BS: a bit rich: value of work to society

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Donuel
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:24 PM

IS $373 a week a lot?

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:41 PM

The public health would be at serious risk were it not for hospital cleaners, dustmen (garbage collectors)sewage workers, etc.

The well being of preschool children whose personalities and entire learning lives are being developed are in the hands of low paid under appreciated nursery workers.

A growing population of infirm adults (elderly and longer living disabled) rely on low paid support workers.

If you ask me the current way is an uncivilised caste system.

Pay should be in line with education you say. Seems to me there are plenty of engineers, (I know 2 personally) scientists, teachers, etc. either underemployed and/or working second jobs in order to keep roof over head, pay for car (and carparking) or train to work, while the CEO of the bank that screwed up their savings, made it impossible to pay off education loans and mortgages, resides in one of a number of expensive houses, drives one of a number of expensive vehicles, etc.

What exactly has that CEO contributed to the any of the people mentioned above? Not a jot to the family of the lady who died from MRSA because the private nursing home she lived in cut back on cleaning staff. Or to the children in overcrowded and under supplied classrooms or the young brilliant mould breaking research scientist who lost his job because the company had to make economies somewhere and they certainly couldn't reduce the marketing and finance managers' pay packages or perks.

And how many banks are actually lending money to any one these days? Including businesses which create jobs. Not many. It must be bad, because Essex County Council took it upon itself to create the Essex Bank, using taxes to promote business in Essex. It can't get much more fucked up.

Time to turn over the money lenders tables, chase them out of the temple and rethink the whole gawd damned system.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 05:22 PM

>>And an investment banker provides the capital that enables an entrepreneur to hire, providing both high and low paying jobs.

If he provides HIS OWN capital, then he wouldn't be included as a wage earner in the survey would he?

Like wise the owner of a store.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: gnu
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:58 PM

eg... Civil... Geotechnical... designs a dam for hydro that does not fail and benefits millions of people far into the future.

"The Invisible E". Your water, sewer, roads... whatever.

BTW... I was offering my buddy's take on things.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:48 PM

Define engineer. An electrical, chemical, petroleum, etc. engineer with a Ph. D. and a few years work earns as a median salary about $80,000; much more possible if he is a consultant or establishes his own business.
Median salary for a pediatrician is about $120,000; an anaethesiologist about $260,000; medical researcher $100,000.

All of the above have very large highs depending on the enterprise of the individual.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: gnu
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:19 PM

At uni, I talked with an Arab buddy of mine about similar. He was aghast that, in NA, an MD (not a researcher/scientist) earned so much while an engineer was paid a paltry amount in comparison. His logic was that an MD dealt with one person at a time while an engineer's work dealt with far more, and with far more dire consequences.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:11 PM

Good luck, Amos. Their reasoning is directed towards a pre-selected conclusion.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:50 PM

DId you guys read the report in full before slamming it? I haven't read it yet, byt I plan to. I especiallly want to understand how they define "value delivered".


A

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: pdq
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:45 PM

The writers can make any point they want by selecting occupations that demonstrate their point.

This emotional propaganda, not science.

Perhaps one could add Rap stars, drug dealers and newspaper editors. That would give a different slant.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:41 PM

Extremely biased selection of the highly paid workers.
How about - a research chemist, owner of a profitable store, and a medical doctor.
And an investment banker provides the capital that enables an entrepreneur to hire, providing both high and low paying jobs.

Subject: RE: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: Janie
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:38 PM

Thanks VT.

Subject: BS: a bit rich: value of work to society
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:46 PM

snip

Pay matters. How much you earn can determine your lifestyle, where you can afford to live, and your aspirations and status. But to what extent does what we get paid confer 'worth'? Beyond a narrow notion of productivity, what impact does our work have on the rest of society, and do the financial rewards we receive correspond to this? Do those that get more contribute more to society?

Our report tells the story of six different jobs. We have chosen jobs from across the private and public sectors and deliberately chosen ones that illustrate the problem. Three are low paid – a hospital cleaner, a recycling plant worker and a childcare worker. The others are highly paid – a City banker, an advertising executive and a tax accountant. We examined the contributions they make to society, and found that, in this case, it was the lower paid jobs which involved more valuable work.

The report goes on to challenge ten of the most enduring myths surrounding pay and work. People who earn more don't necessarily work harder than those who earn less. The private sector is not necessarily more efficient than the public sector. And high salaries don't necessarily reflect talent.

The report offers a series of policy recommendations that would reduce the inequality between different incomes and reconnect salaries with the value of work.

end snip

Found this today and think it looks interesting. Will it make any difference or level the earning field? Probably not in any marked way, especially in my lifetime. But I like to hope that social change is possible. That society will demand a rethink about what the actual work of any position contributes to society and equally what work detracts from the general good.

The link to website has free PDF download of the report.

http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/bit-rich#download-buy