Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Maximum Wage, Income Caps, what do you think?

Posted 5 years ago on Jan. 11, 2013, 3:22 a.m. EST by c1b3rshad3 (32) from Ramseur, NC
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

An idea crossed my mind a few days ago about how an actual redistribution of wealth could take place. You know, tools, policies, that could assist in this. I thought, what if you could only make so much money per day or year or whatever. That would leave more opportunity within a market for others to utilize. Little did I know, someone thought of it before (image that right), which is okay. There's a wikipedia article on maximum wage. I don't have any peer reviewed sources to point you towards but I'm sure one could begin a search in the sources and citations of the wikipedia article. I'm not saying this is the way. I'm just saying maybe its an idea that should be bounced around. Thanks.



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by c1b3rshad3 (32) from Ramseur, NC 5 years ago

I'm sorry but I have to admit I have virtually no understanding of the concepts that have been discussed in the comments here. My lack of understanding is the reason I posted it I guess you could say. It is so that people who would better understand how to implement this type of policy could discuss the topic. Thank you very much for your replies and interest in the topic.

Also, feel free to check this out. I'm sure that its poorly written and proposed but maybe someone here could re create the petition and generate more interest in the issue... https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/put-cap-amount-income-any-one-individual-can-posses-within-given-period-time/rJ8NjytL

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

Look at your goal - level the 1% - 99%

Look at your tool #1 - a brand new policy [cap wages] that no poll shows Americans want [ that I know of ]

Look at your tool #2 - something like the Buffet rule that polls show substantial American support
{ my numbers - no deductions on salary over $500,000 rate 40%
no deductions on salary over $1,000,000 rate 50%
no deductions on salary over $10,000,000 rate 60%
no deductions on salary over $100,000,000 rate 70%

remember your GOALS and choose a path that is possible.
pragmatism works better

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 5 years ago

It might have some benefit, capping the salary of CEOs could help push that money toward the average worker. Wage caps have had mixed success. It was a salary cap that led to employer funded health insurance as way around the cap. You'd have to do something to ban or cap perks and benefits too.

I think the main source of wealth for the 1% is more in the return on their stock holdings. Would you cap ownership at some point? My retirement system, it funded partly from stocks, you'd have to carefully work out something to tax individuals with large holdings while not hurting organizations whose funds that support thousands.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

Your second paragraph- your "organization" that supports thousands -
are they primarily dividends or cap gains

[-] 1 points by JPB950 (2254) 5 years ago

I do not know the details. It may very well be largely a cap gain, with current contributions funding the retirees. The gain being kept more as an asset on paper. The web site states that about 90% of the benefits are paid by contributions and investments, but it doesn't break it down. It's a retirement system for teachers, so the vast majority of members would be in a middle class economic group.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 5 years ago

Bernie Sanders created a constitutional amendment - that I support - but he treats unions differently from corporations regarding political contributions. This will get zero support from Rs.
I think a law giving union pension funds special privilidges that regular mutual funds do not have will run into the same problem.
I dont see a way around that. If cap gains tax goes up it has to be for everyone.

[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 5 years ago

Treating anything an individual gets as income, be it dividends, health insurance, salary, may be a solution. Whatever perk any person is given counts as income.

Talking about contributions gets us away from taxation, exceptionally high wages, and equity. I'm not opposed to eliminating all big money contributions from unions or corporations. Big money is always a corrupting influence, even when you agree with the point of view.

[-] -1 points by ExGoldmanSachs (-52) 5 years ago

Well I don't see a point in either minimum or maximum wage. Let wages be set by market forces.