Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Blowing bubbles and the maximum wage

We are living in a world where a number of ongoing systemic crises are being ignored because many people---a large and vocal minority---believe that they will never be touched by the results of these crises. Most of these people are totally wrong about this. There are only a few of them who have any hope of evading negative outcomes. Because it is so, whether they genuinely believe that there are no crises or are playing a cynical game is another matter, but they have made use of battles over race, gender, immigration, abortion, and so on in order to distract from their disproportionate control over the world, and the increasing wealth transfer and global robbery that now ensues openly.

That wealth transfer is the direct result of blowing bubbles, which is enabled by wealth transfer, which enables the blowing of more bubbles.

It turns out that we don't just need a minimum wage. We need a maximum wage (written for a US context but works well almost everywhere):
They glory in income inequality and wish it to expand instead of contract. Enough of that. They are destroyers of the American Dream.

But people who seek to shrink income inequality — to insure life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all and not just some — must now focus as much on the maximum wage as the minimum wage.

So, be it proposed:

“That any enterprise receiving taxpayer funds shall not compensate that enterprise’s highest paid person in an amount greater than twenty-five times what the lowest compensated person receives.”

Hear hear. But I have one minor complaint. I actually think it should apply to all enterprises, not merely ones that take taxpayer funds. Although the most odious of them do, in fact, take taxpayer funds, in the USA if not also in Canada. Actually, all enterprises benefit from our collective investments: in our roads, in our sewer systems, ...


Niles said...

Last I read, Costco has a maximum pay set up.

Anonymous said...

A maximum wage might be kind of necessary, but it's like closing the barn door after the horses have gotten out.

Also, like all 'good' taxation ideas, this one leaves a nice big loophole open for those with enough wealth to take advantage of it. Instead of hiring a CEO, why not contract the tasks out to another company? Or if that's too obvious, form a new company for each set of lower-paid tasks, and contract with that wholly-owned subsidiary.

Even if you don't do that, as long as the company's stock price is increasing, you can pay the CEO in stock options, and they can make capital gains on the market rather than receive direct compensation.

Námo Mandos said...

True. It's more the spirit of the thing I was cheering. What we need is actually some kind of system to implement a total wealth cap on individuals and perhaps even a size/capitalization limit on corporations and investment vehicles.

Pseudz said...

This is a great idea - - it's reminiscent of the spirit of the Tobin Tax. Feasible, plausible, possible except for the blow-back from the greed class. Still, it's great to have it in the wind . . . thanks, Mandos. Has any Canadian political party spoken about this idea?

Beijing York said...

The elephant in the room is why does everyone balk at increasing taxation of the wealthiest? The obscene amounts of wealth concentrated in the hands of 1 to 5% of the population is a direct consequence of immense tax cuts introduced in the last two decades.

Post a Comment