 |
futurecurrents
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3472 |
01-03-12 07:02 PM
Quote from achilles28:
^If that's the case, then why not raise the minimum wage to 50 dollars an hour? Heck, why not pay everyone 1,000 dollars an hour! We'll all get rich.
Quote from Scataphagos:
Stay tuned...it's coming.
I have these special tin-foil hats on sale for you scat. If you act now you'll be able to afford them before we descend into full commie/socialism.....with sharia law. They're approved by Glen Beck !
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
Scataphagos
Registered: Apr 2009
Posts: 9265 |
01-03-12 07:06 PM
Quote from gwb-trading:
While we are at it, let's abolish the minimum age needed to work. After all this also constrains the free labor market. Obviously all of those safety laws are also skewing the free market.
I hope those who want to live under the conditions of the past enjoy having their children work in factories under unsafe conditions. Of course, they would be unemployed because children are much cheaper. Hope they would enjoy re-living the days before all of these labor laws were passed. Naturally, the rich factory owners would never take advantage of the workers or impose abusive working conditions due to the benevolence in their hearts.
Jibber-jabber!
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
piezoe
Registered: Jan 2006
Posts: 5057 |
01-03-12 07:17 PM
Quote from hoodooman:
Hows about a maximum wage limit. That would stop a lot of what's wrong with america.
Every now and then, not too often mind you, someone posts a remark on ET that is worth some extra thought. Hoodooman's is one of those remarks that gives one pause. It's worth thinking about.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
futurecurrents
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3472 |
01-03-12 07:56 PM
Quote from piezoe:
Every now and then, not too often mind you, someone posts a remark on ET that is worth some extra thought. Hoodooman's is one of those remarks that gives one pause. It's worth thinking about.
I agree in principle. But better is a logarithmic graded tax rate system with no specific levels. However, consideration should be given to the length of the income. Ie. athletes should be given more leeway since their expected income time period is not as long as others.
I don't buy the argument that if the wealthy were taxed a little more that they would stop working. They didn't stop working during the Clinton era and the taxes were higher for them then.
By all measure our society has grown to be more inequitable over the last thirty years. The few are getting richer and everyone else is getting poorer. Like Ron Paul says, welfare in the US is for the rich, for the military industrial complex. The right would have us demonize the poor but it's the oligarchy in the US that is the problem.
1 % owns 40% of the wealth in America. Try telling me that is not a problem.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
nutmeg
Registered: Jan 2007
Posts: 18264 |
01-04-12 01:54 AM
Quote from hoodooman:
Hows about a maximum wage limit. That would stop a lot of what's wrong with america.
Actually though, many professions have max wage benefits and people who realize this or reach them are plow horses, plodding along earning their max wage benefit and for the most part shirking their duties or doing just enough to get by, productivity suffers, no energy, no motivation. They are in a rut.
Union workers reach a max wage scale, state and fed workers, to name a few.
---------------
Minus a min wage, how would one ever write a business plan? If you need 10 lumpers for your business, what's the rate of pay in your business plan? $7.25 or 2 bucks? Min wage provide a startiing point not just in a dollar and cent scenario but provides the owner with a starting point in productivity per widget producer.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
failed_trad3r
Registered: Oct 2009
Posts: 1615 |
01-04-12 03:03 AM
Quote from futurecurrents:
I agree in principle. But better is a logarithmic graded tax rate system with no specific levels. However, consideration should be given to the length of the income. Ie. athletes should be given more leeway since their expected income time period is not as long as others.
Why do we have levels anyway because it's "simpler". we have like, computers? Input your salary and out comes the taxes. we can have a perfect progressive system where earning 1% more does not make your taxes jump 10%.
|
| |
|
Edit/Delete • Quote • Complain |
| Receive
an email whenever a new post is added to this thread by subscribing
to it. |
|
|
|
|
