In Gone With the Wind, Rhett Butler uttered the immortal words: “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn!”
Or more prosaically, I couldn’t care less who earns what or whether they earn more or less than anyone else.
It’s not my business and I’m not interested so please stop bombarding me with it in the Press.
- City pubs will host launch of product which promises to end hangovers
- Canterbury Society unveils wide-ranging vision for the city’s future
Footballers and pop stars and entertainers are horrendously over-paid for what they do. But it’s not my money so why should I care?
It’s the same with the so-called influencers on social media. This might be particularly vacuous way to earn money, but, again, it’s not my money so why should I care?
And the reality is that most people couldn’t care less what entertainers are paid.
So why is the media deluged with it? Perhaps it’s just the media that cares – alongside a small coterie of agitators.
When it was revealed that some BBC presenters, (male) got paid more than others (female), they could have taken legal action on the basis of equal pay for work of equal value. Otherwise, they could have left and got a job elsewhere – or just shut up about it and got on with life.
Equally pay for work of equal value has been with us for years and for those of us who aren’t paid by the bucketload and cannot easily just up an take our skills elsewhere: that’s what trade unions were invented for.
I had the distinction when younger of being a Conservative councillor in one district and the trade union secretary in the one next door.
We secured more for the members by working with the council than my left-wing predecessors ever achieved. They were always about confrontation which got them nowhere.
I’ve always believed in unions and I remained in one until I became part of “the management”, a group which is never collectively represented by unions because there are always more “workers” than “managers” and their interests are not necessarily the same.
Anyway, I digress. I can see that where we, the public, foot the bills or pay the salaries there is a legitimate public interest in how much is spent. I would suggest, however, that who gets what or how the cake is divided up is a matter between employer and employee.
What I cannot see is any legitimate public interest in the average “gender pay gap” in private sector firms and yet we have a kind of pink Conservative government that embraces this kind of stuff as if it is important.
Averages tell you nothing anyway and any statistics you read have probably been manipulated before you read them. I’m not a conspiracy theorist but I did spend forty years in local government, some of it in Canterbury.
Sadly, I’m afraid this is all part of the socialisation and infantilisation of the public that has been going on, probably since the last war, (to my generation that’s 1939-45). It was fuelled by left-wingers during the Thatcher years and pandered to by Blair and his successors Prime Ministers – and yes I include Cameron and May.
It started with left-wingers, unable to get elected, seeking to manipulate every grievance in order to build a coalition of the grumpy grievance pressure groups in the hope it would get them elected.
Blair then bought into it enough to throw them some bones to chew on, but like all these things, “once you have paid the Danegeld, you’ll never get rid of the Dane”.
Having been given a bone, the professional grievancers demanded more, seizing on any and every minor dispute to further undermine the cohesiveness of society, and governments fed them.
The politics of envy are nasty, they set people against each other. People do not realise they are being manipulated by professional malcontents pursuing a divisive, anti-capitalist agenda.
It’s time to wake up people and ask yourself, is somebody else’s salary really any of your business: the answer is a resolute no.