Quote:
Originally Posted by Peverel
I have no issue with people being famous for being good at something and Beckham is an excellent example, I gather he is probably the best footballer in his class (sorry never been into football). However, does he, on a day to day basis, put more into our society than a doctor or a surgeon. Personally I think not but our society seems to think he does based on what our society is prepared to accept as his renumeration package.
(PS nothing against Beckham or anyone else, just using them to illustrate a personal frustration with our society)
|
It's the age old question of which is better?
To get a small amount from a large number of people or to get a large amount from a small number of people?
Doctors, nurses, police, fire fighters, teachers et al do a wonderful and necessary job. However, on an individual basis, each of those aid, in reality, a relatively small number of people during their working life. On a "per instance" basis they get renumerated well. I speak from experience as I work in one of the above professions and my missus in another. So I would also agree they should be renumerated better.
On the other hand singers, footballers, authors et al, provide a service to many many people throughout their working life.(the good ones anyway) On a per instance basis they are renumerated rather marginally but because they provide that service to such a huge number of people they can end up making far more money.
How much money a person makes is not an indicator of how much value society places on what they do. I'm quite happy to pay $100 to get the best seats to watch a rugby match. On the other hand I'd be happy to pay a crap load more to a doctor to perform surgery on me. I'm sure most people feel the same. Quite obviously I value the doctors services more whether or not he is making as much money as David Beckham or any other footballer.
Cheers,
PKFFW