FridgeMagnet
Administrator
I have been in situations where that's the case now tbh.
My silly idea again: earn your age
- Thread starter Mation
- Start date
I have been in situations where that's the case now tbh.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
UnderOpenSky
baseline neural therapy
It would remove a lot of incentive to employ older people, plus why the hell would you do a boring job?
Still can't say I'd complain about the payrise!
Still can't say I'd complain about the payrise!
girasol
Addicted to handstands!
from f,2,3,4 because her internet is borked
Any job at all.
I think they'd be pissed off during the transition to my most excellent system, perhaps, but not if this applied absolutely across the board.
And the chance of an inexperienced person 20 years older getting a job that someone 20 years younger could train them for would be slim.
Does that happen now? The ordinary rules of employment by skill would apply. Under what circumstances do you think the older person wouldn't have any experience at the job for which they are applying?
Your argument doesn't make sense to me. I may be being dense. can you explain it another way?
Do we need all the management positions we currently have? Are you suggesting that very few like being managers?
As a way of making pay equal (as in the same rates/prospects) for everyone while taking account of the fact that you're more likely to have greater expenditure when you're older if you eg. have a family.
You either get a job or you don't. If you do you get paid your age. If not, I guess you'd have to live on whatever the benefit system is (not the subject of this thread really, but I'd favour a living wage of some flat amount that was enough to pay rent and buy food).
Yes. Unlikely though. How many 44 year olds would be in the job as a fresh starter that a 22 year old might also do?
Why? Across your total wage earners you wouldn't be shelling out more and this is a universal system. And you need experienced people.
What are the jobs? I mean - would someone, I assume you f234, pick a job out of some range that is accepted (by whom?) to be worth that salary and then I would get to pick which one I'd go for?
Any job at all.
I think they'd be pissed off during the transition to my most excellent system, perhaps, but not if this applied absolutely across the board.
And the chance of an inexperienced person 20 years older getting a job that someone 20 years younger could train them for would be slim.
Does that happen now? The ordinary rules of employment by skill would apply. Under what circumstances do you think the older person wouldn't have any experience at the job for which they are applying?
Your argument doesn't make sense to me. I may be being dense. can you explain it another way?
Do we need all the management positions we currently have? Are you suggesting that very few like being managers?
As a way of making pay equal (as in the same rates/prospects) for everyone while taking account of the fact that you're more likely to have greater expenditure when you're older if you eg. have a family.
You either get a job or you don't. If you do you get paid your age. If not, I guess you'd have to live on whatever the benefit system is (not the subject of this thread really, but I'd favour a living wage of some flat amount that was enough to pay rent and buy food).
Yes. Unlikely though. How many 44 year olds would be in the job as a fresh starter that a 22 year old might also do?
It would remove a lot of incentive to employ older people, plus why the hell would you do a boring job?
Still can't say I'd complain about the payrise!
Why? Across your total wage earners you wouldn't be shelling out more and this is a universal system. And you need experienced people.
trashpony
Hag
I know at least two older people who have started working on the checkouts at supermarkets to supplement their paltry pensions. There is no way they'd get those sort of unskilled jobs if there were people who would do them for 1/3 of the salary is there? It's a system which pretty much cuts older people out of employment.
I'm about to quit my well-paid job to do something else. I can't imagine anyone would pay me 45k to do secretarial work. Can you?
I'm about to quit my well-paid job to do something else. I can't imagine anyone would pay me 45k to do secretarial work. Can you?
5t3IIa
Registered User
I don't understand the 'any job at all'.
For example: in yesterday's Gaurdian there is a Press and Public Affairs Manager gig at The Nuffield Trust for close to my age. I couldn't do that. And Senior Communications Manager at Croydon Council. I couldn't do that. HVC Operations and Production Coordinator? Wtf is that?
So what do I do? Decide what job I would like to do and it's 'arranged' that it's my age-wage?
Or if it's one of those and I don't get it then I have to go on benefits? So I'm not taking a 24 year old's £24k pa job?
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
what happens now?What if you're really, really shit at interviews?
(This from my phone. Massive thanks to iemanja for posting that huge long reply for me
)
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
The obvious solution to that is to have money based on e.g. whether you have a family.
To be quite honest I don't need any more wages now than I did ten years ago - well, I do but only because I'm self-employed and have fewer ancillary benefits these days. I needed more then, that's all. In fact if I'd had more then I would need less now as I could have bought a flat or something.
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
They may have paltry pensions under the current system, but remember that under mine they'd have earned their age.
just as now you'd go for the jobs you can do. Why would this system make you apply for jobs you don't understand any mire than you might now????
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
Well good for you, but I'd say don't discriminate on the basis of whether you actually do have a family. Pay the same, enough to have a family if you choose, or reward your experiene or just celebrate that you've managed to hold a job down for so long. Who cares why? Its universal.
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
44 grand a year, just for being old 
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
Hmmmmm. don't know... This may involve voting for MESo how are we going to move to the new system? I'm sorry, I'm all about the practicalities of things
Paulie Tandoori
shut it you egg!
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
Worth it under this system relates to whether or not you can do the job - any job. If you can, you're paid your age, if you can't you wont get that particular job.
You're being paid to furnish your mind with information in a nice warm classroom and not outside breaking rocks in the winter chill.
Yeah, why not? Bankers earn several times that for being particularly shit at their job.
Mation
real life adventure worth more than pieces of gold
Why that much? I wasn't counting pupils as students but I guess we could work something out...Say you stay on after school to do A levels, you would have accrued £170,000 by that point (age 18).
Plenty to retire on.
you'd only have to be so-so
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
Pay scales don't happen because they're incentives for people to better themselves and do useful things with their time anyway - that's just a back-formulation.
AnnO'Neemus
Is so vanilla
I think shippy has that manga!
I like a nice idea like this.
Not gonna happen ever but.....
How about starting on £20k at 20
Then annual increases of £1k until 50
Then annual decreases of £1k until dead?
I don't think people who are 80 need £80k a year do they? Especially with their kids probably earning £50k + and probably with savings/assets of their own.
No need to start paying out at 16 with parents probably both earning around £40k? One flaw with this is that people with 5 kids over 20 can be earning over £200k per annum as a family/household. A nice incentive to breed like rabbits and swell the already huge population?
Not gonna happen ever but.....
How about starting on £20k at 20
Then annual increases of £1k until 50
Then annual decreases of £1k until dead?
I don't think people who are 80 need £80k a year do they? Especially with their kids probably earning £50k + and probably with savings/assets of their own.
No need to start paying out at 16 with parents probably both earning around £40k? One flaw with this is that people with 5 kids over 20 can be earning over £200k per annum as a family/household. A nice incentive to breed like rabbits and swell the already huge population?
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
It would create a de facto gerontocracy with the older folks hogging all the money. Fuck that.
Similar threads
