Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing in response to a number of special reports on Executive pay that have appeared recently in the Observer and Guardian:

I cannot help feeling that in trying to shame the recipients of excessively large wage packets by naming them is a bit like trying to shame a playboy by naming all the beautiful women he has had: he may react a little sheepishly, but deep down inside he's proud of it and convinced that all the reproaches stem from envy (if you cannot join them, at least try and make them have a bad conscience for being so fortunate!).

And to to some extent, of course, they are right.

I'm envious. What I couldn't do with 1 million pounds a year!

And just look at all the media celebrities (actors, sportsmen or whatever) and the money they "earn". Can you really blame the boss of a large company for valuing himself more highly than most of these?

The trouble is, when it comes to money and what is considered a reasonable income, we have long lost all (and I mean ALL) sense of proportion. The situation as it stands is absolutely absurd.

Many would agree with me, I'm sure, even among the rich themselves, but immediately point out that this is the how the real world is and that there is no way of altering it. And anyone who has the chance to make a lot of money would be a fool not to take it (if you have moral scruples, just think of the good you could do! You don't have to spend it on fast cars and women).

Thus, nobody seriously thinks that the basic situation can be changed. The government might tax excessive incomes a little more or find a way of reducing bonuses to the bosses of failed companies, but no one expects that it will make a real difference.

However, the situation as it stands is much more serious than most people realise - because of where it is leading us. Excessive incomes is one of the root causes of the  non-sustainable economy and lifestyles that are threatening our vulnerable planet.

It is not just that the lifestyles the rich are so utterly unsustainable, but the fact that - with more than just a little help from the media - they set the trend.

Because we have a market economy, which most agree is a good thing, it is assumed that everyone must be free to demand the highest income they can, even though it means in practice that a privileged few receive 20 times or more the average national wage. How modest of them - and their friends - to assure us that they are worth it!

Then we will be told about how generous they are and how much they donate to charity etc. And, of course, one should not forget that if they didn't have the money to buy their Rolls or private jet, it would put lots of people out of work! The justifications go on and on.

For all the declarations of belief in human equality, there can be none so long as one man can afford to buy the life-time's work of another with his annual bonus. 

No wonder we were prepared to do away with slavery: there is no need of it when you can afford to buy people's labour. That does not only ease the rich man's conscience, but also reduces his responsibility.

We have always been led to believe that it is the poor who are the world's biggest problem. 

That is not true. It's the rich!

Not just because their lifestyles burden our planet more than a 100 poor, but because they are the role models and trend setters that millions, if not billions, of others strive to emulate.

The Kyoto protocol - whether it is ever implemented or not - barely scratches the surface of the problem of achieving a sustainable economy and lifestyles for 7 - 9 billion people on our imperilled planet.

If virtually all the world's role models and trendsetters, the rich the famous the "successful", are not concerned about leading sustainable lifestyles, but in fact do the extreme opposite, what hope do we have of ever achieving sustainability?

None whatsoever. And that means is EXTINCTION.

There is no way to force the rich into changing. That would be like trying to take a bone away from a very big and hungry dog: it will bite your head off!

If the rich are going to change it will have to be of their own volition.

Some hope! You say.

It is the only hope we have.

The rich are the problem - and the solution. Like most people, they love to feel important, and they are - very!

It is just a matter of persuading a few (initially - and hope that it catches on) to stop being a part of the problem and to start being a part of the solution.

Why should they do it? 

Because it is the right thing to do. Because it is in their own enlightened self-interest. Because no one wants to be cursed one day by their own children or grandchildren.

So what do they need to do?

My suggestions: Make public and verifiable

 

1)	what their income is and from where it is derived.
2)	how much they keep for private use (no more than 4x an average income, but allowing time to reduce it from an absolute maximum of 10x)
3)	the good, sustainable causes and projects to which their remaining money is donated*.

* This can include a sustainable community or communities to which they will have a right of membership and which will provide them with material security for the future. This is so that they do not feel they have to invest money for the purpose of providing an income when they are no longer earning big money.

What I am proposing for the rich (the details of which need to be worked out, of course) boils down to a voluntary 

MAXIMUM WAGE,

commitment to a sustainable lifestyle and also to supporting a sustainable economy, which they are in a better position to do than anyone else.

If just some of the famous and "successful" were to lead the way, many would follow.

You think I am crazy. Perhaps you are right. Perhaps we are doomed to extinction.

But I haven't given up hope yet.