take it that I mean "FUKK RIGHT OFF THIS YOUR FAULT"

Who would have thought leavers would blame remainers for it being a mess? Can't remember being less surprised.

And, as they're so keen to point out, we haven't even really left yet