Maximum Wage? Why not?

Discussion in 'Economy' started by NoEconomist, Apr 12, 2011.

  1. NoEconomist
    Offline

    NoEconomist Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    207
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Just a figment of your imagination....
    Ratings:
    +34
    Hello all :razz:

    I was just wondering what the various arguments there are for and against a Maximum Wage in the US

    (Lets say...No employee may receive ANY form of compensation more them twenty times their lowest paid employee. No consultant may receive more then 10% of the annual pay of the highest paid employee of any company in a one year period.)

    I know it would be like trying to castrate a tiger on steroids with a butter knife and an oven mit but from what I have read this is how FDR was able to almost single handedly create the middle class following the Great Depression...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. Granny
    Offline

    Granny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2009
    Messages:
    3,121
    Thanks Received:
    785
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    Rocky Top, TN
    Ratings:
    +1,255
    You've got to be kidding. No, there should not be a maximum wage limit. It would kill what's left of any incentive to excel in your chosen field. You could work your ass off and your only expectation in salary would be maxed at the same limit as that do-nothing idiot sitting next to you. There would be no reason to compete to be the first to come out with something new or better.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. Midnight Marauder
    Offline

    Midnight Marauder BANNED

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    12,404
    Thanks Received:
    1,876
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1,876
    You sure you want to set that precedent? For if you do, what's to stop the G from later saying 20x is too much, not fair, and make it 10? 5? 2? And finally 0?

    Why do you want to give the most wasteful and inefficient entity on the planet still more power? That's the real question.
     
  4. xsited1
    Offline

    xsited1 Agent P

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    17,750
    Thanks Received:
    5,299
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    Little Rock, AR
    Ratings:
    +5,306
    Government control of economic decision-making through central planning? That's worked out so well in the past. :cuckoo:
     
  5. asterism
    Offline

    asterism Congress != Progress

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Messages:
    8,592
    Thanks Received:
    906
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Central Florida
    Ratings:
    +1,073
    Because I'm not going to take the risk required to keep my company afloat for the mere possibility that I can only make a maximum of $600,000 when I sell it nor will I pay the receptionist more than $30,000 per year since the value added to the company simply isn't worth more than that. Ergo, no receptionist and only highly paid decision makers will be in my employ and we'll all take turns answering the phone. It's inefficient, but at least I can cash out and retire when the time is right.

    I'm curious about the limitation on consultants. What's wrong with a freelance computer programmer designing a system for $200 per hour if it increases my profit by $500 per hour? Are you saying that just should not be available? No high earning specialists who do very well and are efficient?
     
    Last edited: Apr 12, 2011
  6. Mad Scientist
    Offline

    Mad Scientist Deplorable Gold Supporting Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    23,936
    Thanks Received:
    5,211
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Ratings:
    +7,676
    I have never thought that there should be a cap on what people can earn. If for example A-Rod can negotiate a 10 year, 250 million dollar contract and a team wants to pay him that, well then good for him! So no, there should be no maximum pay.
     
  7. NoEconomist
    Offline

    NoEconomist Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    207
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Just a figment of your imagination....
    Ratings:
    +34
    I think anyone sitting in an office would be more than willing to work there ass off to make twice as much as the "idiot sitting next to them" to say nothing off X20.

    A Maximum Wage would effect very few people.
     
  8. Midnight Marauder
    Offline

    Midnight Marauder BANNED

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    12,404
    Thanks Received:
    1,876
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1,876
    I only just now saw this... I was able to comfortably RETIRE at age 42 after I struck out on my own doing industrial process engineering consulting and gouging the piss out of my customers for my work.

    To me, it was gouging but to them it was a hugely profitable investment. For the one-time payment they gave me, (Usually $50K on the low end) in 2-3 weeks I have tripled or better, their productivity and slashed their controllable costs in half. This lasts well beyond the fiscal year the investment is made, and they made back what they paid me in the first six months of operation after I was finished. I worked CHEAP compared to what they were able to rake in year after year after I was gone. I could have quadrupled what I charged, but wasn't greedy.

    Under your idiotic proposal, my market would have been limited only to the bigger companies instead of the small to medium-sized ones I serviced. I probably would never have struck out on my own and if I had, surely would never have been able to retire at such a young age. I would probably still be working.

    But, that's the idea right? Keep the smaller to medium-sized companies at a huge disadvantage against the giant corporate competition, and keep people unable to retire so they can work and pay vig to the G until they die.

    Nice. Not.
     
  9. NoEconomist
    Offline

    NoEconomist Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    207
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Just a figment of your imagination....
    Ratings:
    +34
    Well I said twenty times because it seemed like a factor of magnitude that would still allow for a large disparity in compensation with regards to effort and effect. Slippery slopes are just speculation on a speculation.
     
  10. Midnight Marauder
    Offline

    Midnight Marauder BANNED

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2009
    Messages:
    12,404
    Thanks Received:
    1,876
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1,876
    You said 20 times.... But that's the rub isn't it? WHO sets the bar? What qualifies them to do so? Then what stops them from moving the goalposts later?

    You didn't answer the questions.

    You sure you want to set that precedent? For if you do, what's to stop the G from later saying 20x is too much, not fair, and make it 10? 5? 2? And finally 0?

    Why do you want to give the most wasteful and inefficient entity on the planet still more power?
     

Share This Page