770
We Desperately Need Maximum Wage Laws
(jacobin.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
770 points (100.0% liked)
politics
26165 readers
2299 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I don't think you're helping the cause. A perfect solution is not the goal, and a good idea that fails to address the targeted problem is still a good idea.
You can at the same time think:
Don't be a bad progressive by discouraging progress. "Tax wealth not work" is a great slogan to unify the working class. We should also probably tax ultra-high income individuals as well.
The issue is that this is literally not a problem. It's like deciding that the best course of action when you're starving in the woods is to hunt and eat Bigfoot instead of foraging for food. It's a waste of time and resources at best, and a distraction from real solutions at worse. Nobody in the history of the world has become ultra wealthy through high salary.
Idk if you know this but governments are composed of a lot of people. We can fix multiple issues with multiple solutions. Right now the top 0.01% have absolutely too much money. The top 0.1% also don't get taxed enough. The top 1% also don't get taxed enough. The top 10% likely could handle more taxing as well depending on what country we're talking about.
The reality is there are hundreds of problems modern governments need to solve, most of which require revenue, so getting more revenue from the people who own a ton and people who make a ton is good.
I don't understand why we have to pick one solution when we definitely can handle talking about (especially casually on the Internet) multiple solutions, those solutions are good, and we agree on the ranking of importance (wealth tax first, anything that goes after the top 1%, and then income taxes, anything that goes after the top 10%). Like, I don't think it's that hard.
*aside from pro-sports competitors.
He is right though. Those rich guys won't have an income at all, they just live on loans., get driven around in cars owned by the company, live in houses owned by the company etc, etc etc.
I'm literally agreeing with that statement. The ultra wealthy make all their money from their wealthy. Yes. Can we all agree that that's what's happening? Yes? Good.
Now ALSO can we agree it's sane for someone to suggest taxing ultra high income earners? Like in 2012, just reading off the wiki here, the median cash compensation for a US CEO was 5.3 million. That's cash. That's about as much money as I want the limit to be on anyone in the world in terms of wealth and these fuckers are getting paid that a year. Can we agree we should tax cash incomes over oh idk 1 million dollars at something like 90%?
Like guys come on, this isn't hard. Don't just knee jerk react to the topic, read what is being written. Yes, tax wealth. That's the most important thing every government can do. Yes, I'm saying that because I know wealth begets wealth and it cascades, the wealthy are wealthy because of their wealth (no shit). ALSO, yes we should tax ultra-high income earners. If you get paid enough money to retire in two years of normal full time work you should be taxed accordingly (with something like Germany's tax law that let's you spread it out over X years so if it was a one time thing you get taxed normally but if it's an every year salary it gets taxed correctly).
The ultra rich own assets. Their wealth does not come from monopoly money from a paycheck. So you can’t tax them unless you go after unrealized gains.
You absolutely can tax assets. Idk what your point is here, are you anti-taxing the rich? Or are you hyper fixating on the fact that I'm also pro-taxing ultra high income earners more? I don't get your comment.
I'm against taxing unrealized investment gains.
Okay, cool, that's not the question. Are you for taxing the ultra wealthy based on their wealth or against? Are you saying you're against this specific form of wealth tax and because you believe that's the only form of wealth tax you're against the whole concept? What's your fundamental position and point, because I'm not proposing a bill here, I'm taking to strangers on the Internet.