Attn: Giles (and John)

[philk]

I suggest you read 2.1.3 in the FAQ to see why your posts have been removed.

[Giles]

Fair enough Phil

Is it ok to say that being paid ?400 hour for ones company (I mentioned no names and don't specify what is or isn't happening) quite a lot of money or not?

I think I'm free to say if I find the woman atttactive or not, it's just my opinion, no slander intended.

[John]

Then I am free to say that I think your opinion is one born out of jealousy...

As I said in my original post, given the treatment I and my colleagues have recieved at the hands of the media, the gov't and a good many members of public for daring to ask for more than the ?250 A WEEK take home pay, I suppose I should find a figure of ?400 for an hour of ones time rather abhorrent...

BUT I DON'T...

Money is a very subjective article.. it is down to each and every one of us to put a value on things based on our own subjective opinions and whether or not we, as individuals, can justify the figure...

I think it is shallow, short sighted and selfish of you to draw attention to this matter and I hope no one ever questions the value you put on yourself or your work in such a shameful manner.

[Giles]

Look John, until I started reading your postings I used to actually think that the firemen had a point asking for 30K. You've changed my opinion and I think that you are miserable and bitter and yes underpaid too. It sounds like you don't like your job much but you don't have the guts to do much about it except interject it into a completely different discussion. All I said was that ?400 an hour is a lot of money for anybody's time. To most people it's a lot of money so what's it got to do with your job? I wasn't drawing a comparisson, you were. Sounds like you are a little green-eyed. By the way I've got no objection to escorts. If you want to take it further I also think that prostitutes deserve no abuse, their job should be made legal and they should be allowed to operate as bona fide business people. If you were really aware of what escorting really involves, then you would know that it quite often is a cover for prostitution. Because of the law, sex can't be mentioned and this means that the escorts operate in a sort of invisible capacity open to all kinds of abuse. I'm certainly not jealous of what they do or envy them or the kind of people whom some of them work for. Maybe under the worst circumstances ?400 is not really asking a lot. It's still quite a bit of money you must admit. Under the worst circumstances there's always a pimp involved anyway. I'd rather work in the public sector.

[John]

Giles - you've done it again....

Sir - if you'd like to continue this debate I'd be more than happy to do so by email, but unfortunately you have digressed too far and broken board rules.

But I would like to say this - I am by no means green-eyed... I am not motivated by moneyand was in fact perfectly happy on the wage I was drawing - yes, I did feel my work was worth more - but don't we all... the point I was making was a simple analogy and the point I was making was none of us should really interfere in the money matters of others... Money is subjective, value is subjective... But alas, this thread will soon be removed...

feel free to email me Giles.

[alec]

And the replies to Phil's post were removed as they were getting more and more off-topic.

[John]

Giles - you'll find my email address on the link - if you wish to continue your rant, feel free to do it by email.

[marcusallen]

While you guys are arguing the pro's & cons. Let me say that ?400 p/h is too high even by London standards (sex of course, is not allowed to be mentioned by an Agency)!
But without it............................!!!!!!