Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 2 hours ago, mormont said: My point exactly. I know lots of folks that went into politics. I know lots more, including myself, who could have but didn't. Pretty much none of the latter group cited money as the deterrent. Those that did cite it, are not people I would want to be running a dog walking service let alone a country. All respect to your grandfather, but earning a huge salary in another field is irrelevant to whether you'd be a good politician. If earning six times the median salary (plus a flat, country house, and all kinds of expenses) isn't enough cash for someone who wants to be PM, fuck that person. I don't want them in charge. Why? It could be as simple as a 50% reduction in pay makes it harder to raise kids. I'm guessing the UK is like the US and a lot of people running are lawyers, specifically lawyers that would make significantly more at a private firm. It's totally reasonable for them to consider the financial impact if they're not already incredibly wealthy. People factoring in their finances when deciding whether or not to run are not the people that should concern you. Save said concern for the ones that have only known elite schooling and a posh lifestyle who have next to no ability to understand the ups and downs of everyday life for people earning around the median salary or less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: Why? It could be as simple as a 50% reduction in pay makes it harder to raise kids. I'm guessing the UK is like the US and a lot of people running are lawyers, specifically lawyers that would make significantly more at a private firm. It's totally reasonable for them to consider the financial impact if they're not already incredibly wealthy. People factoring in their finances when deciding whether or not to run are not the people that should concern you. Save said concern for the ones that have only known elite schooling and a posh lifestyle who have next to no ability to understand the ups and downs of everyday life for people earning around the median salary or less. Sorry, you think you can't raise kids on a PM salary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 It's worth mentioning that while MPs have a "low" (still far, far higher than the average in this country) salary it seems like they are also able to claim almost anything they want from friends and family as "staff" to second homes as expenses to be paid for by the taxpayer with, which has resulted in a bunch of comparatively minor scandals. Last time I checked most of them run up bills in the region of a couple of hundred thousand pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 10 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said: Sorry, you think you can't raise kids on a PM salary? The interwebs say the base pay is $84,000. I would imagine it would be tough if it's a single earner household with three kids under the age of 10, especially if the person was accustom to earning twice that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 21, 2022 Author Share Posted October 21, 2022 2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: The interwebs say the base pay is $84,000. I would imagine it would be tough if it's a single earner household with three kids under the age of 10, especially if the person was accustom to earning twice that. I raised two kids as a single earner household on considerably less than that. So do the vast majority of the people MPs represent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog-days Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 They earn £164 000. £84 000 is an MP's salary. PMs are also entitled to generous expenses, and get free accommodation. As a comparison, a UK GP earns around £60 000 to £90 000 per year. They don't get their accommodation provided, and don't get huge expenses. (Unless they do and keep it very very quiet). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 21, 2022 Author Share Posted October 21, 2022 More to the point: I would suggest, and many others would agree, that a far more serious problem in our government is that Parliament already has far too many of the sort of people who would think it enormously difficult to raise kids on £84,000 a year. People who would ask how they can possibly afford a nanny on that salary. There is, let's be clear, no shortage of lawyers in Parliament already. There's no evidence that the career is unattractive to those folks. What we need is more people who do not fit that tired archetype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 29 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: The interwebs say the base pay is $84,000. I would imagine it would be tough if it's a single earner household with three kids under the age of 10, especially if the person was accustom to earning twice that. I think you're forgetting that it's the UK we're talking about. UK and US salaries aren't really comparable $84k is around about the comfortable wage in the US (depending on state) £84k is around about 3x the comfortable wage in the UK US equivalent for spending power, of £84k is about $250k - more-or-less doubled for cabinet members; and doubled again for expenses. https://www.raisin.co.uk/budgeting/how-much-money-do-you-need-to-live-comfortably-uk/ https://www.businessinsider.com/living-wage-income-to-live-comfortably-in-every-us-state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poobah Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 7 minutes ago, mormont said: More to the point: I would suggest, and many others would agree, that a far more serious problem in our government is that Parliament already has far too many of the sort of people who would think it enormously difficult to raise kids on £84,000 a year. People who would ask how they can possibly afford a nanny on that salary. And yet the same absolute shitstains would criticise working class people earning £20K, call them greedy for wanting their pay to rise, lazy for not wanting to work more hours with less security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 21, 2022 Author Share Posted October 21, 2022 The levels of self-delusion in the Tory party right now are off the scale. Suella Braverman, who peaked at 32 nominations in the first round before dropping to 27 and being eliminated, somehow seems to think she can get 100 out of the gate this time. Perhaps because of her string of stunning successes in her six week stint as Home Secretary? Honestly, this is insanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impmk2 Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 Had to double take at that $ / £ conversion. The current strength of the USD is insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 11 minutes ago, mormont said: The levels of self-delusion in the Tory party right now are off the scale. Suella Braverman, who peaked at 32 nominations in the first round before dropping to 27 and being eliminated, somehow seems to think she can get 100 out of the gate this time. Perhaps because of her string of stunning successes in her six week stint as Home Secretary? Honestly, this is insanity. If Boris is running, then I'm delighted Suella is as well - she'll only steal votes from BJ, no-one else; giving us a better (still poor) chance of BJ not being on the ballot for the party membership Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 56 minutes ago, mormont said: More to the point: I would suggest, and many others would agree, that a far more serious problem in our government is that Parliament already has far too many of the sort of people who would think it enormously difficult to raise kids on £84,000 a year. People who would ask how they can possibly afford a nanny on that salary. There is, let's be clear, no shortage of lawyers in Parliament already. There's no evidence that the career is unattractive to those folks. What we need is more people who do not fit that tired archetype. Just because someone is a lawyer it doesn’t necessarily follow that the person so employed is wealthy. I can personally attest to that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 21, 2022 Author Share Posted October 21, 2022 Speaking of the ballot for the party membership, holy shit that's also insane. Organising an online vote for 160,000 people in all areas of the country, some abroad, in less than a week? I have quite a bit of experience at organising online voting and there is no way this is going to be secure: and no way there aren't going to be huge numbers of members who will be unable to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog-days Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 I almost feel sorry for any Russian attempts at manipulating the online vote. The thing to do is to pick someone who'll be an incompetent, divisive, destructive PM - but there are so many well-qualified candidates to choose from. How to pick?? ETA: Article from Tortoise about problems with the Conservative leadership election. I didn't know that the party wouldn't even issue GDPR-safe anonymised data about e.g. the age range of the membership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse Named Stranger Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 13 minutes ago, dog-days said: I almost feel sorry for any Russian attempts at manipulating the online vote. The thing to do is to pick someone who'll be an incompetent, divisive, destructive PM - but there are so many well-qualified candidates to choose from. How to pick?? Writen in Truss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 36 minutes ago, mormont said: Speaking of the ballot for the party membership, holy shit that's also insane. Organising an online vote for 160,000 people in all areas of the country, some abroad, in less than a week? I have quite a bit of experience at organising online voting and there is no way this is going to be secure: and no way there aren't going to be huge numbers of members who will be unable to vote. It's gonna be amazing when the BTS army decides who the next PM will be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rorshach Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 3 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said: It's gonna be amazing when the BTS army decides who the next PM will be Well, is there any chance at all they can do worse than the Tory party itself? I see that as a vanishingly small chance, frankly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 21, 2022 Author Share Posted October 21, 2022 Further to my last post: 20,000 members with no email address registered. The solution? The party is going to phone them. All of them, over one weekend. And ask them to supply an email. A number of them won't even have an email: they'll need to acquire one. For many the first thing they'll ever have done with that email is vote in this election. Well, one hopes that will be the second thing, after completing some sort of verification. But then that will go wrong in many instances, and members will only realise it went wrong when they try to vote. And then they'll jam the phone lines to the party with complaints and questions. Meanwhile, anyone not at home or not near their mobile this weekend will presumably have to call to get their vote. But the phone lines are jammed. Then they get to vote and make a mistake with the verification code and oh no, what to do, better call someone. But the phone lines are jammed. The Tories better hope only one person gets the 100 noms because this online vote is going to be an expensive administrative nightmare which thousands of dissatisfied members are going to be bitching about in the Mail. 4 minutes ago, Kalnestk Oblast said: It's gonna be amazing when the BTS army decides who the next PM will be You need to have been a member for three months, and sadly that info they do have. Some people who've been members for longer will probably get missed out due to admin fuckups, but there's no way to game it en masse short of hacking the system. Which might well be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dog-days Posted October 21, 2022 Share Posted October 21, 2022 In news that would once have grabbed much attention and now is like a fart in a fireworks factory, Labour MP Chris Matheson has resigned after a panel found he'd made sexual advances to a member of his junior staff. Bit sad about this. I've voted for him at least once, and had the impression that he was one of the more conscientious, decent people in the Commons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.