econimic ethics: should there be a cap on earningas?

[chaz wyman]

A cap on earnings is just another stupid idea from the left. When a person earns money through voluntary trade, the person makes others better off. If you put a cap on earnings, that will cause productive people to stop working, which will reduce the economic well being of everyone overall.

Are you just trying to cause "equality" of outcome? Why? A person making more money than I do doesn't make me any poorer, provided the person earns their money justly. If a person earns money justly, then it is an injustice to steal it from them.

You are wrong on a number of levels as you allow your ideology to speak for you.

A cap on wages would be an excellent way to enforce re-investment and this will make people better off.
A business can have a choice - invest in the business rather than pay excessive wages. Instead of increasing the polarisation of wealth that is the ruin of society, they can either pay their lower staff more, or spend the cash on re-capitalising the business for which they are supposed to work. Thus the resources that would other wise be squandered outside the business would be used for growth.

You are actually the one who is wrong. For example, your claim that a limit on how much people will earn will mysteriously result in additional investment. A cap will encourage people to stop working after the cap is reached, which reduces income, which will reduce investment. Any work done before the cap, may be unaffected, but since income wil not increase, there will not be an increase in investment.

Your brain is not connected up. I am suggesting a limit of mega-wages, the money rather than going in tax can be re-invested in wages lower down or capital investment in the business.


Your claim that a business will have a choice, "to invest or pay excessive wages," makes no sense.

DUh!! Are you a complete fuckwit or have you just let your brain out for a walk.

A business already has that choice without a cap. The cap, however, removes the option of a business from paying wages beyond a cap. So, we are to believe that some enlightened politicians can magically tell us what a cap should be to make us all better off? The proposition is laughable on its face.

It's a perfect and elegant solution to the problem of wealth polarisation that is wrecking the economies of the western world.

[ForgedinHell]

[

It's a perfect and elegant solution to the problem of wealth polarisation that is wrecking the economies of the western world.

It's not a solution at all. You are simply suffering from envy of those who have more money than you. So? The fact Bill Gates has more money than you may not make you any richer, but it also doesn't make you any poorer. He didn't steal money out of your pocket, did he? He offers a product, and if you don't like what he is selling, then don't buy it. If you do like what he is selling, or others do, and they buy from him, he makes a profit. He made the money justly. Now, out of nothing but envy, you want to come along and say, he can't sell any more products after making 4 million for the year? Then, he'll shut down his business, and the people who would have wanted to buy his products won't be able to. That creates less wealth, not more.

If a cap of 4 million is so great, then tell me, how did you come up with this magical figure? If 4 million is good, then maybe $50,000 would be even better? How do you know what magical number to cram down everyone's life? You don't. That's the problem with you elitists. You think your guess work is valuable knowledge for others to have to live by. It's not. The market determines what people earn. If you don't like that, then move to Cuba.