Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
and just who is going to determine how much someone should make? you? here is a bit of reality for you, if you decide that a business owner or a wealthy person should only make a certain amount of money, then what will happen is that they will hit that mark, and close up shop until the new year rolls around when they can start making money again. and that means that the people they hire to work also get limited in the amount of money they can make unless they get a new job.
have enough rich people shut down businesses part way through the year, and guess what? we get into a recession because there will be millions of people working only part of the year, and that means millions of people on unemployment, welfare, food stamps, etc. and i am not talking about the millions already n those programs, but many millions MORE. figure an unemployment rate of something on the order of 35% or so.
your suggestion is an extremely bad idea.
The bolded is sort of along the lines of what I was thinking....what if the wealthy person has already exceeded that maximum income from passive income that doesn't come from working at a job? Would the OP force that person to 'donate the excess to get down to the limit' ? What if that same person did want to work at a job....would the OP force that person to work for free because the limit had already been reached ? Or would the person's passive income not count, and the person could take a job, but only get paid up to the 120k limit the OP mentioned?
The concept of a "Living Wage" is invalid. You tailor your life to what you can afford, and make decisions based on that with things like when to start a family, buy a house, etc. In order to EARN those things you obtain the skills, and education, and/or experience to be able to earn a higher wage, or salary. That's the way it works. The market pays people more, the more then can contribute to an entity. For government to artificially set wages, and prices is very destructive to the health of the economy.
CEO's make what companies will pay to attract that caliber of person. Nobody is forcing companies to pay CEO's large amounts.
I never understood that claim, show me when companies collapsed every time the government increased minimum wage. If people had better wages, then they’d go out and spend more of it and the economy continues to benefit. Now I understand that could be an issue with smaller companies, you can’t expect them to raise the wage to $15/hr and still pay high taxes, so why not enact laws that companies that pay livable wages pay much less taxes as a compromise?
Also, what do you think of working class and middle class individuals paying their fair share in taxes, but large corporations like Netflix and Amazon which make billions per year paying $0 in taxes? Do you think that’s fair? Don’t you think that gives working class and middle class people the right to complain when we are putting forth our money through taxes?
Wealthy people hogging all the wealth is a HUGE problem, so what if say there was a limit, where they earned say 120K which is MORE than enough to live pretty comfortably, no one really needs anymore than that, and every cent they earned afterwards was taken and invested in schools, education, healthcare etc.? No one on the planet needs huge fancy Yachts, dozens of sports cars, huge mansions etc. etc. all the money greedy wealthy people waste on such garbage would be far better spent on helping poor people, helping sick people and the like.
I never understood that claim, show me when companies collapsed every time the government increased minimum wage. If people had better wages, then they’d go out and spend more of it and the economy continues to benefit. Now I understand that could be an issue with smaller companies, you can’t expect them to raise the wage to $15/hr and still pay high taxes, so why not enact laws that companies that pay livable wages pay much less taxes as a compromise?
Also, what do you think of working class and middle class individuals paying their fair share in taxes, but large corporations like Netflix and Amazon which make billions per year paying $0 in taxes? Do you think that’s fair? Don’t you think that gives working class and middle class people the right to complain when we are putting forth our money through taxes?
Two key points that many under-informed people miss...
1) Corporations don't pay corporate taxes. Their end customers/clients/consumers do. The taxes they pay are included in the pricing formula that determines what YOU have to pay for their goods/services.
2) The middle/working class already pays next to nothing in federal income tax, as it is. This will be eye-opening for many... Take a look at which income groups have a zero or negative effective federal income tax rate in the chart on page 10, and which groups pay the highest effective federal income tax rate. The bars you're looking for are light blue, Average Individual Income Tax Rate. The baseline is 0% and the light blue columns are graphed from a tax rate of below 0% to greater than 0%.
Wealthy people hogging all the wealth is a HUGE problem, so what if say there was a limit, where they earned say 120K which is MORE than enough to live pretty comfortably, no one really needs anymore than that, and every cent they earned afterwards was taken and invested in schools, education, healthcare etc.? No one on the planet needs huge fancy Yachts, dozens of sports cars, huge mansions etc. etc. all the money greedy wealthy people waste on such garbage would be far better spent on helping poor people, helping sick people and the like.
You are either extremely young and inexperience in life, or a lazy, total failure who isn't interesting in working hard and getting ahead. $120k sounds like a to someone young or to lazy to work for a living, but in reality is a mere pittance.
If everyone were limited to a cut off point, there would be no incentive to try to get ahead. Do you think any of the billionaires would work as hard as they do just to give it all away to satisfy a small minded poster? And of course when all of the rich lose incentive and quit working so hard, there would be no money to divide up.
I suggest to you is go to school, get a job, work hard and become rich ans let some other fool tell the rich how they should live and how to spend their money.
Wealthy people hogging all the wealth is a HUGE problem, so what if say there was a limit, where they earned say 120K which is MORE than enough to live pretty comfortably
120k in San Francisco is considered low income. It's almost like barely making above minimum wage in other states.
Wealthy people hogging all the wealth is a HUGE problem, so what if say there was a limit, where they earned say 120K which is MORE than enough to live pretty comfortably, no one really needs anymore than that, and every cent they earned afterwards was taken and invested in schools, education, healthcare etc.? No one on the planet needs huge fancy Yachts, dozens of sports cars, huge mansions etc. etc. all the money greedy wealthy people waste on such garbage would be far better spent on helping poor people, helping sick people and the like.
$120K lol,
Trying living in NYC or San Francisco in a 2 bedroom apartment with family and kids.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
