On the other hand, I reckon with the wages Roland's offering there's probably a fair few in our first team squad who'd be pretty envious of my paltry public sector salary!
240 years for me to earn Ronaldo's salary. On the plus side, in 54 years I'll have earned Ballotelli's so it's not all bad. Definitely something to work towards...
thanks for brightening up my day!!! over 900 years. what a pile of shit.
nearly as angry as this makes me....
Does this make you angry as well?
The top 1% of wage earners in the UK paid 28% of all income tax.
Now, while of course top wage earners do very well in football, NFL, NBA, etc, etc, the calculator as posted makes no sense. Footballers have short, sometimes very short, careers; they have to pay over very significant sums to their advisers as a percentage of their salary. They have to contribute (I think) a minimum of £5k to their pension fund; they have to pay a lot of tax; and some of them have to live and work around Middlesbrough.....
thanks for brightening up my day!!! over 900 years. what a pile of shit.
nearly as angry as this makes me....
Does this make you angry as well?
The top 1% of wage earners in the UK paid 28% of all income tax.
Now, while of course top wage earners do very well in football, NFL, NBA, etc, etc, the calculator as posted makes no sense. Footballers have short, sometimes very short, careers; they have to pay over very significant sums to their advisers as a percentage of their salary. They have to contribute (I think) a minimum of £5k to their pension fund; they have to pay a lot of tax; and some of them have to live and work around Middlesbrough.....
Envy is a pointless pastime.
I had no sympathy whatsoever until you mentioned the Boro issue. They deserve all they get.
Even I earn more than the average footballer......
It would take Robert Downey jnr under 2 days to earn what Ronaldo earns in a week. And he hasn't got 11 opposing actors trying to spoil his work. If he gets it wrong they'll just "take two".
thanks for brightening up my day!!! over 900 years. what a pile of shit.
nearly as angry as this makes me....
Does this make you angry as well?
The top 1% of wage earners in the UK paid 28% of all income tax.
Now, while of course top wage earners do very well in football, NFL, NBA, etc, etc, the calculator as posted makes no sense. Footballers have short, sometimes very short, careers; they have to pay over very significant sums to their advisers as a percentage of their salary. They have to contribute (I think) a minimum of £5k to their pension fund; they have to pay a lot of tax; and some of them have to live and work around Middlesbrough.....
Envy is a pointless pastime.
I always find it very interesting, as the breakdown of figures and percentages don't work out quite exactly how you think they might. Someone on here put a link up a few months ago about what you earn in comparison to the overall wealth of the population of the UK as a whole. Based on the fact I had no children I think it put me in the top 17% - I sure as hell don't feel like I'm in the top 17% based on what I earn.
Such a contentious issue in general. I liked what Naismith of Everton did a while back, buying tickets for fans
thanks for brightening up my day!!! over 900 years. what a pile of shit.
nearly as angry as this makes me....
Extreme poverty is falling. Reason is the poor people in Asia and China have got jobs and wealth is being created. Taking handouts from the likes of Oxfam is not a solution to poverty.
Oxfam has had nothing to do with reducing World poverty in Asia and China, that is down to market capitalism. Oxfam understands capitalism, it is run as a business, it just pays excess over income as salary and holiday travelling expenses rather than dividends.
Total income of £390m, but only about £180m comes from donations. Rest comes from governments and trading activities. Staff costs are £108m so 60% of donations from the public go on staff costs. Also has to pay off a £30m deficit in its final salary pension fund.
The governments just use Oxfam as an agent to distribute aid, so the remaining income comes from running a trading business for profit, £20m spent on advertising and political propaganda. The CEO gets £120k a year.
It would be interesting to see how much money Oxfam receives comes from the rich bastards they dislike, probably less after the advert. Charitable donations are tax deductible, so Oxfam are the beneficiaries of mass tax avoidance, particularly from rich bastards who don't like paying tax and would rather see a charity use it.
By the way, not anti charities, my daughter runs an orphanage she set up in Belize 15 years ago and has never taken a penny in wages and pays her own travel.
Big charities are a business and if the CEOs could wangle a yacht they would, just jealous because they can't hack it in the real world of commerce to earn the dough.
Oxfam does good, but the advert is just simply political, if anything it will alienate the rich bastards from donating. Perhaps they don't care because they get most of their money from government hand outs and their trading profits.
If it makes you angry it has the desired effect, so presumably all the Mr Angries will be making donations.
Makes me just as angry that the money saved by the shop volunteers gets wasted by a charity on pointless political statements. Wonder if any rich bastard advertising agency boss made money out of it.
thanks for brightening up my day!!! over 900 years. what a pile of shit.
nearly as angry as this makes me....
Extreme poverty is falling. Reason is the poor people in Asia and China have got jobs and wealth is being created. Taking handouts from the likes of Oxfam is not a solution to poverty.
Oxfam has had nothing to do with reducing World poverty in Asia and China, that is down to market capitalism. Oxfam understands capitalism, it is run as a business, it just pays excess over income as salary and holiday travelling expenses rather than dividends.
Total income of £390m, but only about £180m comes from donations. Rest comes from governments and trading activities. Staff costs are £108m so 60% of donations from the public go on staff costs. Also has to pay off a £30m deficit in its final salary pension fund.
The governments just use Oxfam as an agent to distribute aid, so the remaining income comes from running a trading business for profit, £20m spent on advertising and political propaganda. The CEO gets £120k a year.
It would be interesting to see how much money Oxfam receives comes from the rich bastards they dislike, probably less after the advert. Charitable donations are tax deductible, so Oxfam are the beneficiaries of mass tax avoidance, particularly from rich bastards who don't like paying tax and would rather see a charity use it.
By the way, not anti charities, my daughter runs an orphanage she set up in Belize 15 years ago and has never taken a penny in wages and pays her own travel.
Big charities are a business and if the CEOs could wangle a yacht they would, just jealous because they can't hack it in the real world of commerce to earn the dough.
Oxfam does good, but the advert is just simply political, if anything it will alienate the rich bastards from donating. Perhaps they don't care because they get most of their money from government hand outs and their trading profits.
If it makes you angry it has the desired effect, so presumably all the Mr Angries will be making donations.
Makes me just as angry that the money saved by the shop volunteers gets wasted by a charity on pointless political statements. Wonder if any rich bastard advertising agency boss made money out of it.
I get what you are saying, but I would say this advert is also highlighting the superficial nature of the world in which we live in, and trying to make people just think about the cause they are campaigning for.
I think the media don't help either. Making people angry is also brought on by the media's stories of celebrities and the super rich living it up. They put it across in such a way that makes, or tries to make people want to dislike those that have more.
There's also a balance though, because I remember when the BBC published their cost of football report a few months ago. That same week I saw Jack Wilshere tweet about some brand new car he'd just bought. But he is a thick twat so wouldn't expect him to show any humility
Comments
have just worked out your annual salary @Charlton_Stu.
Messi is even worse!
Lionel Messi earns €20,800,000 per year. It would take him 10 minutes to earn your weekly salary.
10 MINUTES
On your current salary, it would take you 961 years to earn Lionel Messi's annual wage.
Lionel Messi's yearly salary is equivalent to the cost of 154,074 Barcelona replica shirts with 'Messi' printed on the back.
Lionel Messi earns 95 times more than Alex Morgan, one of the highest-paid female footballers in the US, who is reportedly on $282,000 a year.
nearly as angry as this makes me....
Depressing
I lied. ;-)
The top 1% of wage earners in the UK paid 28% of all income tax.
Now, while of course top wage earners do very well in football, NFL, NBA, etc, etc, the calculator as posted makes no sense. Footballers have short, sometimes very short, careers; they have to pay over very significant sums to their advisers as a percentage of their salary. They have to contribute (I think) a minimum of £5k to their pension fund; they have to pay a lot of tax; and some of them have to live and work around Middlesbrough.....
Envy is a pointless pastime.
Even I earn more than the average footballer......
......in League 2
Such a contentious issue in general. I liked what Naismith of Everton did a while back, buying tickets for fans
Oxfam has had nothing to do with reducing World poverty in Asia and China, that is down to market capitalism. Oxfam understands capitalism, it is run as a business, it just pays excess over income as salary and
holidaytravelling expenses rather than dividends.Total income of £390m, but only about £180m comes from donations. Rest comes from governments and trading activities. Staff costs are £108m so 60% of donations from the public go on staff costs. Also has to pay off a £30m deficit in its final salary pension fund.
The governments just use Oxfam as an agent to distribute aid, so the remaining income comes from running a trading business for profit, £20m spent on advertising and political propaganda. The CEO gets £120k a year.
It would be interesting to see how much money Oxfam receives comes from the rich bastards they dislike, probably less after the advert. Charitable donations are tax deductible, so Oxfam are the beneficiaries of mass tax avoidance, particularly from rich bastards who don't like paying tax and would rather see a charity use it.
By the way, not anti charities, my daughter runs an orphanage she set up in Belize 15 years ago and has never taken a penny in wages and pays her own travel.
Big charities are a business and if the CEOs could wangle a yacht they would, just jealous because they can't hack it in the real world of commerce to earn the dough.
Oxfam does good, but the advert is just simply political, if anything it will alienate the rich bastards from donating. Perhaps they don't care because they get most of their money from government hand outs and their trading profits.
If it makes you angry it has the desired effect, so presumably all the Mr Angries will be making donations.
Makes me just as angry that the money saved by the shop volunteers gets wasted by a charity on pointless political statements. Wonder if any rich bastard advertising agency boss made money out of it.
I get what you are saying, but I would say this advert is also highlighting the superficial nature of the world in which we live in, and trying to make people just think about the cause they are campaigning for.
I think the media don't help either. Making people angry is also brought on by the media's stories of celebrities and the super rich living it up. They put it across in such a way that makes, or tries to make people want to dislike those that have more.
There's also a balance though, because I remember when the BBC published their cost of football report a few months ago. That same week I saw Jack Wilshere tweet about some brand new car he'd just bought. But he is a thick twat so wouldn't expect him to show any humility