If you are about to spend $1 bn to build a lavish 27-storey house and buy your wife a luxury Airbus jet, what's the point of giving yourself a 66% pay cut?
I am holding a copy of the Financial Times Weekend Edition and on the first page I read in big letters the title of the article,
"A towering example from Ambani"
I'm thinking whoever this Ambani guy is, he must have done something very noble to have him on the front page as someone who leads the world by the example of his actions.
Then the first two paragraphs read like this and I quote them here to gear you up (I was)
"Mukesh Ambani, Asia's richest man, who is spending about $1 bn to build a lavish 27-storey house and buy his wife a luxury Airbus jet, this week gave himself a 66 per cent pay cut."
"In reducing his remuneration to "set a personal example of moderation in executive compensation", Mr Ambani, who controls Reliance Industries, became the first high-profile Indian executive to heed his government's call for austerity in corporate compensation."
Is that supposed to make me feel good because I almost feel like crying here, the tears are swelling under my eyes and I can't continue reading the article any more. I feel terrible for the guy. 66% pay cut when his wife is getting him into so many expenses with the new house and Airbus jet?
I find the title and opening of the story too comical to laugh it makes me cry.
Are we supposed to believe that this guy voluntarily took a cut in his pay because his government called upon him to show modesty and austerity in compensating himself?
Are we supposed to believe that he will not be saving himself money cutting his pay all the while selling himself to the world as someone who is actually experiencing the effects of the recession through the pay cut?
What a towering example of hypocrisy we are lured to accept.
I suggest we make it a rule worldwide that billionaires and millionaires never take a pay-cut in their compensation no matter how severe a recession is and no matter how high their official salary. The whole point of having a salary cut is to have a cut in expenses and expensive lifestyle habits. Otherwise, there's no point cutting it to set an example if expenses are not also cut!
What's more depressing than economic austerity is the depression that arises from taking us all, beings of a lesser God, for fools.
The article continues by saying that,
"Tax experts told the Financial Times that Indian tycoons' salaries and bonuses were not their main income and many top executives preferred to earn low wages, which are taxed at about 30 per cent, and instead be remunerated more with dividends, which are tax free."
Can someone explain how Mr. Ambani sets an example by not cutting down on his expensive lifestyle?
I just don't see what the Indian government is so proud about. At best, they forced Mr. Ambani to take a better look at his tax structure and save himself money.
If they tell me that their aim was to make it possible for him to spend his $1 billion in order to stimulate the plutonomy and make the dream of becoming rich like Ambani one day possible for millions of poor Indians, then I can accept that at least we're not taken for fools.
There are no funny words or phrases or emotions in the article, but for some reason this hilarious reporting cracked a smile on my face something that I haven't experienced from reading the FT's front page in a long long time! |
support this thought
