spacetweek wrote: » It's interesting to me that there seems to be a particular age group/demographic on here. May I ask how old you guys are? And what industry you work in? I don't know anyone who makes less than 25k. The only time that occurred briefly to me or anyone I know was when we graduated and got crappy starter salaries, but within about 6 months we were all > 25k. These are typical wages in lreland. Nobody makes less than 25k unless they are only 6 months in the job or it's sweeping the streets.
mhge wrote: » Because people with a degree don't understand what average means; and that to get a €35k average one guy on €75k must be balanced by a bunch of €25k folks.
Here is a story about statistics I made up for my son: Once there was a boy who asked his parents to double his pocket money to €40 a month. When his parents laughed, he got angry. “The average guys in my class get a month is ten times that”, he said. His parents were gobsmacked, but suspicious. They asked their friends and all of their kids were getting €20 a month too. When they quizzed their son further he owned up that he had included the teachers after tax salary in his average: €503 [15,000+(30x€20) divided by 31]. This highlights the difference between the average (or mean) and other measures. If the son had reported the mode (most common figure) or the median (the figure at which half the set got more & half got less), both of those would have been €20. But the mean can get skewed by a small number of more highly paid individuals. And it also, incidentally, shows that pay can be fair and yet averages vary between groups. Imagine that there were another class with an identically paid teacher and only ten pupils. Instead of an average of €503 [15,000+(30x€20) divided by 31] the average for that class would be €1,381 [15,000+(10x€20) divided by 11]. Both teachers are paid the same, all students are paid the same, but the average for one class is almost three times the other. And that is why the mix of employment means average public sector pay and average private sector pay will always be different. There are more doctors in the public sector; more retail staff in the private. You might argue retail staff should be paid more, you might argue public sector workers are paid more here than in other countries – those are separate questions. While the mix is different the averages can’t be usefully compared, any more than the two class averages above can. That is why every month the CSO says average pay for the public sector and private sector cannot be directly compared. Now let us never speak of this again.
TheChizler wrote: » Any idea what the median wage is? Might give a more appropriate estimate than the average.
OMD wrote: » Average pay for a full time worker in Ireland is about €45,000. €22 per hour X 40 X52.
kceire wrote: » Thats assuming a 40 hour week. Most 9-5 jobs are actually 9-1 & 2-5 to allow for a lunch break. I would class that working week as 35 hours and hence €40,040 as the average full time working salary, in my opinion of course
Laminations wrote: » http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_household_income $24,677 in 2007 so I imagine lower than that now. The high wages of a minority skew the average.
murphaph wrote: » Most "9-5" jobs are in fact 9-6 jobs as very few firms pay people for their lunch break (which must be taken and in many firms it's an hour, compulsory).
seamus wrote: » $24,677 when adjusted for PPP. That's not the same thing as the actual median so isn't all that relevant here. That is, the median wage is not €19,000 (that's roughly what $24k is in euros). Adjusting for PPP takes into account things like the cost of living, cost of goods, taxes, etc etc to work out what the buying power of the median wage in one country would be if they were in the United States. In PPP terms, Ireland = 1.25 where the US = 1, so that adjusted median wage of $24k translates to an actual median of $30k, or about €23.5k. Of course, that's all very rough, the figures are from 2007, and it's household income versus personal income, so can't be compared to the published €35k average per capita income. Edit: Useful household income stuff here:www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/silc/2010/silc_2010.pdf
TheChizler wrote: » Of course it doesn't really make sense to compute average wages from multiple professions.
Farmer Pudsey wrote: » TheChizler wrote: » Of course it doesn't really make sense to compute average wages from multiple professions. No it doesn't makes sence to show anything that shows the difference between public sector and private sector wages. even though the average private sector wage is much the same in Ireland and in the UK. But the difference in public sector pay in the UK is 7% above the private sector while in Ireland the difference is 40%. Anything that shows that public sector workers are overpaid and is unfavourable to public sector must be wrong and not make sence
Zascar wrote: » You may find this interesting:
spacetweek wrote: » ........... Nobody makes less than 25k unless they are only 6 months in the job or it's sweeping the streets.
You clearly don't understand what's going on do you ?, elites are not employees on a wage, they are the people that earn profits on the labour of others. Check out the ST list of Ireland's rich, this 'recession' has made them wealther than they ever were in the celtic tiger.
Peanut wrote: » However, the 0-10,000 figures almost certainly skew things, as many of them probably don't represent fulltime jobs or other circumstances. So if we ignore this bracket
Duggys Housemate wrote: » Quite. Or they earn rent. Very very few PAYE workers in Ireland earn above the 250K bracket. We can see from that bracket that 10,667 (0.5%) people earn above 250K but more tellingly they earn 6B between them, or on average - 600K. However the average is misleading here too - I bet there are a few people earning tens, or hundreds of millions. The top 0.25% probably take the lions share of that - about 4-5 billion. And they would be earning dividends or profit or capital gains. Nobody gets that in wages - we don't have American type CEO salaries here, or the banking magnates from London. The point being is that increasing "income tax" - a misnomer, if ever there was one - because it is really a PAYE income tax wont do anything. This myth pervades the left and right. Anyway, to tax the top 0.25% we need to tax dividends and capital gains.
OMD wrote: » Dividends, capital gains and profits are taxed.
Jellicoe wrote: » You clearly don't understand what's going on do you ?, elites are not employees on a wage, they are the people that earn profits on the labour of others. Check out the ST list of Ireland's rich, this 'recession' has made them wealther than they ever were in the celtic tiger.
TheChizler wrote: » You were the one who brought the 'elites' into this! You neglected to say that 'elites' aren't employees on a wage. Even 'elites' have to make a living, they have a salary/wage or some kind of income. Their earnings affect the overall average. I'm just trying to understand your post.
Duggys Housemate wrote: » but you saidThat would mean the 'elites' earn less, the 'non elite' earn less, or there are less 'elites'. What's their plan again? In relation to him saying the average wage would fall. Your claim is incorrect because falling wages != falling profit.
Jellicoe wrote: » what's more intresting is that you sprung to the conclusion that elites have to be employees, and they do for the worker Vs worker race to the bottom scam and lies to work. Must be the sunday indo brainwash.
TheChizler wrote: » Even CEOs have a wage. And I don't read the Independent. Would you please clarify who the 'elites' are as I clearly don't understand? I don't see how my post is incorrect, as if either group's wages were to fall and the other to remain static, the average wage would fall. The original statement was that if the 'elite's plans go ahead, the average wage would drop. I assumed you're saying the plan is to take home more money. If they make more money, either the 'non-elites' would make less or stay the same most likely, and therefore the average wage would either remain the same or rise. I was just asking what you meant cause the start of your sentence didn't tie in with the end of your sentence. This is a bit silly in fairness.
Duggys Housemate wrote: » You think everybody earns a wage? Have you heard of dividends, profits, capital gains? That's what the top .1% are earning