Travel Perks

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 13:06

Key happy for MPs to get nothing for perks

Yeah, I bet, you're loaded. But all MPs aren't and to be honest I'd like our MPs to be able to get around the world without it having any considerable impact on their income.

Pimp-X · 16th November 2010, 13:12

I too would like to travel the world without significant impact on my income.

Saladin · 16th November 2010, 13:16

Must be a struggle getting by on just $136,000 a year.. Lucky they had that tax cut recently!

Rocket · 16th November 2010, 13:27

travel perks always been a bit of a piss take to be honest. I'd say it will be stripped and the salaries will be bolstered.

I think key is in touch though. Public think its an absolute piss take.

GM · 16th November 2010, 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by lightspeed

But all MPs aren't and to be honest I'd like our MPs to be able to get around the world without it having any considerable impact on their income.

If they need to travel on business it's paid for by the department that is hosting the trip. This travel thing is just a perk for their own personal use.

Its a 'nice to have' but don't cry if it's taken away from you, and if any politician makes a song and dance about it then they need a reality check.

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 13:32

What's the reality check? That you're better off moving to Aussie and pursuing a corporate career rather than being a relatively low paid politician in NZ?

GM · 16th November 2010, 13:36

OK you need to re-read what I wrote.

It is a perk.

In the real world if a perk is taken away from you you have no recourse.

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 13:38

In my jobs perks have been offered in lieu of increased income.

E.g. "We know we don't pay as much as other companies, but we do offer these perks..."

Juju · 16th November 2010, 13:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Key happy for MPs to get nothing for perks

Yeah, I bet, you're loaded. But all MPs aren't and to be honest I'd like our MPs to be able to get around the world without it having any considerable impact on their income.

Lol wut. All business related travel is paid for. This is for their own personal holidays.

L2read.

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 13:40

Way to jump to conclusions.

Juju · 16th November 2010, 13:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Way to jump to conclusions.

How am I jumping to an incorrect conclusion?
You clearly defined in your OP that you were worried this perk removal would impact on their incomes, ergo that they would have to pay for all their travel, business included. I merely pointed out the fact this perk removal has nothing to do with business travel.

ipee · 16th November 2010, 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Key happy for MPs to get nothing for perks

Yeah, I bet, you're loaded. But all MPs aren't and to be honest I'd like our MPs to be able to get around the world without it having any considerable impact on their income.

I'm curious to know why you think taxpayers should pay for their personal travel?

I can understand why they would do it in the corporate world as it would be used as an incentive to attract talent but it's not as crucial in public office.

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 13:51

Because MPs get paid shit relative to the importance of the work they do and you get what you pay for.

Rince · 16th November 2010, 13:55

and definitely get rid of travel-perks-for-life BS too....

wtf?

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by ipee

I can understand why they would do it in the corporate world as it would be used as an incentive to attract talent but it's not as crucial in public office.

Wait, what? It's NOT important to attract talent in public office?

ipee · 16th November 2010, 14:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Because MPs get paid shit relative to the importance of the work they do and you get what you pay for.

Really? Even the backbenchers who just sit on their asses and don't do shit?

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 14:05

Yeah, we're getting what we pay for.

GM · 16th November 2010, 14:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Wait, what? It's NOT important to attract talent in public office?

There is no technical ability attached to being a politician.

ipee · 16th November 2010, 14:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Wait, what? It's NOT important to attract talent in public office?

No it's not because you have to remember that most politicians don't go into public office for the money so any financial incentives would not be as attractive as they would be to someone applying for a job at a large multi-national corporation.

Take John Key for example.......took a huge paycut to get into politics.

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 14:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by ipee

No it's not because you have to remember that most politicians don't go into public office for the money...

That sounds like good, conventional wisdom, but I'm not so sure it's true. Or if it's helpful. Maybe if people got into politics to get a good pay day, we'd have better politicians?

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by GM

There is no technical ability attached to being a politician.

I don't think you're right. I think it's true you can be a politician without technical ability, but it doesn't mean that technical ability isn't a component of a good politician.

GM · 16th November 2010, 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

I don't think you're right. I think it's true you can be a politician without technical ability, but it doesn't mean that technical ability isn't a component of a good politician.

What is a good politician?

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 14:18

Good question, but not one that's easy to answer. Perhaps for the sake of argument we can just agree that such a thing does exist?

GM · 16th November 2010, 14:23

OK, say we have a good politician in NZ, would the same politician be 'good' in another country like say Australia?

You said they would take their 'talent' overseas, but I'm not too sure that they can.

blynk · 16th November 2010, 14:24

What I find is interesting. In one of the articles that said that $600k was spent in 2008.
but if you take 120 MPs, and multiply that by about $9k. Thats $1m.

So if we give everyone a payrise, it will cost us more.

Saladin · 16th November 2010, 14:27

The only required skill to be be a politician is electability.

ipee · 16th November 2010, 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

That sounds like good, conventional wisdom, but I'm not so sure it's true. Or if it's helpful. Maybe if people got into politics to get a good pay day, we'd have better politicians?

Yeah but here's the thing, you can't just think, "hey, the moneys not too shabby in politics, i'm gonna be a politician!" You actually have to be voted in to become a politician, either directly or indirectly ie.party lists.

Ain't democracy a bitch!

Juju · 16th November 2010, 14:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lightspeed

Because MPs get paid shit relative to the importance of the work they do and you get what you pay for.

So how come NZ's Prime Minister is 6th on the chart of world leaders pay rates vs per capita GDP?

source:http://liberation.typepad.com/.a/6a0...54751b9970c-pi

Pimp-X · 16th November 2010, 14:36

Thread is delivering.

Juju · 16th November 2010, 14:41

So even the most junior member of parliament gets five times the average NZ income.

They also get at least 50% to 150% more income than the average doctor, manager, and lawyer.

CCS · 16th November 2010, 15:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pimp-X

Thread is delivering.

Thread has been lolspeeded from the get-go.

Also, I don't think the perks should be scrapped, but limit the perk to a 15% rebate irrespective of how long the MP has been around for.

leadinjector · 16th November 2010, 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saladin

The only required skill to be be a politician is electability.

quoted for most truth

A Corpse · 16th November 2010, 16:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by ipee

No it's not because you have to remember that most politicians don't go into public office for the money so any financial incentives would not be as attractive as they would be to someone applying for a job at a large multi-national corporation.

Take John Key for example.......took a huge paycut to get into politics.

You really think Key doesn't stand to gain substantially in his personal business ventures from his time fronting the country, both during and after his stint as PM?

fixed_truth · 16th November 2010, 16:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juju

I merely pointed out the fact this perk removal has nothing to do with business travel.

Afaik instead of being able to use the rebate to fund work related travel - all such travel would now have to be funded from the Leader’s Office budget. If funding for this budget is inadequate then MPs will miss out on legitimate work related international travel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saladin

The only required skill to be be a politician is electability.

One word - List members

BoyWonder · 16th November 2010, 16:35

Or two depending on how you read it.

ipee · 16th November 2010, 19:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Corpse

You really think Key doesn't stand to gain substantially in his personal business ventures from his time fronting the country, both during and after his stint as PM?

I dunno, some would argue remaining involved with Wall St - the financial hub of the world, rather than becoming PM of a very small country would be a better career move if money is the sole motivation.

cyc · 16th November 2010, 19:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by A Corpse

You really think Key doesn't stand to gain substantially in his personal business ventures from his time fronting the country, both during and after his stint as PM?

You're generally pretty clueless about most things but this is just hilarious. Not debating your proposition GENERALLY but if you think there's some sort of clear case that John Key would either now or in future become financially better off by virtue of being in politics, you really haven't got a clue how much a senior executive in an investment bank earns.

Pimp-X · 16th November 2010, 19:26

This thread was fucked the second it started.

Lightspeed · 16th November 2010, 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juju

So even the most junior member of parliament gets five times the average NZ income.

They also get at least 50% to 150% more income than the average doctor, manager, and lawyer.

But still significantly less than the country's top earners.

Basically, my preference is that our government is run by some of the best our country has to offer. And how do you get the best? Well one way is to pay the muthafuckers!

xor · 16th November 2010, 21:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juju

So how come NZ's Prime Minister is 6th on the chart of world leaders pay rates vs per capita GDP?

source:http://liberation.typepad.com/.a/6a0...54751b9970c-pi

Hey lolspeed, why don't you answer the question?

If money is an incentive for someone to go into politics then I'd be very worried that someone like Sir Les Patterson will turn up.

16th November 2010, 13:12	#2
Pimp-X Drunken Annoying Superhero Bastard	I too would like to travel the world without significant impact on my income. __________________ If there is one movement I could get behind in this world, it would be the discrimination and abuse of fucking idiots.

16th November 2010, 13:55	#14
Rince SLUTS!!!!!!!	and definitely get rid of travel-perks-for-life BS too.... wtf? __________________ Slow internet is worse than no internet. It's like putting your penis in once and then being required to make out for 2 hours --Matt "The Oatmeal" Inman

16th November 2010, 14:36	#29
Pimp-X Drunken Annoying Superhero Bastard	Thread is delivering. __________________ If there is one movement I could get behind in this world, it would be the discrimination and abuse of fucking idiots.

16th November 2010, 14:41	#30
Juju get to da choppa	So even the most junior member of parliament gets five times the average NZ income. They also get at least 50% to 150% more income than the average doctor, manager, and lawyer. Last edited by Juju : 16th November 2010 at 14:42.

16th November 2010, 19:26	#38
Pimp-X Drunken Annoying Superhero Bastard	This thread was fucked the second it started. __________________ If there is one movement I could get behind in this world, it would be the discrimination and abuse of fucking idiots.

16th November 2010, 13:06	#1
Lightspeed	Travel Perks Key happy for MPs to get nothing for perks Yeah, I bet, you're loaded. But all MPs aren't and to be honest I'd like our MPs to be able to get around the world without it having any considerable impact on their income. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 13:16	#3
Saladin Nothing to See Here!	Must be a struggle getting by on just $136,000 a year.. Lucky they had that tax cut recently!

16th November 2010, 13:27	#4
Rocket	travel perks always been a bit of a piss take to be honest. I'd say it will be stripped and the salaries will be bolstered. I think key is in touch though. Public think its an absolute piss take. __________________ Later Boltz!

16th November 2010, 13:32	#6
Lightspeed	What's the reality check? That you're better off moving to Aussie and pursuing a corporate career rather than being a relatively low paid politician in NZ? __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 13:36	#7
GM	OK you need to re-read what I wrote. It is a perk. In the real world if a perk is taken away from you you have no recourse.

16th November 2010, 13:38	#8
Lightspeed	In my jobs perks have been offered in lieu of increased income. E.g. "We know we don't pay as much as other companies, but we do offer these perks..." __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 13:40	#10
Lightspeed	Way to jump to conclusions. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 13:51	#13
Lightspeed	Because MPs get paid shit relative to the importance of the work they do and you get what you pay for. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 14:05	#17
Lightspeed	Yeah, we're getting what we pay for. __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 14:18	#23
Lightspeed	Good question, but not one that's easy to answer. Perhaps for the sake of argument we can just agree that such a thing does exist? __________________ Stay shook. No sook.

16th November 2010, 14:23	#24
GM	OK, say we have a good politician in NZ, would the same politician be 'good' in another country like say Australia? You said they would take their 'talent' overseas, but I'm not too sure that they can.

16th November 2010, 14:24	#25
blynk	What I find is interesting. In one of the articles that said that $600k was spent in 2008. but if you take 120 MPs, and multiply that by about $9k. Thats $1m. So if we give everyone a payrise, it will cost us more.

16th November 2010, 14:27	#26
Saladin Nothing to See Here!	The only required skill to be be a politician is electability.

16th November 2010, 16:35	#35
BoyWonder	Or two depending on how you read it.