- Capitalism and Alternatives -

minimum effort

Posted by: Gee ( si ) on January 18, 19100 at 18:42:29:

In Reply to: A Maximum Wage posted by MDG on January 18, 19100 at 18:12:28:

: Converting a capitalist society to socialism, communism, or some other "ism" will be a lengthy and cumbersome process -- at best.

I though the ideal was revolution and not trying to patch things up as one goes along?

: In the meantime, and in the interest of promoting social justice and equality, I advocate a maximum wage, i.e. the total amount of wealth (not wages or salary) a person is allowed to earn per year.

Where? in the US? ok, at least one way airline tickets will be a boon industry for the first year after that legislation.

Lets stop everyone at $5 million? yeah ok, once that medical company chief has his $5 million he needn't bother to push for that heart attack preventing medicine research - half his motivation has gone (like it or not). Same with producers all over, all reaching the ceiling before the year end and slowing down there, produsing far less wealth than would otherwise have been the case.

No MDG - its a silly thing. the irony is that a socialist revolution would actually be far more honest, the above is just a sure way to hamper economic abundance under the current system (making it less easy for socialsim to take it over) - now why would you want to do that?

: On the other hand: all wealth above $5 million will be subject to taxation. People can give the extra money to charity, reinvest it in their businesses (increased wages for their workers, new machinery, etc.), but on the last day of the year, whatever is still in their private possession goes to the Government.

Boy I'd like to see what utter crap people will write off their 'excess' earnings on, and how little those earnings will become when they see that they can no longer choose what to do with it - so why bother earning it (and no, zero sum fans, this does *not* leave more for others)

: This would provide billions of additional monies with which to improve public society --

If it were enacted it would provide an amount equal to that which by the oversight and accident of the earner crept over their 'dont bother after today' line. i.e. not much. You would be far better (assuming you want to achieve tax paid goodies for 'the public') to completely unleash earning power and just demand a flat rate proportion of it. 10% of a billion is more than everything over $5m when the fellow stopped bothering after that level. I fear you may in a zero-sum trap.

I wasnt rude.

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup