Great (Tom) Scott!

15 comments on “Great (Tom) Scott! ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Tombstone 1

   31 May 2012 at 10:35 am

   Exactly – and this is what we need to change. The wrong people are making too much money and bleeding the rest of us dry in the process. Time for change. Serious change.
2. Roy 2

   31 May 2012 at 10:57 am

   Perfect. Kudos to Tom Scott.
3. tc 3

   31 May 2012 at 11:19 am

   +1 and wtf has Heffernden done at MRP to get such a whopping increase and bonus.
   • bbfloyd 3.1

     31 May 2012 at 11:40 am

     he’s been a “good friend” to the national party…
4. weka 4

   31 May 2012 at 11:27 am

   Very good cartoon.
    
   Why are NZers so reluctant to question the salaries of very highly paid executives? We seem to think there is a taboo on this.
   • Draco T Bastard 4.1

     31 May 2012 at 11:46 am

     The whole world seems to think there’s a taboo on it. This does seem to be changing though as people realise that the CEOs/traders/bankers and their ilk really aren’t worth as much as they’re paid.
     • Colonial Viper 4.1.1

       31 May 2012 at 11:50 am

       One does not question the salaries and bonuses of our most esteemed gods.
   • Chris 4.2

     31 May 2012 at 6:57 pm

     I think it is because every time anyone does question it they just bring up the salaries of American CEO’s etc and that always seems to be the end of it.

     I’ve never understood why more shareholders in particular don’t attack these salaries. 
   • rosy 4.3

     31 May 2012 at 7:51 pm

     The French are getting it. Baby steps but pretty brave to be limiting public service pay to 20 times that of the lowest paid worker and a 75% tax on incomes over 1m euros without any other Euro country planning on following suit (at this stage)

     France’s new socialist government has announced an immediate, dramatic clampdown on fat-cat pay, promising to cap the salaries of chief executives at state-owned companies which could see top pay-packages slashed or halved.

     The president François Hollande vowed during the election campaign that in majority state-owned companies, the highest salary must not be 20 times more than the pay of the lowliest worker. The squeeze on state fat cats, expected to be enacted by decree next month, is part of the new government’s quest for France to set a moral example in a crisis-hit Europe where top earners’ stratospheric pay packages and benefits has exasperated workers and voters. The measure will sit alongside Hollande’s promised new top tax rate of 75% on income over 1 million euros, which is extremely popular among the French public, and which he has described as an act of “patriotism” and “morality”. Socialists brushed aside criticisms from the right that state pay-caps could make it difficult to recruit from private sector.
     • Draco T Bastard 4.3.1

       31 May 2012 at 8:03 pm

       I like this comment

       GreenRevolution

       30 May 2012 7:31PM

       France’s president has vowed that the highest state salary must not be 20 times more than the pay of the lowliest worker

       I would like to suggest that the lowest private sector salary must not be less than 1/20th of the highest paid banker or hedge fund manager.

       😈
5. freedom 5

   31 May 2012 at 12:30 pm

   lest we forget the tragedies and hardships of our betters
   
6. Bored 6

   31 May 2012 at 12:47 pm

   This whole farcical situation is another example of how completely fucked up our economic arrangements are. I have no doubt some people do work which is worth more than others, but its down to how we judge it, and more importantly it is warped by “private property rights”.

   There is something about aged care that relates to property and inheritance. We tax people during their working life to pay for the educational, health and welfare services that we a a society require to keep us a coherent / cogent entity. At the same time there is an understandable inclination amongst families to try and keep their accumulated wealth within the family unit for purposes of inheritance.

   This property might just as well be converted at death to cover the cost of aged care (including reasonable pay rates), but it currently is not What happens is that the state picks up part of the bill according to the value of the assets of the aged person concerned. The system is inequitable to those who have accumulated property (as opposed to those who have not) and conversely inequitable to the tax payers because property is easily hidden by those who have it (meaning the tax payer picks up the tab).

   My preference is for us to socialise the delivery of aged care (with reasonable rates of pay for carers) funded by the tax payer on a universal zero access charge for aged care. To avoid shortfalls with PAYE funding we could tax property transactions, introduce death duties and tighter transfer criteria for assets etc.This will off course upset the middle classes who have become very accustomed to receiving the family house as an inheritance.
7. Sam Hall 7

   31 May 2012 at 12:53 pm

   DEATH DUTIES. duty to the society that raised, fed,clothd and educated (insufficiently) and healed them b4 they went on to be masters of their own little universes.(black holes)
8. felix 8

   31 May 2012 at 1:59 pm

   Bang on, Tom.

   Also, who else has been trained by xkcd to hover over every cartoon they see?
9. SandFly 9

   31 May 2012 at 7:21 pm

   Now, now!
   It takes a special person to lose $106 million and not have to answer for it.
   (4th sentence)
   http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/6673556/Government-in-112b-barney-over-accounting

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS