| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 137550 | 2014-07-20 00:16:00 | Yep,one of the reasons I can't put a heater on in Dunedin | ruup (1827) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1379619 | 2014-07-20 00:16:00 | Yep,one of the reasons I can't put a heater on in Dunedin.Why do you need so much money? When will it trickle down?... www.stuff.co.nz |
ruup (1827) | ||
| 1379620 | 2014-07-20 00:32:00 | It's one of the flaws in our financial system. When companies make huge amounts of money they have to pay the top executives a lot to retain them or someone else will. It's not because the job is worth the salary or the people need the money, it's because of competition for staff and the need to perform for stockholders. It's all backwards but I don't see any way to fix it. In an Ideal world the poor bastard who climbs into a sewer to fix problems most of us don't want to know about or the emergency workers who scrape people up off the road would be the ones earning the big bucks. If we paid for work based on it's difficulty or value to society though some jobs would never be filled. The only incentive for people to do some types of work and perform for their company (not the general public) is a financial one. The upside is the chance that we or one of our family manages to find our way into one of those ridiculously overpaid jobs. It may be a small chance but there's always the hope that we too could benefit from our lopsided system. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1379621 | 2014-07-20 01:20:00 | It amazes me people won't put a heater on for the cost of running it, but will sit in front of a big screen tv and have a computer running all day while not using it. It's all about priorities. | plod (107) | ||
| 1379622 | 2014-07-20 01:25:00 | It's one of the flaws in our financial system. When companies make huge amounts of money they have to pay the top executives a lot to retain them or someone else will. It's not because the job is worth the salary or the people need the money, it's because of competition for staff and the need to perform for stockholders. It's all backwards but I don't see any way to fix it. In an Ideal world the poor bastard who climbs into a sewer to fix problems most of us don't want to know about or the emergency workers who scrape people up off the road would be the ones earning the big bucks. If we paid for work based on it's difficulty or value to society though some jobs would never be filled. The only incentive for people to do some types of work and perform for their company (not the general public) is a financial one. The upside is the chance that we or one of our family manages to find our way into one of those ridiculously overpaid jobs. It may be a small chance but there's always the hope that we too could benefit from our lopsided system. I'd like to offer a slightly different perspective. I definitely agree that the currently salary package plus perks that is offered to CEOs of power generation companies is way over the top for running a utility. Afterall, we all need power, water and sewage services and aside from shopping around for the best deal from all the utility companies we are all going to end up going to one if them any way. So as long as the power keeps coming through the power lines what other big decisions do those CEOs have to make? I don't have as much of an issue with CEOs of large retail companies or tech companies getting paid biggish salaries as they have different issues to contend with that can often have a greater effect on the profitability of their company. |
Webdevguy (17166) | ||
| 1379623 | 2014-07-20 01:38:00 | It's actually all about the lack of money...it amazes me that some people, only think in terms of 'I'm alright Jack' ....Our society has gone from 'WE' to "ME ME ME" If only the 'average man' got the 'average wage!' | ruup (1827) | ||
| 1379624 | 2014-07-20 02:19:00 | It's one of the flaws in our financial system. When companies make huge amounts of money they have to pay the top executives a lot to retain them or someone else will. . A ridiculous argument. If none of them paid bloated salaries to those who do bugger all, it wouldn't be like that. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1379625 | 2014-07-20 02:41:00 | I stopped getting my power from Contact Energy a few months back and am now with Greypower Electricity thru Pulse Energy. Maybe more people will vote with their feet. | Bobh (5192) | ||
| 1379626 | 2014-07-20 03:00:00 | It's not how much you earn. Its how much you spend | gary67 (56) | ||
| 1379627 | 2014-07-20 03:31:00 | But if you can't earn it you can't spend it. | ruup (1827) | ||
| 1379628 | 2014-07-20 03:37:00 | A ridiculous argument. If none of them paid bloated salaries to those who do bugger all, it wouldn't be like that. Let me put it another way, jobs that anyone can do tend to pay less because there are plenty of willing potential employees to chose from so the employers don't have to try very hard to attract them. Jobs that require a specific set of skills tend to pay more because there are less people to choose from and that creates demand. Top end jobs tend to pay stupid amounts of money regardless of the complexity of the job because if they don't anyone who is remotely talented won't take the job. Also whoever does that job has to be willing to take the heat, sometimes very substantial amounts of it, when things go bad. If you could make more money doing something more worthwhile why would anyone be CEO of a company? (some would but that's not the point). They pay what they do to attract the people they want, the fact that to us those people don't seem worth it doesn't come into the decision making at all. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||