Is Andrew Demetriou worth over $1m per year?

Talk on the national game

Is Andrew Demetriou worth over $1m per year?

Yes
7
22%
No
25
78%
 
Total votes : 32

Postby Dutchy » Sat Mar 24, 2007 10:33 am

PhilG wrote:
Dutchy wrote:So Phil you dont have a Super fund? :shock:


No.

How could I when since 1992 I've only worked for six months?

And even if I did I'd be doing my super through my bank - which is the way it should be done because it's secure.


There goes your credability....

How do you do you super fund through a bank without them investing the funds in the sharemarket on your behalf? the only way to do it would to put your funds in a Cash super fund but do to that would be crazy as over the last 5 years cash has returned around 6% while property and share super funds have returned upwards of 15%...
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46240
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2646 times
Been liked: 4308 times

Postby PhilG » Sat Mar 24, 2007 3:29 pm

..
Last edited by PhilG on Wed May 16, 2007 9:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhilG
 

Postby Dutchy » Sun Mar 25, 2007 12:35 am

PhilG wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
PhilG wrote:
Dutchy wrote:So Phil you dont have a Super fund? :shock:


No.

How could I when since 1992 I've only worked for six months?

And even if I did I'd be doing my super through my bank - which is the way it should be done because it's secure.


There goes your credability....

How do you do you super fund through a bank without them investing the funds in the sharemarket on your behalf? the only way to do it would to put your funds in a Cash super fund but do to that would be crazy as over the last 5 years cash has returned around 6% while property and share super funds have returned upwards of 15%...


And who pays for it, Dutchy? Where does that money come from? It contributes to the distance between the rich and the poor.

The way to go with the bank is with a term deposit. Earns the most interest for the security provided. And it also provides the banks the ability to lend for housing on a competitive level.

Anyone who goes to a super fund is taking money away from the poor - to use your example. I think that attitude is less credible than the level you are accusing me of.


LOL such a simple life!!...everyone who works has a super fund so we are all taking from the poor :lol: :lol: ....then again you dont work...
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46240
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2646 times
Been liked: 4308 times

Postby PhilG » Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:36 am

..
Last edited by PhilG on Wed May 16, 2007 9:42 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhilG
 

Postby Dutchy » Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:59 am

2 separate arguements...Super will allow many people to create their own wealth to get them through retirement without relying on welfare, which in turn will free up public money for use elsewhere...I dont see how you could have a problem with that theory....everyone no matter what their situation, can create their own wealth plan....whether people choose to do it or not is another questions...

anyway enough of all that....play on
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46240
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2646 times
Been liked: 4308 times

Postby Psyber » Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:14 pm

PhilG wrote:...Anyone who goes to a super fund is taking money away from the poor - to use your example. I think that attitude is less credible than the level you are accusing me of.

Yes it is true, but if your money is in a term deposit the bank reinvests it in funds and they get what is "taken" from the poor, so shooting yourself in the foot doesn't benefit anyone but the bank - and its share holders - of which I am one and I thank you.

I have relatively little superannuation, but then I stand to inherit a substantial amount invested in the share market by my prudent relatives many years ago! This means I won't get any of the pension I have contributed to through my taxes over the years, but I guess you have to accept some unfairness.

I think we should have compulsory superannuation for all, paid by all as a percentage of income, independently administered and audited [and not able to be touched/raided by governments] with income proportional to input at retirement. At present only MPs and bureaucrats, and those who can fund it themselves, get superannuation worth having. The present compulsory system is just enough to make sure pensioners don't qualify for fringe benefits.
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Postby Psyber » Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:18 pm

PS: Back to the original post. No Andrew Demetriou is not worth that. In our society we overpay entertainers and administrators who do not produce anything, and underpay our farmers, manufacturers, scientists, and professionals who do - though I would leave lawyers out of that last group!
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Postby PhilG » Sun Mar 25, 2007 7:13 pm

..
Last edited by PhilG on Wed May 16, 2007 9:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhilG
 

Postby Dutchy » Sun Mar 25, 2007 8:57 pm

PhilG wrote:I hate the share market. Always have and always will. The heart of the world's biggest problem - the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.



Not if the poor invest in the share market!!!
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46240
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2646 times
Been liked: 4308 times

Postby Dutchy » Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:01 pm

Psyber wrote:I think we should have compulsory superannuation for all, paid by all as a percentage of income, independently administered and audited [and not able to be touched/raided by governments] with income proportional to input at retirement. At present only MPs and bureaucrats, and those who can fund it themselves, get superannuation worth having. The present compulsory system is just enough to make sure pensioners don't qualify for fringe benefits.


WTF...dont we have this now with employers compulsory 9% contribtions?....im confused...
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46240
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2646 times
Been liked: 4308 times

Postby Psyber » Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:13 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Psyber wrote:I think we should have compulsory superannuation for all, paid by all as a percentage of income, independently administered and audited [and not able to be touched/raided by governments] with income proportional to input at retirement. At present only MPs and bureaucrats, and those who can fund it themselves, get superannuation worth having. The present compulsory system is just enough to make sure pensioners don't qualify for fringe benefits.


WTF...dont we have this now with employers compulsory 9% contribtions?....im confused...

Yeh mate, but it is not enough, the employee needs to be putting more in than that - see my bit in bold above. That, too, is only applicable to employers for employees, it does not compel independent sub-contractors or the self-employed.

In fact the employer having to pay 9% and do all the paper work is a disincentive to employ people. What I am suggesting is that everybody pay a percentage of their income from whatever source into their own super fund at a level sufficient to provide for their old age, and that the rate and return be on the same basis for all - instead of the present situation where MPs and public servants get generous super paid for by the tax-payer, a lot of people get token super squeezed out of their employer, and very many get no super either because they are self-employed by choice and don't bother, or are forced to be self-employed by being made into subbies who then get no super, or the token 9% they have to pay for themselves if they form a company
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Postby Psyber » Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:29 pm

PhilG wrote:No, term deposits are for lending. Always have been. If my bank is using TD's for other things I'd leave and go elsewhere - as a matter of principle.

And making super compulsory for everyone is impossible - expecially for those who are unemployed and not likely to be able to work ever again. And therefore discriminatory.

I hate the share market. Always have and always will. The heart of the world's biggest problem - the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.

And the difference between the money at AFL house and the money at the grass roots typifies the problem!

I'm not sure that term deposits are restricted by law as being for that purpose only, at least not in all states. Most banks are private companies and have been deregulated. However, there may be specific term deposits specifically for that form of "ethical" investiment, just as there are "green" investment plans - I have 2 Hectares of Blue Gums soaking up CO2 in WA.

Presumably those on benefits would have to be exempted, otherwise the government would have to put the rates up. Mind, you a few years ago I discovered my elderly mother had $10,000 in a tin in her wardrobe that she had saved out of her single persons aged pension.

Wise investors get richer, those who spend their money on booze, cigarettes, gambling, and drugs get poorer. My mother did not work, my father left school at minimum age and had a lowly paid clerical assistant's job after he had been unemployed for eight years, my sister started work in an office typing pool and studied real estate at night. My sister is a millionaire now - all her own doing. My parents bought cheap houses and did them up one at a time for sale until they could buy a good one to live in. I was youngest and lucky, my father and sister were both employed when I was growing up and the family put me through University, and I am fairly well off too. I value a society structure that makes that possible.
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

Postby PhilG » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:30 am

..
Last edited by PhilG on Wed May 16, 2007 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhilG
 

Postby PhilG » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:36 am

..
Last edited by PhilG on Wed May 16, 2007 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhilG
 

Postby Dutchy » Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:43 am

Phil - EVERYONE has choices and has to be accountable for THEIR actions...everyone in Australia has the ability to earn reasonable $$$ and hence invest as they like...whether they choose to do this is their choice...stop the blame game....
User avatar
Dutchy
Site Admin
 
 
Posts: 46240
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2005 8:24 am
Location: Location, Location
Has liked: 2646 times
Been liked: 4308 times

Postby TroyGFC » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:06 am

Boy!! I should have posted this in the political forum!!
http://www.palmoilaction.org.au/

JUST SMASH 'EM TIGERS!!
User avatar
TroyGFC
League - Top 5
 
 
Posts: 2545
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Meningie, formally at Warradale
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 3 times
Grassroots Team: Meningie

Postby mypaddock » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:19 am

lets put it this way- he earns three times what the prime minister of this country earns. now that is a joke!
mypaddock
League Bench Warmer
 
Posts: 1111
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 9:51 pm
Has liked: 0 time
Been liked: 0 time

Postby Hondo » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:31 am

TroyGFC wrote:Boy!! I should have posted this in the political forum!!


You should have left the thread as simply "Is Demetriou doing a good job - yes / no". As soon as you bring his salary into it you get in to a whole other world of debate - CEO salaries has been a hot topic for years now in all industries, not just the AFL. Rightly or wrongly, to get someone with the skills and experience necessary to run the AFL you would not get much change out of $1m. It's just the way it is. Pay less, and you'll get peanuts and the outcome will be worse than the position you think we are in now.
User avatar
Hondo
Coach
 
 
Posts: 7927
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Glandore, Adelaide
Has liked: 70 times
Been liked: 32 times

Postby PhilG » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:06 pm

..
Last edited by PhilG on Wed May 16, 2007 9:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
PhilG
 

Postby Psyber » Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:33 pm

PhilG wrote:Psyber, those who waste their money on alchohol, cigarettes, drugs and gambling are downtrodden because their self esteem is at a low ebb. They need help. The reason they gamble is because they want the money the rich have, and because they can't work gambling is the only way they can get it. I say that's not fair. To sink to those filthy cigarettes and drugs (which are as bad as each other) is a symptom of a pre-existing problem. Now if the ciggys and the drugs were pushed out of their reach it wouldn't change that - because that isn't the issue.

There are rich people around, and they aren't sharing. THAT is the issue.

I supect that they start out doing it because they think it is fun or part of being "all growed up" and then when their life is a mess start making excuses like "poor self-esteem". They have "downtrodden" themselves. The poor are not the only ones who turn to drink drugs etc. either.

Being out of work and poor did not push my parents in that direction. People make choices and are responsible for them. Nobody who thinks can seriously believe there is a reasonable chance of getting money by gambling - very few win big. My parents chose to save and invest and benefitted from it.

I'm relatively rich - I earned it myself, with a little help from my family, and I give some to charities I assess as genuine, but I am not interested in subsidising the self-indulgent! It is self-indulgent to think that just because others have earned something they should give it to you. My sister is a millionaire. She came from a poor family, grew up in Hindmarsh, studied at night, and worked hard and used her brain. She occasionally drank, liked Chardonnay, never smoked, and never gambled beyond occasionally putting a free token that came with a meal in a pokie.

I am not saying everyone who is poor has brought it on themselves, there are genuine tragedies, but when people cry poor you have to look at just how much money they are actually wasting that they could put to better use.
User avatar
Psyber
Coach
 
 
Posts: 12247
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:43 pm
Location: Now back in the Adelaide Hills.
Has liked: 104 times
Been liked: 405 times
Grassroots Team: Hahndorf

PreviousNext

Board index   Football  AFL

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Around the place

Competitions   SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums   Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |