Support NeoGAF

[kmfdmpig]

A lot of them already do dont they.
Business folk already are committing legal tax avoidance. So are famous actors, and many who earn millions of pounds a year.

Problem is this:
Do you want a rich person to use public resources without paying into the system equally relative to you? Or do you not want them to be able to do this?

The solution to the problem you mentioned is not a limit on earnings, but a progressive tax system.

I agree that wealthy have a disproportionate benefit from living in the society that provides them an opportunity to earn their wealth, so progressive taxation makes sense. An arbitrary and hard cap on earnings, however, makes no sense and encourages the wealthiest people to abandon ship.

 

[navii]

Sounds right to me, lots of people earning that much aren't working that hard anyway. If you own a company your earnings are not just your yearly wage. So a business owners hard work is paid off.

That's just like my opinion man.

Edit: though I realise sometimes your worth isn't tied to only how hard you work.

 

[kirblar]

The solution to the problem you mentioned is not a limit on earnings, but a progressive tax system.

I agree that wealthy have a disproportionate benefit from living in the society that provides them an opportunity to earn their wealth, so progressive taxation makes sense. An arbitrary and hard cap on earnings, however, makes no sense and encourages the wealthiest people to abandon ship.

[url]https://t.co/kIL81a5DOL[/URL]

"rise in US wealth inequality over last 30yrs .. by far the most important driver is .. drop in tax progressivity"

 

[TechnicPuppet]

I think it's a great idea. Earnings have gone crazy.

 

[Hollycat]

I'd support a maximum wage, but it'd need to be in the millions I think. Maybe tens of millions.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

The solution to the problem you mentioned is not a limit on earnings, but a progressive tax system.

I agree that wealthy have a disproportionate benefit from living in the society that provides them an opportunity to earn their wealth, so progressive taxation makes sense. An arbitrary and hard cap on earnings, however, makes no sense and encourages the wealthiest people to abandon ship.

They ain't paying what they are asked to pay just now. They lowered the 50p rate saying they were doing it because they might actually pay if it's less.

For how long can we just sit and do nothing.

 

[kirblar]

They ain't paying what they are asked to pay just now. They lowered the 50p rate saying they were doing it because they might actually pay if it's less.

For how long can we just sit and do nothing.

For as long as people support men like Corbyn rather than ones actually capable of implementing change.

 

[kharma45]

Great timing Jezza with inequality at its lowest for three decades. He's the gift that keeps giving.

 

[Delusibeta]

A hard cap on wages is a dumb idea, because it'll mean that any rich people (who doesn't immediately leave the country) would have any income above the cap be converted into shares, bonds and various other financial instruments that would still pay said rich person loads of money but make it far harder for the Government to get tax (when compared to the current PAYE system). End result would be a precipitous drop in tax revenue and a very noticeable increase in income inequality.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

For as long as people support men like Corbyn rather than ones actually capable of implementing change.

Yeah they others have all done a splendid job haven't they.

 

[mlclmtckr]

I do not think you understand what a "purity test" is.

You're talking about bouncers kicking people out of tents for being too far left.

 

[ghst]

are the sharpened 50ps that get lobbed at players taking corners tax deductible?

 

[norinrad]

We have something like this in the Netherlands, officials in the public sector are forbidden to earn more than ministers (€228.599 including expenses). I don't see how you can apply this to private sector.

The old man hasn't thought things through. That's the problem. Something like this only works for all public sectors and it's morally fair.

Of course the guy who implemented this in the Netherlands went on to make close to 500k a year at the private sector. Lol

 

[D4Danger]

Yep. The fact that Labor, and especially Corbyn aren't all over the NHS crisis, and blaming it on the Tories (as they should be), is really telling.

He was on TV several times this weekend talking about the NHS crisis. Meanwhile the people actually responsible were mia. Why don't you direct some of that anger in the right direction?

Also fun fact when the BBC interviewed Corbyn about the NHS they asked if he would resign because of it. That combined with his general inability to create media friendly sound bites are killing any reasonable thougt it seems.

 

[Madness]

"Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his own brow? No says the Labour leader in Westminster, there must be a market cap"...

 

[Jackpot]

They ain't paying what they are asked to pay just now. They lowered the 50p rate saying they were doing it because they might actually pay if it's less.

For how long can we just sit and do nothing.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=228017537#post228017537

 

[kirblar]

You're talking about bouncers kicking people out of tents for being too far left.

No, they're being kicked out because every time they take power, they attempt to murder everyone in the tent.

It's not about purity of ideology, it's about self-destructive behavior. They're welcome to stay if they don't try to light things on fire.

 

[EdwardTeach]

I can't see any footballers getting behind this. Their wages would have to be be cut to about 1/52th of their current salary.

 

[norinrad]

JC has a huge young fanbase though, that along could keep him there for a long while.

 

[WhateverItTakes]

JC has a huge young fanbase though, that along could keep him there for a long while.

Therin lies the problem. This would be all fine and dandy if that generation supporting him was shifted to middle age, with the much older generation that is pretty much blanked conservative up the river. Then his politics might actually have a shot at winning over the general public.

But it ain't. And at this point it's looking like a sizable demographic shift is required to get Labours a win in an election. Well, that or a new strategy and leader.

Well it all comes down to if you are out for yourself or want future generations to benefit, currently they are screwed and sitting around doing nothing will not fix it so I'm open to ideas.

I get it dude, but this cap isn't the fix for us younger folk. What we need is cutting down on tax loopholes and investment in the community and government services, which cutting down what talent comes here won't help.

And in saying stuff like this, these policies wildly beyond what the current political landscape of the country, Corbyn undermines te chance of us getting a future any more liberal than we've got. He can wildly dream in his own time. For us, he needs to get elected, and than means reining it in on elaborate schemes like this, something he didn't even have a full answer on when he said it, and at the very least focusing on what matters. His headlines today should be on putting the government to task over their shambolic treatment of the NHS. The other headline he has on migration is decent I suppose but not really strong enough.

We need small steps that the public can be sold on, not fanciful leaps that scare them away. Remember the long game.

 

[bitbydeath]

Arguing for this cap with that avatar is hilariously on point.

Well it all comes down to if you are out for yourself or want future generations to benefit, currently they are screwed and sitting around doing nothing will not fix it so I'm open to ideas.

 

[satriales]

I like the idea of linking the highest paid in a company with the lowest paid. So if the boss wants more he has to pay his employees more too.

 

[bigedole]

I like the idea of linking the highest paid in a company with the lowest paid. So if the boss wants more he has to pay his employees more too.

I like the idea of associating the income of an employee to an amount mutually agreed upon by employer and employee that will generally end up following the amount of value the employee brings to the company through their work.

Anything else is fairy tales and flying spaghetti monsters. A business can not be run by making up numbers to pay people that have nothing to do with the value of their work,.

 

[Goodlife]

I like the idea of linking the highest paid in a company with the lowest paid. So if the boss wants more he has to sack his lowesr paid employees and pay an agency to hire them back

Fixed

 

[mlclmtckr]

No, they're being kicked out because every time they take power, they attempt to murder everyone in the tent.

It's not about purity of ideology, it's about self-destructive behavior. They're welcome to stay if they don't try to light things on fire.

The mainstream third-way Dems 'took power' in 2016, and lost. To Donald Trump. I don't know why you're talking about murder and fire. I'm talking about politics.

There are a lot of people who want a less business-friendly option next time. That doesn't make them hardline Che Guevara loving barricade-building extremists.

 

[Steel]

This is idiotic. What the hell?

The mainstream third-way Dems 'took power' in 2016, and lost. To Donald Trump. I don't know why you're talking about murder and fire. I'm talking about politics.

There are a lot of people who want a less business-friendly option next time. That doesn't make them hardline Che Guevara loving barricade-building extremists.

If you think that anything other than charisma and appearances lost the election in the U.S., then you must think Obama would've lost had he been able to go for a third term.

 

[Suikoguy]

The mainstream third-way Dems 'took power' in 2016, and lost. To Donald Trump. I don't know why you're talking about murder and fire. I'm talking about politics.

There are a lot of people who want a less business-friendly option next time. That doesn't make them hardline Che Guevara loving barricade-building extremists.

This is a thread about Corbyn, who are you talking too?

Also, you missed a chance to attack people with neoliberal, i'd suggest editing your post to include it.

 

[daviyoung]

Corbyn is a Bernie Saunders fan anyway. Such a big fan that he can't pronounce his name right.

 

[aygomyownroad]

Labour are doomed for decades.

Conservatives have every election in the bag. The SNP have got Labour voters in Scotland, and Labour voters in England have gone to Conservatives.

I understand the difference between wages can be massive but he is effectively wanting to punish people who are successful.

He is useless and outdated. The reason they did so well with Tony Blair was because rather than be left wing labour at the time were leaning more right.

 

[mlclmtckr]

Also, you missed a chance to attack people with neoliberal, i'd suggest editing your post to include it.

Feel free to have a look at my history and find the post where I did that.

 

[kirblar]

The mainstream third-way Dems 'took power' in 2016, and lost. To Donald Trump. I don't know why you're talking about murder and fire. I'm talking about politics.

There are a lot of people who want a less business-friendly option next time. That doesn't make them hardline Che Guevara loving barricade-building extremists.

No there aren't. Not when your ideal "less business-friendly" option is someone like Corbyn.

Corbyn loses to May among Labour voters in polls.

 

[qcf x2]

Maybe not a hard cap, maybe a soft cap and serious scaling after. Wait, that's taxes!

I was gonna say a soft cap and the majority of the non-taxed surplus gets split equally among all the employees of the company (like tips at a restaurant), but there would be so many scams by the negatively affected folk that it wouldn't even be funny.

 

[Uzzy]

I remember when that well known left wing socialist Theresa May promised to make shareholders votes on remunerations for bosses legally binding, because even she recognised that the scale of the disparity between executive pay, often after abject failures, and the general populace was problematic and becoming undefensible.

 

[Condom]

The title is misleading, it suggests he is thinking of something in the 150-200k range while the actual number is in the millions.

 

[Suikoguy]

The title is misleading, it suggests he is thinking of something in the 150-200k range while the actual number is in the millions.

It is? Link?

I had no idea somewhat more was 20 times more.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

this is hypothetical because logistically i'm not sure how it would happen, but if salaries were capped across the globe and CEOS had the only jobs that paid 1 million bucks a year, the current CEOS would continue doing the job at that salary. basically, i don't think many CEOs really care about making 150 million as opposed to 1 million, they just want to be making more than everyone else.

Most current CEOs would probably retire and companies would struggle to attract talent at those levels. Especially struggling companies that need exceptional executives the most, because why would an executive leave his cushy job at a successful company to lead an ailing one when the pay's the same?

 

[Condom]

It is? Link?

I had no idea somewhat more was 20 times more.

The last sentence of the OP?

 

[chillybright]

I like the idea of associating the income of an employee to an amount mutually agreed upon by employer and employee that will generally end up following the amount of value the employee brings to the company through their work.

Anything else is fairy tales and flying spaghetti monsters. A business can not be run by making up numbers to pay people that have nothing to do with the value of their work,.

Yep. Everytime wage cap is brought up the socialism-gaf always have me scratch my head.

 

[Suikoguy]

The last sentence of the OP?

lol, that's his example of someone who would be hit by a wage cap, not where he would place it.

Nevermind the countless other reasons why this would be a terrible idea, explained by countless posters in this thread.

 

[Condom]

lol, that's his example of someone who would be hit by a wage cap, not where he would place it.

Nevermind the countless other reasons why this would be a terrible idea, explained by countless posters in this thread.

He is suggesting a policy and using such an example for his reasoning; Of course he means it would be done against high wages of 50m and the like.

And what if the idea is bad or not? I wasn't talking about that.

 

[Gnome Scat]

Well, say goodbye to all of your entrepreneurs and innovators because they'll be coming to America.

 

[Cromat]

This just shows how massively out of his depth this guy is. If they impose this kind of arbitrary (and very low) wage ceiling, all it will achieve is massive deflation - in other words the value of money would skyrocket to accommodate the differences in relative value that were erased by this arbitrary ceiling.

High wages fall to accommodate limit -> companies can now lower prices on their goods because they save on salaries -> companies have an incentive to reduce prices to undercut their competition -> everyone does and the price level drops sharply (deflation) -> the real value of money increases everywhere -> people pull out their savings because money gains value over time -> massive underinvestment in the economy -> depression -> wage cuts and unemployment...

 

[grumpy]

England is gonna be hardcore Toryland for the next 20 years with this guy as leader of the opposition. This feels a lot like a repeat of the 1980s - Early 1990s period in Labour's history.

 

[grumble]

I don't see a problem with this.

Tax the rich so much that their salary works out to 138k. 138k is more than reasonable, it's more money than the vast majority of the population will make over 3-4 years.

Then why work hard? I understand diminishing value, but zero value? I'd get to middle management and coast.

 

[Ravensmash]

England is gonna be hardcore Toryland for the next 20 years with this guy as leader of the opposition. This feels a lot like a repeat of the 1980s - Early 1990s period in Labour's history.

Can the Lib Dems take advantage?

I genuinely think they got a unfair rep during their time in Government.

 

[Almighty]

Yeah this idea seems like something that might be good in your head, but has no chance of working out well in the real world. It always seems more sensible to to me to raise the floor rather than cap the ceiling.

 

[old manatee]

Sounds good to me.

 

[TheWasTheJoke]

This literally the dumbest policy I've ever heard. It's batshit fucking insane. Creating a maximum wage of say, $250,000, will have the effect of bringing down every single wage to that level, dramatically decreasing net tax revenue. A wage trap will also be created, where it makes for sense for an individual to stagnate their career when their earnings are slightly below the gap as endeavouring any further will not reap material rewards. This will lead to losses of productivity in many areas of the job market and the gradual de-skilling of the high echelons of society. I also expect those who earn considerably above the limit to either store their wealth overseas, evade tax or emigrate. This could be anyone from professional footballers to neurosurgeons. A decrease in the budget, stagnation of industry and a human resources flight will be the only result of the madness.

I feel for the British left, which has co-opted by a ridiculous 70's style socialist abrasive ego maniacal moral relativistic clueless unelectable bunny rabbit.

 

[DBT85]

Absolute wage caps are ridiculous.

Thiugh I have no issue with a "person at the top of a company can not earn more than 50x the person at the bottom" type rules.

 

[legend166]

Hopefully we will be able to cap incomes. It's urgent and necessary as individual redistribution doesn't work and the gap is getting wider and wider.

Income inequality is the biggest problem of modern societies and, although capping isn't necessarily the best way to handle it, it's a good first step.

First step? In what universe is an income cap a first step?

That's what I don't understand with so many people on this board. I see it in the universal income threads too. Everyone jumps to these radical 'solutions' instead of the heaps of smaller, more realistic things.

For example, instead of putting a cap on income, you can start taxing capital gains more effectively, stop people shifting massive amounts of wealth offshore, and tinker with the progressive tax brackets.