Since many states decided yesterday to further increase the minimum wage, I'd like to propose the next logical step in this process: the maximum wage. It's high time that we put an upper bound on what you can earn in this country. Let's cap all wages at a maximum of $50,000 per year. No person, regardless of ability or value, should be permitted to make over $50,000 in one year because, obviously, no one needs more than $50,000 in one year. All income exceeding $50,000 should be taxed at a 100% rate.
This program will stimulate growth because it will force every business to invest in their own organization's growth, rather than fraudalently lining the pockets of rich fat-cats. Furthermore, we can use that tax money to provide free health care for everyone, including pets. Finally, it will bring about a golden age of equality wherein there will be almost no gap between rich and poor!
Who's with me?
I am definately down with that! $50,000 is a bit low.. but a maximum salary is definately needed..
absolutely hilarious. please also limit the amount of sexual encounters men are allowed to have and discuss so that other people don't feel bad. Along with leg extensions and hair plugs for all. Everyone the same, everyone equal.
But everyone will be equal! And equality means everyone gets the same thing. So there's no such thing as want because want is only based on what someone else has, right?
Well, if it's a maximum, then not everyone will be equal. If we had a STANDARD wage, then we'd all be equal.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
you're not allowed to accuse me of stereotyping women anymore!
can I accuse you of derailing???
The Astoria??? Orgazmic!
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
absolutely hilarious. please also limit the amount of sexual encounters men are allowed to have and discuss so that other people don't feel bad. Along with leg extensions and hair plugs for all. Everyone the same, everyone equal.
Well, if it's a maximum, then not everyone will be equal. If we had a STANDARD wage, then we'd all be equal.
As an economist, well, I coud not resist this anymore. Really, my head is about to burst trying to put together all the variables and possible changes of such a measure , needless to say I'm failing miserably so far...
All I'm positive about is that a maximum wage is set and the minimum wage is raised, inequality (measured by Gini coefficient) would be reduced because the income share of the richest 10% of the population would be reduced and the income share of the poorest 10% would increase. Hence the gap between those deciles would be smaller. However this is a picture, meaning a static situation, to really assess the impact of such measure you'll have to wait for people, goverment and markets' reactions to such meaures...
On a lighter note -and if we're going to make this discussion international- can I say that US$50,000/year is a little too low...can we settle for US$10,000/month, i.e. US$120,000 par year .
As an economist, well, I coud not resist this anymore. Really, my head is about to burst trying to put together all the variables and possible changes of such a measure , needless to say I'm failing miserably so far...
You're only failing because you have no imagination. Just picture it working and it will! Even better, eliminate the individualistic standards of "working" and it can never fail!
All I'm positive about is that a maximum wage is set and the minimum wage is raised, inequality (measured by Gini coefficient) would be reduced because the income share of the richest 10% of the population would be reduced and the income share of the poorest 10% would increase. Hence the gap between those deciles would be smaller. However this is a picture, meaning a static situation, to really assess the impact of such measure you'll have to wait for people, goverment and markets' reactions to such meaures...
The reactions of people, government and markets are irrelevant. All can be corrected.
On a lighter note -and if we're going to make this discussion international- can I say that US$50,000/year is a little too low...can we settle for US$10,000/month, i.e. US$120,000 par year .
No. That would be $70,000 that you'd be stealing from the FUTURE.
Since many states decided yesterday to further increase the minimum wage, I'd like to propose the next logical step in this process: the maximum wage. It's high time that we put an upper bound on what you can earn in this country. Let's cap all wages at a maximum of $50,000 per year. No person, regardless of ability or value, should be permitted to make over $50,000 in one year because, obviously, no one needs more than $50,000 in one year. All income exceeding $50,000 should be taxed at a 100% rate.
This program will stimulate growth because it will force every business to invest in their own organization's growth, rather than fraudalently lining the pockets of rich fat-cats. Furthermore, we can use that tax money to provide free health care for everyone, including pets. Finally, it will bring about a golden age of equality wherein there will be almost no gap between rich and poor!
Who's with me?
Stimulate growth? How does limiting peoples ability to spend stimulate growth? This post scares me because there are a lot of you that think like this, and have no idea why America's economy is the best in the world.
Why would anyone become a doctor to only earn 50,000 a year? Why would anyone work overtime to get a project done? A cap doesn't stimulate growth. Quite the opposite.
Stimulate growth? How does limiting peoples ability to spend stimulate growth? This post scares me because there are a lot of you that think like this, and have no idea why America's economy is the best in the world.
Isn't the goal equality? Why do you focus on stimulating growth? And spending won't be limited if prices fall in reaction to the salary cap. In the long run if prices don't drop by themselves we certainly have the ability to set prices more fairly, too and further correct market inefficiencies.
Why would anyone become a doctor to only earn 50,000 a year? Why would anyone work overtime to get a project done? A cap doesn't stimulate growth. Quite the opposite.
One would become a doctor earning $50,000 a year so one could help people. One would work overtime to get a project done for the benefit of others. Why is that so hard to see? The cap doesn't necessarily stimulate growth, but it would narrow the gap between rich and poor and make life fair and equal.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
You're only failing because you have no imagination. Just picture it working and it will! Even better, eliminate the individualistic standards of "working" and it can never fail!.
OK, I'm trying to be creative here, but all I can see is the people affected by this measure running to their respective banks and sending their savings and assets to the so-called fiscal paradises. I'm assuming all income will be restricted to US$50,000/year, because if previous assets are out of the "game", putting a cap to maximum wage would have a mild impact, at least on the short run.
The reactions of people, government and markets are irrelevant. All can be corrected.
OK, I'll play along. Lets suppose previous wealth and assets remain the same, hence only income distribution will be changed. Thus, if we consider general equilibria there won't be much of a change. In the long run wealth distribution could change. But hey, if everything can be corrected why do I even bother to find the economic logic of all this .
It's only unfair because you refuse to cooperate! You should help those people with their children because, as we all know, it take a village to raise a child. They're only struggling because of your failure and their greed.
It does not take a village. Stop using catchphrases.
OK, I'm trying to be creative here, but all I can see is the people affected by this measure running to their respective banks and sending their savings and assets to the so-called fiscal paradises. I'm assuming all income will be restricted to US$50,000/year, because if previous assets are out of the "game", putting a cap to maximum wage would have a mild impact, at least on the short run.
Hmm....that's a good point. Then we'll ban private banks. All banks will become government-run entities. And all consumer spending will be billed to the government directly. That way we can track all spending.
OK, I'll play along. Lets suppose previous wealth and assets remain the same, hence only income distribution will be changed. Thus, if we consider general equilibria there won't be much of a change. In the long run wealth distribution could change. But hey, if everything can be corrected why do I even bother to find the economic logic of all this .
EXACTLY!!!
Oh come on, we'll keep creating wealth, I won't be stealing from the future, with that amount I'll be able to save for upcoming generations
You have no right to save since you'll probably just squander your savings on your children rather than all children. Plus, we're going to need that money now.
It does not take a village. Stop using catchphrases.
It does too take a village. Parents cannot be expected to shoulder the burden of their children alone. Those children are your responsibility too! The children are our future.
It does too take a village. Parents cannot be expected to shoulder the burden of their children alone. Those children are your responsibility too! The children are our future.
exactly. ban anything that can be used as a weapon, hold the things accountable! Not the people!
This thread scares me more than terrorism and wars. It is unreal that people in 2006 still can think like this. Communism and socialism don't work. A wage limit only limits innovation and growth. Take an economics class folks. Quit living in a dreamworld. You may like your theory on paper, but in reality it won't work.
Do any advocates of this plan make over $50,000 right now?
How is that relevant? We're doing this for everyone. That's what "common good" means! And if you're not willing to sacrifice, compromise and cooperate for the common good, you must be selfish. And that's just greedy.
Sounds like people who did not plan their careers well want a magic escalation in pay!
No! We don't want to be paid more. We want you to be paid less. What right do you have to earn so much more than the rest of us? We work hard too!
It does too take a village. Parents cannot be expected to shoulder the burden of their children alone. Those children are your responsibility too! The children are our future.
Hey, if people stopped fuckign around with whomever they wanted and actually worked on their marriages, then they might be able to raise their children. It is not my responsibility to raise selfish peoples' children.
This thread scares me more than terrorism and wars. It is unreal that people in 2006 still can think like this.
Really? Terrorism only exists because of capitalism. Your greed is what caused 9/11. You don't see muslim extremists attacking Cuba, do you?
Communism and socialism don't work. A wage limit only limits innovation and growth. Take an economics class folks. Quit living in a dreamworld. You may like your theory on paper, but in reality it won't work.
It will work because we want it to work. Innovation and growth come from an innate human desire to learn and to build. The beautiful thing is, those people won't be able to help themselves. They have to grow, they have to innovate. It's engrained in them. And if they try to do it in secret, we'll find out.
How is that relevant? We're doing this for everyone. That's what "common good" means! And if you're not willing to sacrifice, compromise and cooperate for the common good, you must be selfish. And that's just greedy.
No! We don't want to be paid more. We want you to be paid less. What right do you have to earn so much more than the rest of us? We work hard too!
Get an education. Work your way up towards success. That is the American dream. You are paid based on how much it would cost to replace you. It is tougher to replace an engineer than a janitor. Economics.
Comments
I am definately down with that! $50,000 is a bit low.. but a maximum salary is definately needed..
you're not allowed to accuse me of stereotyping women anymore!
Excellent! Glad to have you on board.
Well, if it's a maximum, then not everyone will be equal. If we had a STANDARD wage, then we'd all be equal.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
Where do you think I'm going with this?!?!
I figured you were going somewhere near that, so I was trying to be a foil.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
YES! HAIR THE HAIRLESS!!!
Those of us with long locks must compromise.
As an economist, well, I coud not resist this anymore. Really, my head is about to burst trying to put together all the variables and possible changes of such a measure
All I'm positive about is that a maximum wage is set and the minimum wage is raised, inequality (measured by Gini coefficient) would be reduced because the income share of the richest 10% of the population would be reduced and the income share of the poorest 10% would increase. Hence the gap between those deciles would be smaller. However this is a picture, meaning a static situation, to really assess the impact of such measure you'll have to wait for people, goverment and markets' reactions to such meaures...
On a lighter note -and if we're going to make this discussion international- can I say that US$50,000/year is a little too low...can we settle for US$10,000/month, i.e. US$120,000 par year
You're only failing because you have no imagination. Just picture it working and it will! Even better, eliminate the individualistic standards of "working" and it can never fail!
The reactions of people, government and markets are irrelevant. All can be corrected.
No. That would be $70,000 that you'd be stealing from the FUTURE.
Stimulate growth? How does limiting peoples ability to spend stimulate growth? This post scares me because there are a lot of you that think like this, and have no idea why America's economy is the best in the world.
Why would anyone become a doctor to only earn 50,000 a year? Why would anyone work overtime to get a project done? A cap doesn't stimulate growth. Quite the opposite.
The same way you simulate growth in a garden: active management. Control is the only way to make things grow in the right direction.
America's economy is the best in the world because of the poor. The poor built this country. All of them. Without a doubt. Each poor person.
Because some people want to become doctors. We can use people's own desires against them. Don't you see how perfect this is!?!?
Because some people have pride in completing projects. We can use people's own morality against them. Don't you see how wonderful it would be??!?!
Isn't the goal equality? Why do you focus on stimulating growth? And spending won't be limited if prices fall in reaction to the salary cap. In the long run if prices don't drop by themselves we certainly have the ability to set prices more fairly, too and further correct market inefficiencies.
One would become a doctor earning $50,000 a year so one could help people. One would work overtime to get a project done for the benefit of others. Why is that so hard to see? The cap doesn't necessarily stimulate growth, but it would narrow the gap between rich and poor and make life fair and equal.
Sounds like people who did not plan their careers well want a magic escalation in pay!
(this doesn't apply to people whose lives may have sidetracked by legit reasons and may not have had the ability to cultivate a career).
OK, I'm trying to be creative here, but all I can see is the people affected by this measure running to their respective banks and sending their savings and assets to the so-called fiscal paradises. I'm assuming all income will be restricted to US$50,000/year, because if previous assets are out of the "game", putting a cap to maximum wage would have a mild impact, at least on the short run.
OK, I'll play along. Lets suppose previous wealth and assets remain the same, hence only income distribution will be changed. Thus, if we consider general equilibria there won't be much of a change. In the long run wealth distribution could change. But hey, if everything can be corrected why do I even bother to find the economic logic of all this
Oh come on, we'll keep creating wealth, I won't be stealing from the future, with that amount I'll be able to save for upcoming generations
It does not take a village. Stop using catchphrases.
Hmm....that's a good point. Then we'll ban private banks. All banks will become government-run entities. And all consumer spending will be billed to the government directly. That way we can track all spending.
EXACTLY!!!
You have no right to save since you'll probably just squander your savings on your children rather than all children. Plus, we're going to need that money now.
It does too take a village. Parents cannot be expected to shoulder the burden of their children alone. Those children are your responsibility too! The children are our future.
Let's just pay everyone 50K a year for working any job?
exactly. ban anything that can be used as a weapon, hold the things accountable! Not the people!
How is that relevant? We're doing this for everyone. That's what "common good" means! And if you're not willing to sacrifice, compromise and cooperate for the common good, you must be selfish. And that's just greedy.
No! We don't want to be paid more. We want you to be paid less. What right do you have to earn so much more than the rest of us? We work hard too!
Hey, if people stopped fuckign around with whomever they wanted and actually worked on their marriages, then they might be able to raise their children. It is not my responsibility to raise selfish peoples' children.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh cuba I love you if only for the sweet cuba libres
>
...a lover and a fighter.
"I'm at least half a bum" Rocky Balboa
http://www.videosift.com/video/Obamas-Message-To-American-Indians
Edmonton, AB. September 5th, 2005
Vancouver, BC. April 3rd, 2008
Calgary,AB. August 8th, 2009
Really? Terrorism only exists because of capitalism. Your greed is what caused 9/11. You don't see muslim extremists attacking Cuba, do you?
It will work because we want it to work. Innovation and growth come from an innate human desire to learn and to build. The beautiful thing is, those people won't be able to help themselves. They have to grow, they have to innovate. It's engrained in them. And if they try to do it in secret, we'll find out.
Get an education. Work your way up towards success. That is the American dream. You are paid based on how much it would cost to replace you. It is tougher to replace an engineer than a janitor. Economics.
That's a pretty good idea, but there's going to be some problems with that. Let's just take it slow here.
Exactly!!! People are just victims of their circumstances. They have no control. Change the circumstances and you own the people.