Poor CEOs cannot live on $500,000 a year

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by Jagos

A cap on anyone prohibits them from trying to achieve whatever they want for X reason.

And what the people being capped have wanted to achieve is to make themselves grossly richer via a legalized ponzi-scheme that has destroyed the national economy. Seriously I'm not seeing the issue here.

Originally Posted by Jagos

Who would invest in new business if everyone has similar income with no incentive to produce more?

The people who aren't making the fantastically enormous sum of five hundred thousand dollars a year?

[Marelo]

Originally Posted by Krylo

Though, honestly, I'd be all for a pay cap of like... 10-20x the amount the lowest paid worker makes. It'd prevent a lot of problems like this from happening in the future.

That would actually be a pretty good incentive for corporations to pay their lower level workers more... I really like that idea.

[Wigmund]

That's funny, corporations actually giving a damn about the low-wage drones. Next thing you'll say is that the corporations could use the spare money to assist the government with public works improvements on infrastructure, schools, and other needed projects. Or that the corporations could set up scholarships to help the needy to enter college and receive degrees that might assist the corporations.

I love this economic downturn, it looks like it's giving us the benefits of a socialist revolution without actually having to set the rich ablaze. They've done it to themselves. How convenient.

[Grand Master Kickface]

Originally Posted by Mesden

Kind of does. The money would, instead of grossly overpaying CEOs for failing businesses, go back into the failing business to keep it afloat. Which means instead of laying off thousands of workers because all the CEOs make more than all their workers put together (Just in bonuses!), they can, you know, keep those workers hired on, thus employing poor people.

Okay, thanks for that. I feel like I understand it a little better now.

the amount President Obama wants to set as the top pay for banking executives whose firms accept government bailout money

Auuuugh I completely skimmed over this before my first post too. If this only applies to companies accepting bailout money then it makes much more sense.

Originally Posted by Runswithnopants

That would actually be a pretty good incentive for corporations to pay their lower level workers more... I really like that idea.

Wait... hold on. So CEOs raise the wages of their lowest paid workers so they can indirectly make more money themselves... but all this new money has to come from somewhere, right? Wouldn't the widespread practice of this just cause mass inflation?

[Nique]

Ok I guess capitalism is all well and good but yeah lets not continue letting people abuse it, right?

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by Grand Master Kickface

Wait... hold on. So CEOs raise the wages of their lowest paid workers so they can indirectly make more money themselves... but all this new money has to come from somewhere, right? Wouldn't the widespread practice of this just cause mass inflation?

Um, you realize they couldn't raise their worker's wages more than the company earns, right?

[The Wizard Who Did It]

Originally Posted by Nique

Ok I guess capitalism is all well and good but yeah lets not continue letting people abuse it, right?

I'm pretty sure that's how America has been trying to do it. I mean, it's kind of like how America doesn't have a pure democracy, and instead has a representative democracy/republic. It's a lot simpler and more effective than a pure democracy has been projected to be.

In the same vein, we also more or less regulate how our capitalistic policies work (or attempt to, or seem to attempt to, depending on your view of American politics). This takes the form of having laws against things like Cartels, which would be allowed in a pure Capitalistic market.

Basically, this is yanking the CEO's collar further away from the Pure Capitalist line, if anything.

[Grand Master Kickface]

Originally Posted by Fifthfiend

Um, you realize they couldn't raise their worker's wages more than the company earns, right?

...oh.

[Marelo]

Originally Posted by Wigmund

That's funny, corporations actually giving a damn about the low-wage drones. Next thing you'll say is that the corporations could use the spare money to assist the government with public works improvements on infrastructure, schools, and other needed projects. Or that the corporations could set up scholarships to help the needy to enter college and receive degrees that might assist the corporations.

I figure they might give a damn if their own pocketbooks are directly tied to the wages of the downtrodden.

Edit: Happy 300th post to moi.

[Wigmund]

Originally Posted by Runswithnopants

I figure they might give a damn if their own pocketbooks are directly tied to the wages of the downtrodden.

They would then; but how sad is it one has to tie the fates of the richest in a company so directly with the fates of the poorest for this to happen?