korova_blue (7th June 2011)
I don't agree with their wages but don't forget footballers have a very limited career life. In theory they should be putting away the extras for when their knees finally give in, or they hit that age limit where they are no longer seen as viable. I forget which one but I heard a Liverpool player now owns a large section of Liverpool as he made investments and bought up property from his earnings. Wasn't extravagant while a footballer but now is making a very decent wage on the work he has done since. He is also a very decent guy apparently, helping out those that need it, so that may be the difference.
Going slightly OT, some I was talking to was also saying that the issue is that these young kids are given managers whose sole purpose is to get them what they want & do what they want so they get used to having everything and anything. It's the old adage, you keep the talent happy. So why would they think there isn't anything they can't do or have (race that sports car on a public road, have that 'bit' on the side without anyone knowing, etc), they push the limits, testing their boundaries & then the problems hit. The clubs should be looking after them better. & don't get me started on a football club as business!!! Can anyone name a club that is profitable? & I mean on the balance sheets, day to day not for the owner by selling it later as an investment
Footballers and athletes don't work hard? As a junior sportsman I trained with some of these folk at the academies ... I was doing 30+ hours of training a week on top of my school work, paper round / saturday job ... and they were doing 45+ (and most of them came out with better qualifications than me too).
Only a handful of sports folk earn to the top money, because they are at the top of their level, whether it be through technical skills, perseverance or simple hard work. A smaller handful get there from being in the right place at the right time ... and being used to generate additional income via marketing, etc.
When you think that some CEOs are in place in their forties, because they started after getting out of Uni at 21/22 ... and then they have another 20-30 years of top earning ... think about the little lad who starts out in football at 8, is at their peak for 10 years and it is all over by 40. Whilst I don't agree with how many of them live their life, or make use of their money, I would never say that they haven't worked hard.
The smart folk ensure that they do stuff in their spare time ... some will study, some will run other businesses, some will start preparing to go into other trades (coaching, presenting, medical, etc) but you will always get those who have access to money and resources and don't use it positively.
The same could be said of some regarded as celebrities ... the overnight success which is seen for certain comedians ... well, that is usually overnight after having spent years working the circuits. If you are talking celebs who are famous for being famous ... that is another matter.
Don't knock sports folk, actors, musicians, writers, etc ... just because you don't see the full picture it doesn't mean they haven't worked!
Last edited by GrumbleDook; 7th June 2011 at 01:49 PM.
I missed a vital word...."young"...lol
These range from simple things ... such as setting up a ltd company. The company gets the reported £100k a week but the footballer gets a smaller cut as a salary. Many assets (homes, cars, etc) are owned by the company and not the person. The company is registered overseas and does not take a profit as all monies are invested in growth (including buying up housing, art, etc). The player uses their small salary to make charitable donations. Food is regarded as an expense when 'prescribed' by a dietician / nutritionalist. The clothes are part of their work-wear, even fashion items as it relates to the brand marketing (if the clothes weren't part payment for sponsorship, that is).
There are hundreds more little things which can cut down the tax bill, and build up an investment portfolio to cover the post-football years.
I believe some of this came about because of definite government policies intended to make us a more competitive economy. In 1979 one of the first things the incoming Conservative government did was to abolish the tax allowance for businesses taking on apprentices. Some of the younger Edugeekers may not know this, but an apprenticeship used to last for five years with a thorough grounding, including college training, in a particular discipline such as engineering, plumbing and the like. Now we 'import' these skills.
The first recession devastated manufacturing in the north of England, leading to very high levels of unemployment and thus helping to create some of the conditions for a flexible labour market, such as driving competition for jobs thus allowing companies to lower wages. One government minister, Nicholas Ridley, went so far as to say that as manufacturing jobs declined, so the service sector would step in to take up the slack. Certain other laws were brought into effect such as employees having to have worked for a company for more than two years before being guaranteed any job security (this has since been changed). It was not unheard of for people to be laid off just short of their two years and asked to reapply for their jobs. How I read this is that is that "flexible" means low paid jobs, very little job security, and jobs could be moved to areas where the population was able or willing to undercut those currently in employment. Strong unions were seen as an impediment to that. The phrase "You should be thankful you have a job" was much in evidence at the time.
Other help afforded employers, especially those such as Rupert Murdoch in his move to Wapping, was the abolition of secondary picketing. Murdoch used the purchasing power of Sky, and a nudge from Alan Sugar, to buy up the rights to live football on television, thus paving the way to the current Premier League set up, the ratcheting up of the money available to clubs to spend, and is directly responsible for the astronomical salaries paid to some of today's footballers. To give him credit, he realized early on that in order to drive the take up of Sky subscription packages he had to make football exclusively his domain and remove competition. I have to hold my hand up here and say that I take the full Sky Sports package.
Another factor was the belief that by selling off council houses we would become a "home owning democracy" and thus become natural Conservative voters. This allowed people on diminishing wages to be able to buy their council house at greatly reduced rates. This may have worked had the money raised been used to build more affordable housing, but councils were forbidden from doing this and had to use the money to reduce the council tax. As is obvious now, the shortage of affordable housing has led to increased demand for suitable rented accommodation, which is not being met in full. Peoples' debt burdens are increasing in order to either find the deposit on a new home, or the surety on rented accommodation. Private builders sit on huge land banks, only building to maximize profit.
Privatisation banged another nail into the fair pay coffin. Contracting out whole sectors to private companies once again led to lower wages and, in the case of hospital cleaners, directly to a rise in infections contracted by patients in hospitals. Single Status, initially intended to raise the salaries of female employees to the levels of their male colleagues doing similar tasks, has now been turned on its head resulting in massive cuts to the salaries of male workers in order to bring them into line with those of the female workforce.
I think so much damage was done to our economy and national well-being during the last 30 years that I fear we will never recover, but I'm getting old.
Last edited by beeswax; 7th June 2011 at 02:27 PM.
I think it's quite sad that the jobs under the median are very skilled jobs like Mechanical engineers, tool makers, sheet metal workers etc. where as pretty much all the job above the median are in service industries like accountancy, solicitors etc. Just goes to show the world we live in I suppose.
Last edited by maniac; 7th June 2011 at 02:45 PM.
This is what happened to the estate that I was brought up on. People fled for bigger, cheaper houses, because they were told that's what they should do. Therefore, new people came in, and the spirit was lost. Street parties for a royal occasion? In 1977, my mum and dad were involved in OUR street party. It was one amongst thousands....How many were there in April?
Thatcherism destroyed this country, and the last Labour government hardly covered themselves in glory either, but at least they tried to improve things for the working class.
bodminman (7th June 2011)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)