RonJeremy Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 I think if each Parasite in Westminster got paid for the hours they "worked" £65k would be a great wage. As for a raise, if they must get one then it should reflect the rest of the country's wage rise, 1% seems to be the norm. Why not cull 75% of the Parasites in the house, make the remaining 25% work for a living and pay them a flat £100k and NO expenses of any description. Angel. I don't know where to start with this. The EXPENSES are just that. Recompense for office equipment, postage, travel to and from constituency, second homes etc.. they are not exorbitant. This is a specious argument. The BBC's correspondent was on the news last asking your average dimwit in the street whether they thought MPs should set their own pay - "no" everyone replied. So they were then asked should they get an 11% pay rise. "No" was the inevitable reply. Incongruous answers from the general public. One said "I wish I got that" - more green eyed nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share Posted December 13, 2013 I live in hope that pork can be educated, nothing more. you might learn something:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 to be fair it does seem that loob is in love with them bit of a lone voice mind. It would be nice if the MP's joined the real world Our MPs should be very well paid, it poor timing to get an 11% pay rise, but its not that often they get pay rises. And it is an overall salary cut. Any MP that does not get money for a second job, should accept this pay rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 It's not that MPs don't get enough, but that others get too much. MPs think they should be up there with CEOs and bankers who are on a £million plus, which is ridiculous. As they represent the people, MPs' salary should be based on the national average wage. MPs already get nearly 3 times the average wage. Remember we are paying for it out of our taxes. I think that should be enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 It's not that MPs don't get enough, but that others get too much. MPs think they should be up there with CEOs and bankers who are on a £million plus, which is ridiculous. As they represent the people, MPs' salary should be based on the national average wage. MPs already get nearly 3 times the average wage. Remember we are paying for it out of our taxes. I think that should be enough. What made you conclude that MPs believe that they should be getting paid a £million plus? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 MPs think they should be up there with CEOs and bankers who are on a £million plus, which is ridiculous.I know many CEOs, here and overseas. Many of whom are business owners/shareholders. I don't any CEO who's on a £million plus. I do know a fair few, in local and not-so-local startups, who are on minimum wage or less. I'm confident that the point transcends many 'bankers' (bank employees) as well. As they represent the people, MPs' salary should be based on the national average wage. MPs already get nearly 3 times the average wage.The national average wage is representative of an average job with average tasks and average responsibilities. I've explained in broad terms what an MP's job consists of. Question for you: do you think it's an average job? Time for some facts about MP's pay increases, based on historical data: Jan-96 £34,085 0.00 Jul-96 £43,000 26.00 % Apr-97 £43,860 2.00 % Apr-98 £45,066 2.75 % Apr-99 £47,008 4.31 % Apr-00 £48,371 2.90 % Apr-01 £49,822 3.00 % Jun-01 £51,822 4.01 % Apr-02 £55,118 6.36 % Apr-03 £56,358 2.25 % Apr-04 £57,485 2.00 % Apr-05 £59,095 2.80 % Apr-06 £59,686 1.00 % Nov-06 £60,277 0.99 % Apr-07 £61,181 1.50 % Nov-07 £61,820 1.04 % Apr-09 £64,766 4.76 % Apr-10 £65,738 1.50 % Apr-13 £66,396 1.00 % Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share Posted December 13, 2013 I know many CEOs, here and overseas. Many of whom are business owners/shareholders. I don't any CEO who's on a £million plus. I do know a fair few, in local and not-so-local startups, who are on minimum wage or less. I'm confident that the point transcends many 'bankers' (bank employees) as well. The national average wage is representative of an average job with average tasks and average responsibilities. I've explained in broad terms what an MP's job consists of. Question for you: do you think it's an average job? Time for some facts about MP's pay increases, based on historical data: Jan-96 £34,085 0.00 Jul-96 £43,000 26.00 % Apr-97 £43,860 2.00 % Apr-98 £45,066 2.75 % Apr-99 £47,008 4.31 % Apr-00 £48,371 2.90 % Apr-01 £49,822 3.00 % Jun-01 £51,822 4.01 % Apr-02 £55,118 6.36 % Apr-03 £56,358 2.25 % Apr-04 £57,485 2.00 % Apr-05 £59,095 2.80 % Apr-06 £59,686 1.00 % Nov-06 £60,277 0.99 % Apr-07 £61,181 1.50 % Nov-07 £61,820 1.04 % Apr-09 £64,766 4.76 % Apr-10 £65,738 1.50 % Apr-13 £66,396 1.00 % an average mps cost to taxpayers in 2004 was 118 grand not bad to say they were payed 57 grand you doing yourself no favours in sticking up for the indefensable prats who are having every one of us over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 an average mps cost to taxpayers in 2004 was 118 grand not bad to say they were payed 57 grand This thread is about a pay increase which has been proposed alongside a substantial reduction of claimable expenses and pension rights but I guess that 'little' detail has been lost in the noise of the headline figures, as usual. you doing yourself no favours in sticking up for the indefensable prats who are having every one of us over I'm not sticking for anyone and certainly not after any kind of 'favours', I'm simply informing the debate, which imbecilic posts are hindering. Including yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share Posted December 13, 2013 This thread is about a pay increase which has been proposed alongside a substantial reduction of claimable expenses and pension rights but I guess that 'little' detail has been lost in the noise of the headline figures, as usual. I'm not sticking for anyone and certainly not after any kind of 'favours', I'm simply informing the debate, which imbecilic posts are hindering. Including yours. say what you like mate i dont care i will still be here for you to cry on my shoulder when you find out the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 say what you like mate i dont care i will still be here for you to cry on my shoulder when you find out the truth Is this the truth based upon the facts, or your type of truth? One based upon headlines and gut feelings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.