Jeremy Corbyn's Labour

[superblue24]

Still don't see £50m mentioned. I saw £200,000 though...but that he isn't wedded to an amount.

Either way, my view is that the workers create the profit, and should therefore share in it. Not allowing bosses to pay their staff more than an certain amount means that the bosses of those companies will just make more money at their workers' expense.

BBC changed the news story and removed the quotes. He had said that "He couldn't see why anyone would need to earn more than 50M a year", indicating that any cap he wanted to introduce would be reserved for the "super-rich"

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Wag cap. Interesting views being expressed on this but that was just the concept of a wage cap being mentioned. The full speech is now available, what Corbyn had to say on excessive pay was:

'In the 1920s, J.P. Morgan, the Wall Street banker limited salaries to 20 times that of junior employees.


Another advocate of pay ratios was David Cameron. His government proposed a 20:1 pay ratio to limit sky-high pay in the public sector and now all salaries higher than £150,000 must be signed off by the Cabinet Office.


Labour will go further and extend that to any company that is awarded a government contract.
A 20:1 ratio means someone earning the living wage, just over £16,000 a year, would permit an executive to be earning nearly £350,000. It cannot be right that if companies are getting public money that that can be creamed off by a few at the top.


But there is a wider point too. 20 years ago the top bosses of the FTSE 100 companies earned just under 50 times their average worker, today that figure is now 130 times. Last year alone, the top bosses got a 10 per cent pay rise, far higher than those doing the work in the shops, in the call centres, in the warehouses.


So what can we do?


… We could allow consumers to judge for themselves, with a government-backed kitemark for those companies that have agreed pay ratios between the pay of the highest and lowest earners with a recognised trade union.


… We could ask for executive pay to be signed off by remuneration committees on which workers have a majority.


… We could ensure higher earners pay their fair share by introducing a higher rate of income tax on the highest 5 percent or 1 percent of incomes.


… We could offer lower rates of corporation tax for companies that don’t pay anyone more than a certain multiple of the pay of the lowest earner.


There are many options. But what we cannot accept is a society in which a few earn the in two and a bit days, what a nurse, a shop worker, a teacher do in a year. That cannot be right.


This is not about limiting aspiration or penalising success, it’s about recognising that success is a collective effort and rewards must be shared.


We cannot have the CEO paying less tax than the cleaner and pretending they are worth thousands times more than the lowest paid staff.'

 

[mrsblue]

Wag cap. Interesting views being expressed on this but that was just the concept of a wage cap being mentioned. The full speech is now available, what Corbyn had to say on excessive pay was:

'In the 1920s, J.P. Morgan, the Wall Street banker limited salaries to 20 times that of junior employees.


Another advocate of pay ratios was David Cameron. His government proposed a 20:1 pay ratio to limit sky-high pay in the public sector and now all salaries higher than £150,000 must be signed off by the Cabinet Office.


Labour will go further and extend that to any company that is awarded a government contract.
A 20:1 ratio means someone earning the living wage, just over £16,000 a year, would permit an executive to be earning nearly £350,000. It cannot be right that if companies are getting public money that that can be creamed off by a few at the top.


But there is a wider point too. 20 years ago the top bosses of the FTSE 100 companies earned just under 50 times their average worker, today that figure is now 130 times. Last year alone, the top bosses got a 10 per cent pay rise, far higher than those doing the work in the shops, in the call centres, in the warehouses.


So what can we do?


… We could allow consumers to judge for themselves, with a government-backed kitemark for those companies that have agreed pay ratios between the pay of the highest and lowest earners with a recognised trade union.


… We could ask for executive pay to be signed off by remuneration committees on which workers have a majority.


… We could ensure higher earners pay their fair share by introducing a higher rate of income tax on the highest 5 percent or 1 percent of incomes.


… We could offer lower rates of corporation tax for companies that don’t pay anyone more than a certain multiple of the pay of the lowest earner.


There are many options. But what we cannot accept is a society in which a few earn the in two and a bit days, what a nurse, a shop worker, a teacher do in a year. That cannot be right.


This is not about limiting aspiration or penalising success, it’s about recognising that success is a collective effort and rewards must be shared.


We cannot have the CEO paying less tax than the cleaner and pretending they are worth thousands times more than the lowest paid staff.'

***....20 times 16k is 320 not 350 as Corbyn stated....explains plenty.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Perhaps you could help him by letting us all know what will Labour be doing for Britain post Brexit. What you haven't learnt is telling the world how nasty the Tories are, completely failed in the GE so change the record. Don't bother blaming the press because that's what my union did after every defeat rather than admit to their own failings. Remember that now forgotten phrase 'We have to listen to people'

If you want people to vote Labour they need more than what they get from the likes of Alastair Campbell.....We should have never had a referendum in the first place. Well Alastair we did and we voted out....so what are you offering me.

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/155675139454/jeremy-corbyns-speech-in-peterborough

I'd pretty much stand by everything said here, with this stance he has my full support

 

[londonblue]

BBC changed the news story and removed the quotes. He had said that "He couldn't see why anyone would need to earn more than 50M a year", indicating that any cap he wanted to introduce would be reserved for the "super-rich"

That pesky BBC, always editing their stories! FWIW, if it was £50m i'd agree with the point because it wouldn't affect many employees, or bosses, around the country!

 

[rigsby]

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/155675139454/jeremy-corbyns-speech-in-peterborough

I'd pretty much stand by everything said here, with this stance he has my full support

Tried to read it but gave up. Scrolled down a fair way but as I say heard it all before.....Nasty Tories, more NHS funding, nasty Tories, £350m was a lie, We will respect the vote, we have our eye on May.....Oh and we must listen.

So did I miss anything.....Anything that might just make one person in the whole of Britain change their vote in the next GE.

 

[rigsby]

That pesky BBC, always editing their stories! FWIW, if it was £50m i'd agree with the point because it wouldn't affect many employees, or bosses, around the country!

He used £50m as an example not a set figure. Nice idea but you would have to by tax rather than some legal cap. For example allow the James Dyson's of the world more money through legal loopholes than a Mike Ashley or a City Banker.

As for foreign footballers playing in the PL and not even paying tax in Britain, How about 75% tax as they don't create a single job in this country.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Tried to read it but gave up. Scrolled down a fair way but as I say heard it all before.....Nasty Tories, more NHS funding, nasty Tories, £350m was a lie, We will respect the vote, we have our eye on May.....Oh and we must listen.

So did I miss anything.....Anything that might just make one person in the whole of Britain change their vote in the next GE.

Granted Jeremy 2.0 didn't play well in the right wing media as a relaunch but the speech is worth reading in full.

If the next labour government cracks down on rogue employers who undercut British workers by bringing in unskilled labour from the EU, that alone would be a potential vote winner I'd've thought.

 

[rigsby]

Granted Jeremy 2.0 didn't play well in the right wing media as a relaunch but the speech is worth reading in full.

If the next labour government cracks down on rogue employers who undercut British workers by bringing in unskilled labour from the EU, that alone would be a potential vote winner I'd've thought.

Yes us people who voted Brexit have already thought of that. The best way to stop wages being undercut by exploited unskilled foreign labour......Don't allow them into Britain in the first place.

Now I know those words are to harsh for you and you see that as racist but its just the hard facts of economic life. We do not need an endless supply of unskilled labour, its does no one any favours and no you can't possibly put more into the system if you are on minimum wage.

Capitalism is a actually a finer balance than people think. If I have 10 jobs at my company and 9 people to fill them then you the worker have the power to demand a decent wage and conditions. Now if 11 people are available for those same 10 jobs, then me the boss has all the power.

Shame you cant see how the EU does no favours for the workers. It helps ruin the counties they leave behind in Eastern Europe and has caused untold social problems in Britain. But every time you scream racist you actually play into the hands of the greedy corrupt bosses you so despise

The likes of Paul Embery can see it. So can JC, its a shame a twisted version of the PC police from his own party have silenced him......Because we all suffer as a result.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Tried to read it but gave up. Scrolled down a fair way but as I say heard it all before.....Nasty Tories, more NHS funding, nasty Tories, £350m was a lie, We will respect the vote, we have our eye on May.....Oh and we must listen.

So did I miss anything.....Anything that might just make one person in the whole of Britain change their vote in the next GE.

you can't have heard it all before if you haven't read it all.
You were banging on and on about Corbyn's Brexit plan and when it arrives (before the government's) you can't be bothered to read it.
Its almost as if you want to criticise no matter what is or isn't said. Not a surprise at all.

 

[rigsby]

you can't have heard it all before if you haven't read it all.
You were banging on and on about Corbyn's Brexit plan and when it arrives (before the government's) you can't be bothered to read it.
Its almost as if you want to criticise no matter what is or isn't said. Not a surprise at all.

Of course I have, from you on a daily basis.

No one is interested in long winded anti Tory rants. You said you fully supported his statement....Then why don't you listen.
People like a clear message or two. Does Jeremy ( I might be against free movement, then again maybe not) Corbyn, have anything for us.

Now without mentioning the Tories or the NHS ( it won't gain you any votes) what will the Labour party do for the British working classes. Remember those horrible little people who voted Brexit, well there the ones who will decide if Labour end up in government or wiped out as a party just like in Scotland.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Of course I have, from you on a daily basis.

No one is interested in long winded anti Tory rants. You said you fully supported his statement....Then why don't you listen.
People like a clear message or two. Does Jeremy ( I might be against free movement, then again maybe not) Corbyn, have anything for us.

Now without mentioning the Tories or the NHS ( it won't gain you any votes) what will the Labour party do for the British working classes. Remember those horrible little people who voted Brexit, well there the ones who will decide if Labour end up in government or wiped out as a party just like in Scotland.

this is a repeat of your bleating on the NHS thread where you complain I was 1) avoiding questions ('where do old people live' was the tricky question) and 2) answering too thoroughly

you keep asking about Labour's stance and what I think of it, I've given you the link and told you I support what it says - there is the answer to your questions, if you don't want to read it that's up to you but that is where the answers are (but I should let you know that if you want political discussions to exclude the NHS and the government that's not really going to happen)

 

[rigsby]

this is a repeat of your bleating on the NHS thread where you complain I was 1) avoiding questions ('where do old people live' was the tricky question) and 2) answering too thoroughly

you keep asking about Labour's stance and what I think of it, I've given you the link and told you I support what it says - there is the answer to your questions, if you don't want to read it that's up to you but that is where the answers are (but I should let you know that if you want political discussions to exclude the NHS and the government that's not really going to happen)

I knew you would need your comfy NHs blanket to hide under. Yes we know you would pump an endless amount of other peoples money into it. But at the last GE we didn't trust you because you couldn't say how you would raise that money and many of us don't think that's the answer anyway.

Now back to the issue that will decide the next GE. You do realise that the Tories are deliberately dragging their feet because they want to fight the next GE on Brexit.

Almost like WW2, if its over then people will vote for other subjects rather than immigration, which would help Labour. So you need to give JC a kick up the backside and push for it to happen sooner rather than after a GE. Most of all you need some policies rather than rambling anti Tory nonsense.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I knew you would need your comfy NHs blanket to hide under. Yes we know you would pump an endless amount of other peoples money into it. But at the last GE we didn't trust you because you couldn't say how you would raise that money and many of us don't think that's the answer anyway.

Now back to the issue that will decide the next GE. You do realise that the Tories are deliberately dragging their feet because they want to fight the next GE on Brexit.

Almost like WW2, if its over then people will vote for other subjects rather than immigration, which would help Labour. So you need to give JC a kick up the backside and push for it to happen sooner rather than after a GE. Most of all you need some policies rather than rambling anti Tory nonsense.

http://press.labour.org.uk/post/1556...n-peterborough

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Yes us people who voted Brexit have already thought of that. The best way to stop wages being undercut by exploited unskilled foreign labour......Don't allow them into Britain in the first place.

Now I know those words are to harsh for you and you see that as racist but its just the hard facts of economic life. We do not need an endless supply of unskilled labour, its does no one any favours and no you can't possibly put more into the system if you are on minimum wage.

Capitalism is a actually a finer balance than people think. If I have 10 jobs at my company and 9 people to fill them then you the worker have the power to demand a decent wage and conditions. Now if 11 people are available for those same 10 jobs, then me the boss has all the power.

Shame you cant see how the EU does no favours for the workers. It helps ruin the counties they leave behind in Eastern Europe and has caused untold social problems in Britain. But every time you scream racist you actually play into the hands of the greedy corrupt bosses you so despise

The likes of Paul Embery can see it. So can JC, its a shame a twisted version of the PC police from his own party have silenced him......Because we all suffer as a result.

Membership of the EU has certainly done myself and my wife plenty of favours.Allowing us to live and work easily in another EU country in which neither of us was born,for example.

I suppose you could argue that as teachers, neither of us are unskilled workers.In which case I'd agree with you.

However, I still happen to believe in the free movement of labour in the EU as a matter of principle.

 

[GrumpyBlue]

this is a repeat of your bleating on the NHS thread where you complain I was 1) avoiding questions ('where do old people live' was the tricky question) and 2) answering too thoroughly

you keep asking about Labour's stance and what I think of it, I've given you the link and told you I support what it says - there is the answer to your questions, if you don't want to read it that's up to you but that is where the answers are (but I should let you know that if you want political discussions to exclude the NHS and the government that's not really going to happen)

Why do you bother engaging with him - I gave up reading his crap by putting him on ignore only to see posts when others waste their time engaging doh!

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Whilst Corbyn was making apparent U turns according to the mass media, what has gone somewhat under the radar is the government U turn - the £1,000 levy for EU workers has been ditched within 24 hours, and in other EU immigration news Home Secretary Amber Rudd has had a speech on immigrant workers registered by the police as a 'hate incident'![FONT=Helmet, Freesans, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT]

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Why do you bother engaging with him - I gave up reading his crap by putting him on ignore only to see posts when others waste their time engaging doh!

yeah, sorry. I'd liken it to finding litter on the street - you wonder if you should bother but then you stoop down and pick it up (though that coke can that turned out to be covered in fox poo has put me off - maybe I should remember that moment more often when on here....)

 

[mrsblue]

Why do you bother engaging with him - I gave up reading his crap by putting him on ignore only to see posts when others waste their time engaging doh!

Hmmm

Personally I find Riggers entertaining and informative...likewise ***.

Would rather read their stuff than most on here.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Just watched the Andrew Marr Show on iPlayer - Jeremy Corbyn on at 36 minutes for anyone who wants to see it.
Comes across as so calm and positive on this discussion.