If There is a Minimum Wage, Then why is There not a Maximum Wage?

[nanook12]

I can clearly see why we need a minimum wage because companies would try to pay workers cents an hour and everyone would live in third world poverty. But why is there not a maximum wage? Does anyone really need a billion dollars to do what they want in life? It just seems excessive. After a certain point it seems like all money does is get funneled into congress in order to buy politicians and change the rule sets in favor of the wealthy and corporations.

Maybe there should be a maximum wage where a person could all the material things he will ever want, but stops at that point because any more would just go to gaining power and influence and tipping the rules in their favor.

[PACOX]

Thats what taxes are for. I dont think there should be max wage, the market tends to regulate that. The idea of putting a hard cap on how much someone can earn just doesnt feel right to me.

Ever play a game where you could farm until dropped but diminishing returns kicked in after x amount of time? Something like that.

[Independent voter]

Because someone has to give you a minimum wage, nobody is going to give you a maximum wage.

[HumbleDuck]

To encourage people climb the corporate ladder.
Also sleeping inside a whale carcase is expensive.

[nanook12]

Thats what taxes are for. I dont think there should be max wage, the market tends to regulate that. The idea of putting a hard cap on how much someone can earn just doesnt feel right to me.

Ever play a game where you could farm until dropped but diminishing returns kicked in after x amount of time? Something like that.

Putting a cap at 100 million dollars a year is not enough and feels wrong to you? Are you kidding me...

- - - Updated - - -

People like that don't tend get their wealth off wage alone. Bonuses, investments, stocks, bonds, etfs, ect.

I don't care where they get it. It should be capped at a certain amount.

[Arewn]

Thats what taxes are for. I dont think there should be max wage, the market tends to regulate that. The idea of putting a hard cap on how much someone can earn just doesnt feel right to me.

Ever play a game where you could farm until dropped but diminishing returns kicked in after x amount of time? Something like that.

(bolded) No it doesn't. That's the problem.

Not sure how I feel about the idea, but it would have to be a more complete solution then just raw wage.

[Captain N]

Some places of business do have maximum wages but unfortunately they're only for the workers and not so much the administration. Costco while decent with its wages do cap their employees at around $24/hour but then give them 2 bonus checks for $3000 twice a year.

[nanook12]

(bolded) No it doesn't. That's the problem.

Not sure how I feel about the idea, but it would have to be a more complete solution then just raw wage.

100 million dollars a year from all sources of income. If a person cannot live fine off 100 million dollars a year, then they are just a lost cause.

[Deleted]

If you do the math properly then no one contributes much more than about 500K to the bottom line of any business.

There's an old study showing significant numbers of CEO's are actual sociopaths and actively damage their companies.

Essentially executives award themselves huge salaries because they can, owners and stockholders go along with it because they overemphasize the importance of the CEO.

[PACOX]

(bolded) No it doesn't. That's the problem.

Not sure how I feel about the idea, but it would have to be a more complete solution then just raw wage.

Wages for most people are capped according to how much the market is willing to pay for their services times how much time can spent practicing the profession.

If we're talk big corporate execs, their wealth usually isnt in liquid assets alone.

[Arewn]

100 million dollars a year from all sources of income. If a person cannot live fine off 100 million dollars a year, then they are just a lost cause.

The "all sources" was what I was getting at. I'm just saying the solution would have to cover everything.

I'm also not sure a direct cap should be used. Maybe something like a multiple of the lowest payed employee at the company (e.g if your company's lowest earner brings in 30 000 a year, the top earner is capped at 3mil).

Wages for most people are capped according to how much the market is willing to pay for their services times how much time can spent practicing the profession.

If we're talk big corporate execs, their wealth usually isnt in liquid assets alone.

We're not talking about "most people" though. We're talking about the super wealthy.
A big corporate exec does not make as much as their skill is worth, they make as much as their position of power enables them to siphon out of the company.

[Kithelle]

Thats what taxes are for. I dont think there should be max wage, the market tends to regulate that. The idea of putting a hard cap on how much someone can earn just doesnt feel right to me.

Ever play a game where you could farm until dropped but diminishing returns kicked in after x amount of time? Something like that.

Yeah, because the rich never do anything to avoid taxes! Or never try to fight when their taxes get raised!

[theostrichsays]

I don't care what why they get it. It should be capped at a certain amount.

I tend to get annoyed when I meet people who have 6 or 7 homes, and most of them sit empty or they allow rental units to sit empty because taking the loss today means getting rid of poorer people and being able to present this only wealthy people are here presentation (pretty common along the gulf coast) and honestly have little issue with a company having a max wage, if it meant that minimum wages would be increased.... and I'm sure those seem silly to a lot of people here. But to say we should cap people on their investments? How would you even go about doing that mate?

[Deleted]

So the big boss is already making maximum wage, where does all the money go? They increase the workers wages? I don't think big boss would like that.

[PACOX]

Putting a cap at 100 million dollars a year is not enough and feels wrong to you? Are you kidding me...

Tax their assets then. That kind of money only applies to a small portion of any population. But if you tell me I can only make so much money in a year are you going to force me to work if I hit the cap?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah, because the rich never do anything to avoid taxes! Or never try to fight when their taxes get raised!

Then the discussion is how to properly tax them, not capping their wages.

[Kolbjorn]

But why is there not a maximum wage?

Because it's not necessary, nor is it 'the problem.'

If a dude comes up with something and forces everyone to use it - say, Microsoft Windows or the iPhone, it isn't a problem that s/he gets AllTheMoney(TM).

What is a problem is that the U.S. has the lowest intergenerational economic mobility for the developed countries. That means if your dad's a plumber, you're more likely to stay a plumber (rather than become a doctor or whatever) in America than in other wealthy nations. That's not fixed by taking cash from Gates, Buffet, or even the Koches, it's fixed by spending money to improve educational outcomes, and so on. This does not inherently require making top people less wealthy.

The reason for progressive taxation isn't to make Bill Gates poor again, it's because if you give Gates another $10, he's just going to put it in the bank because he already has everything. If you give $1 to 10 random mmo champion forum dwellers, they'll have their mom buy another bag of Cheetos. (Gates will then get his $10 back because he owns stock in Cheetos.)

[nanook12]

Because it's not necessary, nor is it 'the problem.'

If a dude comes up with something and forces everyone to use it - say, Microsoft Windows or the iPhone, it isn't a problem that s/he gets AllTheMoney(TM).

What is a problem is that the U.S. has the lowest intergenerational economic mobility for the developed countries. That means if your dad's a plumber, you're more likely to stay a plumber (rather than become a doctor or whatever) in America than in other wealthy nations. That's not fixed by taking cash from Gates, Buffet, or even the Koches, it's fixed by spending money to improve educational outcomes, and so on. This does not inherently require making top people less wealthy.

The reason for progressive taxation isn't to make Bill Gates poor again, it's because if you give Gates another $10, he's just going to put it in the bank because he already has everything. If you give $1 to 10 random mmo champion forum dwellers, they'll have their mom buy another bag of Cheetos. (Gates will then get his $10 back because he owns stock in Cheetos.)

Keep fooling yourself. Helping the poor and middle class requires cutting the rich down some. Money is a closed system bro. Unless you just want to print more and risk rampant inflation.

[SoSuMe]

So the big boss is already making maximum wage, where does all the money go? They increase the workers wages? I don't think big boss would like that.

Fuck "Big Boss" ?

- - - Updated - - -

Because it's not necessary, nor is it 'the problem.'

If a dude comes up with something and forces everyone to use it - say, Microsoft Windows or the iPhone, it isn't a problem that s/he gets AllTheMoney(TM).

What is a problem is that the U.S. has the lowest intergenerational economic mobility for the developed countries. That means if your dad's a plumber, you're more likely to stay a plumber (rather than become a doctor or whatever) in America than in other wealthy nations. That's not fixed by taking cash from Gates, Buffet, or even the Koches, it's fixed by spending money to improve educational outcomes, and so on. This does not inherently require making top people less wealthy.

The reason for progressive taxation isn't to make Bill Gates poor again, it's because if you give Gates another $10, he's just going to put it in the bank because he already has everything. If you give $1 to 10 random mmo champion forum dwellers, they'll have their mom buy another bag of Cheetos. (Gates will then get his $10 back because he owns stock in Cheetos.)

This complete bullshit sorry. The problem is the wage of said plumber is linked to what minimum wage earners can pay thus the cycle continues... people that are rich don't need a plumber as often than someone that lives in a older more rundown neighborhood.

[Mittens]

Keep fooling yourself. Helping the poor and middle class requires cutting the rich down some. Money is a closed system bro. Unless you just want to print more and risk rampant inflation.

What is economic growth?

[Doctor Amadeus]

Because people aren’t smart enough to recognize there should be limits to everything.