blonde poker forum

They should all read this and realise how lucky and fortunate they are, not just in relation to society but to their forefathers:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulfletcher/2010/10/somme_ceremony_puts_football_i.html#268116 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulfletcher/2010/10/somme_ceremony_puts_football_i.html#268116)

'You're only on 90k a week Wayne?? You want to double it to £200 k??? Put the pen down, don't bother signing the contract, we've had some bad news...there's going to be a world war and you have to enlist'

What do you think the likes of Wazza and Cashley would do in the face of that??

This is really just sanctimonious guff isn't it. 

If you where sole handedly responsible for making the company you work for £10 million a year would you be happy to get paid £500 a week so that you can relate to the general public.I also think the media should start intruding on members of the general public and put all their worst stories and mistakes in the paper,true or false so that everyone else can revel in it then the general public will be able relate to footballers.Tank went on about it earlier but why is it footballers who take the most amount of grief for salaries.There's a ton of bankers on huge salaries but unlike Rooney and most of the other highest pad footballers they really don't seem to be earning there salaries at all from what is expected of them.

Is it just footballers in this country that shouldn't have this kind of earner power?  Or is it anyone in any industry that doesn't meet your moral standards? Wayne Rooney gets what he does for kicking a ball around, but he kicks the ball around in a specfic way which millions and millions of people find very appealing and which 99.99% of us can't emulate.  Rooney et al are fortunate enough that they work in an industry where their skills can demand huge wages, so what? Good luck to them.  Who wouldn't try and maximise their earning potential in his position.  I won't feel at all guilty when answering questions about Smallville can demand the same kind of salary.

Anyway, compared to some of the people that sign these players' cheques Wayne Rooney is a saint, you can hardly judge them on moral grounds when the dudes in the suits take moral bankruptcy to new depths.  

To coin a phrase, "you can't help the poor by being one of them".  Wayne Rooney doesn't owe anybody a living.  You can't just cherry pick certain people anyway and say that isn't fair....taken to it's extreme by your rationale really, we should all abandon our comfy western lives because it's obscene that we can live in houses with water and lecky when there's kids in India who live literally in shit.  People aren't poor in this country, even the poor aren't poor, they're just not as well off as the Rooney's.  Wealth is not just about a pay cheque.  This footballer bashing is very narrow minded and as I said, sanctimonious.  You can re-argue your point when you live in a ditch in Delhi.

The planet's doomed, I saw it on the telly, it's every man for himself. You can't cap people's earnings, that's just commie pinko nonsense and you can quote me.

I could happily argue either side of the footballers wages point.

On one hand they possess very unique skills that for some reason are highly valued by general society and if the clubs are making millions why are not the players. Those criticising players for 'lack of loyalty' should remember that as soon as you stop performing, get a little old, or someone else comes along - then the club is very quick to get rid of the player.

On the other hand, most clubs lose money, wages are hardly linked to performance and the wages are excessive compared to other more 'worthwhile' jobs.

Ultimately if you want players to earn less - cancel your Sky subscription and stop buying replica kits.

In my experience (10 years on the IT side of investment banking), the bankers earning the big money are the ones that make the biggest profits for the bank. They also tend to be the ones working 60-80 hour weeks and are burnt out by mid-30s. Big problem with the reward system here is that it encourages risk taking - bonuses are usually based on 1 year's performance, so short-term risk taking is encouraged by the system. The comparison with star footballers is pretty close - the best ones are head-hunted by other companies, and the competition for the best forces salaries to what are perceived to be absurd levels. Also similar to footballers, it's easy to shout from the sidelines, but it doesn't mean everybody can do what the best ones can do. Results are easily measurable. The general perception is that there are huge numbers of bankers trading with somebody else's money, but this is actually pretty rare. It's the sales guys and the advisory guys that make the bulk of most investment bank's profits.

The top managers of the bank don't actually make much direct profit themselves, but still get paid at fairly silly levels (often significantly less than their profit-making underlings though). But few people say that Alex Ferguson shouldn't get paid much because he doesn't score any goals.

There you go. A defence of banker's salaries. A rare thing :).

My head nearly exploded reading this post, thankfully WarBwastard managed to defuse it.

I would like to see

-free pies
-booze allowed on newly built terraces
-cheerleaders and maybe elephants
-peanut sellers in the crowd

all of these are more important than how much someone is paid in a free market