No one should be suprised that Fred Goodwin isn't willing to give up his obscenely generous pension. To him it marks a considerable drop in income - the poor man is probably struggling to know how to make ends meet.
After all his multi-million pound pension pot is but a trifle compared to what he's used to. As well as several million a year in salary and bonuses, there were the perks, like the private jet.
He's been used to flying around in a £17.5m private jet that can carry 19 passengers between Edinburgh and Beijing non stop. In one report, the 32ft cabin was described as allowing 'passengers to walk about on the “soft, deep pile carpeting” or relax on the “supple leathers”, according to its sales blurb.'
And if we expect Fred to have a conscience about this, we are kidding ourselves - he bought this jet, which costs around £9,000 an hour to run, at the same time as he was making 18,000 people redundant.
Only intervention will stop greedy people like Fred (and he's not alone) running amok again as soon as the economy picks up. And the first thing should be a law that says that no one in a company can earn more than ten times (and I'm being generous) the salary of the lowest paid worker.
I'm sick of hearing about how we must reward these high flyers who create all our wealth. They don't do it alone. Without all the people down the chain, they are useless. The Sir Freds of this world can come up with all kinds of fancy schemes (hopefully some of which are not as dumb as his) but unless there are people to implement them, they are just hot air.
It is time the people who really make companies successful - the workforce - were given as much attention and consideration as the bosses and the shareholders.
Saturday, 28 February 2009
Friday, 5 December 2008
'Pure Evil' or failed by the wrong priorities?
I was thinking about Shannon Matthews' mother last night. Like everyone else I'm shocked that she could have inflicted that on her daughter but it can't be a coincidence that she is a) inadequate, b) uneducated and c) lives on a sink estate in Dewsbury surrounded by similar people.
I accept that she was a liar, manipulative and uncaring. But don't we need to ask what made her that way? Or do we believe that by some strange quirk of fate, many people raised in poverty, failures at school and with no belief that things can change, turn out to be the same people who play the system and screw everything they can out of the state?
It's not too hard to imagine that when she picked up the Sun and saw the money pouring into the McCann family - who may not have subjected their daughter to kidnapping, drugs etc, but were certainly negligent - Karen Matthews thought 'wouldn't mind a bit of that' hatched a plan and roped in the even more inadequate Michael Donovan
And once they had started it would have been impossible to go back. In fact they had to rack it up because, as was admitted on Today this morning, the disappearance of a girl from the underclasses as compared to Madeleine McCann, was largely ignored at first by the papers.
We can carry on wringing our hands and talking about people being 'pure evil' but that's not going to change anything. At one stage the mother was probably a bright eyed kid like her daughter and I notice that the police liason officer on the case said she felt sorry for the mother, even when she knew what she had done.
What struck me was that the police search for Shannon cost £3.5m. We are now going to pay for these two people to spend a considerable amount of time in jail and presumably the state is forking out to bring up at least some of the seven children she has by five different men. I can't help thinking that money, spent elsewhere would do a lot more good.
Perhaps if we had more, better trained social workers, they wouldn't be so stretched that they are happy to ignore families like the Matthews and fail to pick up on situations like Baby P. People don't go into social work to do harm, so it is about time we looked at the real problem, which is probably that there aren't enough of them to do the job properly.
And in order to stop kids like Shannon going on to replicate the mistakes of her mother, we need to do more with them in school. That means great teachers and more teachers;m fewer kids in a class so no one can hide at the back of the class and fail to learn to read and write. And specialist teachers, especially in area like Dewsbury Moor, who understand the problems and have time to give the less bright kids at least the basics. One on one if necessary. It can't be a coincidence that you don't find public school kids from comfortable homes involved in cases like this.
It's no good saying we can't afford it. We can afford the Iraq war, half a million a year on taxis for the foreign office, millions to repair a failed 'big bang' experiment that has already cost millions. We can afford the huge sums of money to keep thousands of people in jail.
I accept that she was a liar, manipulative and uncaring. But don't we need to ask what made her that way? Or do we believe that by some strange quirk of fate, many people raised in poverty, failures at school and with no belief that things can change, turn out to be the same people who play the system and screw everything they can out of the state?
It's not too hard to imagine that when she picked up the Sun and saw the money pouring into the McCann family - who may not have subjected their daughter to kidnapping, drugs etc, but were certainly negligent - Karen Matthews thought 'wouldn't mind a bit of that' hatched a plan and roped in the even more inadequate Michael Donovan
And once they had started it would have been impossible to go back. In fact they had to rack it up because, as was admitted on Today this morning, the disappearance of a girl from the underclasses as compared to Madeleine McCann, was largely ignored at first by the papers.
We can carry on wringing our hands and talking about people being 'pure evil' but that's not going to change anything. At one stage the mother was probably a bright eyed kid like her daughter and I notice that the police liason officer on the case said she felt sorry for the mother, even when she knew what she had done.
What struck me was that the police search for Shannon cost £3.5m. We are now going to pay for these two people to spend a considerable amount of time in jail and presumably the state is forking out to bring up at least some of the seven children she has by five different men. I can't help thinking that money, spent elsewhere would do a lot more good.
Perhaps if we had more, better trained social workers, they wouldn't be so stretched that they are happy to ignore families like the Matthews and fail to pick up on situations like Baby P. People don't go into social work to do harm, so it is about time we looked at the real problem, which is probably that there aren't enough of them to do the job properly.
And in order to stop kids like Shannon going on to replicate the mistakes of her mother, we need to do more with them in school. That means great teachers and more teachers;m fewer kids in a class so no one can hide at the back of the class and fail to learn to read and write. And specialist teachers, especially in area like Dewsbury Moor, who understand the problems and have time to give the less bright kids at least the basics. One on one if necessary. It can't be a coincidence that you don't find public school kids from comfortable homes involved in cases like this.
It's no good saying we can't afford it. We can afford the Iraq war, half a million a year on taxis for the foreign office, millions to repair a failed 'big bang' experiment that has already cost millions. We can afford the huge sums of money to keep thousands of people in jail.
Tuesday, 16 September 2008
It turns out the capitalists were right
As someone who sees himself leaning towards Old Labour rather than any of the current parties, I have always been sceptical about the promises of capitalism.
However,the current financial meltdown has proved its advocates are right about one thing - the drip down effect.
The problem is that the effect seems to hardly work at all in the boom times - the capitalists manage to get their buckets out and catch most of it before it reaches the rest of us.
But in bust!
The buckets are turned upside down over their heads and the drip down becomes a torrent of misery for the ordinary people who played no part in the decisions that created it.
And when they've all got over their nerves and restored the system, the bankers will pick up the pieces and restore their large bonuses and pension provisions, the gamblers who make money out of any misery will count their profits, and the rest of us will start from a lower base hoping for a little bit of drip down once more.
However,the current financial meltdown has proved its advocates are right about one thing - the drip down effect.
The problem is that the effect seems to hardly work at all in the boom times - the capitalists manage to get their buckets out and catch most of it before it reaches the rest of us.
But in bust!
The buckets are turned upside down over their heads and the drip down becomes a torrent of misery for the ordinary people who played no part in the decisions that created it.
And when they've all got over their nerves and restored the system, the bankers will pick up the pieces and restore their large bonuses and pension provisions, the gamblers who make money out of any misery will count their profits, and the rest of us will start from a lower base hoping for a little bit of drip down once more.
Wednesday, 16 July 2008
MP's expenses and allowances
While we are not blessed with a particularly impressive bunch of MPs in the current parliament, I tend to give most of them the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their motivation and honesty.
But the debates they have held on their own expenses suggest that many of them are completely out of touch with how real people live.
Of course they need a home in both London and their constituency. No reasonable person would argue with those homes being adequately furnished. But the allowances they receive for this should not be used to make a capital gain and boost what is already an above average salary and a generous pension scheme.
My own solution would be to put all MPs into council accommodation, either flat or house according to their need. This would remove any chance of them being accused of having their noses in the trough, but would also have an added advantage.
I am willing to bet that it wouldn't be long before the standard of council housing improved, redecorating and repairs would be carried out more quickly, and anti-social behaviour on estates would be tackled.
Another aspect of the debate I find interesting is that MPs of all parties seem to be agreed that £24,000 free of tax is a suitable amount for someone living in London. If that is so, why is not the basic tax allowance £24,000 for the rest of people living in London, and a similar adjusted figure (say £19,000) for those of us outside the capital?
Until MPs start to live with the same forces and problems the bulk of us face, they will never be able to represent us properly, nor can they expect our trust and respect.
But the debates they have held on their own expenses suggest that many of them are completely out of touch with how real people live.
Of course they need a home in both London and their constituency. No reasonable person would argue with those homes being adequately furnished. But the allowances they receive for this should not be used to make a capital gain and boost what is already an above average salary and a generous pension scheme.
My own solution would be to put all MPs into council accommodation, either flat or house according to their need. This would remove any chance of them being accused of having their noses in the trough, but would also have an added advantage.
I am willing to bet that it wouldn't be long before the standard of council housing improved, redecorating and repairs would be carried out more quickly, and anti-social behaviour on estates would be tackled.
Another aspect of the debate I find interesting is that MPs of all parties seem to be agreed that £24,000 free of tax is a suitable amount for someone living in London. If that is so, why is not the basic tax allowance £24,000 for the rest of people living in London, and a similar adjusted figure (say £19,000) for those of us outside the capital?
Until MPs start to live with the same forces and problems the bulk of us face, they will never be able to represent us properly, nor can they expect our trust and respect.
Wednesday, 2 July 2008
We want a nanny but she must be free
The BBC ran a poll to coincide with the 60th anniversary of the national health service and a few of the statistics jumped out at me:
82 per cent of those questioned thought the government should do more to wean people off drugs
69 per cent wanted the government to do more to reduce alcohol consumption and to promote healthy eating
67 per cent wanted the government to do more to reduce smoking
65 per cent wanted the government to do more to help people lose weight.
I wonder what percentage of those people would also vote for the government increasing taxes to pay for these things?
It seems that society increasingly demands the government solves its problems but doesn't want to pay the bill and certainly doesn't want to take responsibility for things that are largely in their own hands.
Of those options listed, probably only drugs needs medical intervention in most cases. There is enough information out there to help those who want to eat more healthily, lose weight or quit smoking, but people don't seem ready to find it.
We are told every day in the newspapers that everyone is up in arms at the rising cost of petrol and wants the government to do something about it. That really means they want the tax to be cut so they can buy their petrol cheaper.
Yet part of the solution is in their own hands: don't take unnecessary journeys in the car and when you are driving, cut your speed.
I recently drove on a motorway, keeping my speed between 50-60mph. It increased my journey time by only a few minutes and cut my fuel consumption by a surprising amount. Yet I was being passed constantly by drivers, many going well over the speed limit, who were no doubt complaining about the increased cost of petrol.
Perhaps it is time to stop asking the government to pay out for things that we can do ourselves. Or if we are not willing to do that, at least stop moaning about having to pick up the tab in the form of taxes.
82 per cent of those questioned thought the government should do more to wean people off drugs
69 per cent wanted the government to do more to reduce alcohol consumption and to promote healthy eating
67 per cent wanted the government to do more to reduce smoking
65 per cent wanted the government to do more to help people lose weight.
I wonder what percentage of those people would also vote for the government increasing taxes to pay for these things?
It seems that society increasingly demands the government solves its problems but doesn't want to pay the bill and certainly doesn't want to take responsibility for things that are largely in their own hands.
Of those options listed, probably only drugs needs medical intervention in most cases. There is enough information out there to help those who want to eat more healthily, lose weight or quit smoking, but people don't seem ready to find it.
We are told every day in the newspapers that everyone is up in arms at the rising cost of petrol and wants the government to do something about it. That really means they want the tax to be cut so they can buy their petrol cheaper.
Yet part of the solution is in their own hands: don't take unnecessary journeys in the car and when you are driving, cut your speed.
I recently drove on a motorway, keeping my speed between 50-60mph. It increased my journey time by only a few minutes and cut my fuel consumption by a surprising amount. Yet I was being passed constantly by drivers, many going well over the speed limit, who were no doubt complaining about the increased cost of petrol.
Perhaps it is time to stop asking the government to pay out for things that we can do ourselves. Or if we are not willing to do that, at least stop moaning about having to pick up the tab in the form of taxes.
Monday, 12 May 2008
Burma and Zimbabwe need to find oil
The endangered people of Burma and disenfranchised of Zimbabwe need to get digging and quick. It's the only hope they have that the major powers will do more than wring their hands and spout platitudes.
What's the difference between the repressive regimes in Iraq and Burma? - Oil
What's the difference between the vote rigging in Zimbabwe and Iraq? - Oil
But of course, I forgot, we went into Iraq to get rid of an evil dictator who was oppressing his people - and had oil
What's the difference between the repressive regimes in Iraq and Burma? - Oil
What's the difference between the vote rigging in Zimbabwe and Iraq? - Oil
But of course, I forgot, we went into Iraq to get rid of an evil dictator who was oppressing his people - and had oil
If we can't afford elderley care, how can we afford Iraq?
Gordon Brown says he wants a debate about how to provide care for the elderly that doesn't put their savings and homes in jeopardy.
However the background noises from the government suggest the country can't afford what is going to be massively increasing bill as more and more of us live longer. So forget all the tax and national insurance we've paid, it's down to us again, is it?
What I don't understand is why it is always possible to find untold billions to fight unnecessary wars like Iraq, but not to look after our own elderly citizens.
Could it be that our politicians are still so wrapped up in memories of what used to be Britain's role in the world that their position at the world's top table is more important to them than the people they represent?
However the background noises from the government suggest the country can't afford what is going to be massively increasing bill as more and more of us live longer. So forget all the tax and national insurance we've paid, it's down to us again, is it?
What I don't understand is why it is always possible to find untold billions to fight unnecessary wars like Iraq, but not to look after our own elderly citizens.
Could it be that our politicians are still so wrapped up in memories of what used to be Britain's role in the world that their position at the world's top table is more important to them than the people they represent?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)