769

With wealth inequality and billionaire control over American society growing ever more obscene, it’s well past time to implement a maximum wage limit.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Burninator05@lemmy.world 28 points 3 days ago

My limited understanding is that once you're super wealthy your actual income doesn't matter. They take loans against their wealth to pay for whatever they want.

We need to tax both capital gains at a rate higher than labor and tax loans as income if they use stock as collateral.

[-] Tetragrade@leminal.space 5 points 3 days ago

Yes but this is an article aimed at a casual audience of wage-laborers, who undestand wealth as the thing you get for a job.

And the details of the demand don't really matter that much, because at this point it's clear that even a milquetoast request like this will still prompt the US oligarchy to have the secret police fire on protesters. Imo if anything you want the demands to initially be as mild as possible, makes them look more unreasonable. Once people are onboard you can push for more important goals.

[-] DarkSideOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

I think we need to decide, if unrealized gains are real gains. How you can loan using unrealized gains as collateral if from tax purposes it’s not real money.

If you can loan money using unrealized gains a collateral you should be taxed. I am not saying you tax unrealized gains, but taxing when get money “from” it.

But loan is considered a loss and you even get a tax break.

Also need to limit tax write-offs to really business needs, like rich people can get a huge car like a Mercedes G class on their business and write-off the cost for instance. The rich have a lot of loopholes. Incentives should be limited to people and companies making a X sum. If your company makes billions, I don’t think you need a tax incentive.

[-] joel_feila@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

I propose we tax owning stock like property

[-] TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone 177 points 4 days ago

It's not wages that are the problem, it's compounding multi-generational wealth. It's very easy for rich people to make their income zero.

[-] Remember_the_tooth@lemmy.world 41 points 4 days ago

Amen. Minimum wage was a good start, but it's become a mere virtue signal for labor rights. I have no reason to believe a maximum wage wouldn't function similarly. Furthermore, nominal sums are pretty meaningless with currency anyway. Inflation makes them irrelevant pretty quickly. Progressive tax and social subsidy is what works, historically.

[-] QuoVadisHomines@sh.itjust.works 16 points 4 days ago

I worked for a guy that got paid $1 a year. The business paid for everything for him. Wage caps will not work.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago

Can't they both be a problem?

[-] TheCriticalMember@aussie.zone 11 points 4 days ago

Well like I said, pretty much all of these mega rich people don't have any income on paper, otherwise they would have to pay income tax. And rich people hate paying taxes.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] hark@lemmy.world 52 points 4 days ago

What we need is a wealth tax. If you don't want wealth to be hoarded, then you tax it. The rich and their stooges online will parrot that "wealth taxes don't work" precisely because it is the only tax that does work and that is why they oppose it.

[-] critical@reddthat.com 97 points 4 days ago

A big misconception is that billionaires get rich from their salary.

[-] teolan@lemmy.world 36 points 4 days ago

Maximum wage laws don't make sense because the ultra rich get their wealth from investments, not wages.

[-] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

At some point, we decided that people who work and make $100K a year get taxed 50% more than people who make the same money from investment. Income is income. Get rid of capital gains special status.

And this loophole of borrowing money against stock value is income, and should be taxed as such. If we did this, everyone's income taxes would be much lower, national debts would be in reduction.

But the Wall street dicks consider taxing on investments "getting taxed twice", and hedge fund managers still pay NO income taxes, only CGT.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] youngGoku@lemmy.world 57 points 4 days ago

The thing about most mega rich people is they don't earn wages. So this wouldn't affect them.

[-] unphazed@lemmy.world 12 points 4 days ago

Came here to say this. They're poor, see how much their salaries are? Just a million, which they reinvest into the company for another share of 1% of their 3 trillion dollar company... that they control, and fire 20k employees to get back 50 million in just a week for their share...

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 10 points 4 days ago

Semantics. "Max income law"

Any income over $300,000 per year goes to the State to cover programs to eradicate poverty. Easy.

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] TronBronson@lemmy.world 30 points 4 days ago

We need monopoly busting, and inheritance tax, and general wealth redistribution. We need to stop monetizing basic needs and start paying fair wages. Income cap solves none of that. No way you can sell ‘income caps’ to the general public.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nibble4bits@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 days ago

They already play a shell game with wages, so they don't pay income taxes. Most of the really rich and successful people have their incomes derived from capital gains and then use the talking point that it's already money that was taxed through their business so it shouldn't be taxed further.

TAX CAPITAL GAINS.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Pulptastic@midwest.social 29 points 4 days ago

All incoming money and assets. Hell, tax all assets at 100% over 100M. Maybe even hard code a limit to the size of corporations, since they are people the same rules apply.

[-] survirtual@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago

We need a cap per owner. When you have multiple owners, the cap sums between them. Owners share equal rights.

So take a megacorp, like Google. They would be essentially need to make every employee an owner plus hire thousands of new "owner employees" to maintain their profit margin. Those profits get divided equally among owners, and the owners decide the direction of the company.

This pattern is also future proof against AI.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TronBronson@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago

Maximum wage would be nice, but the inequality doesn’t happen with wages, it’s stock options, asset hoarding, and rent seeking. These people don’t pay taxes, or claim wages lol. Inheritance tax of 95% of 11Million that’s an idea! Need to strip the aristocracy of its belongings.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 37 points 4 days ago
  1. Tax income greater than 100x the minimum wage at 95%
  2. Tax standing wealth above 1000x annual minimum wage

The solutions aren't complicated. What's complicated is getting the solutions implemented when enough representatives are bought out by the wealthy.

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] SharkAttak@kbin.melroy.org 32 points 4 days ago

I agree with the post who said that it should be categorised as a mental illness. If I had 100 cats people would look at me funny, if I was going around the state grabbing every cat I could get my hands on they would have me locked up.

[-] A_norny_mousse@feddit.org 16 points 4 days ago

Yes, this. It also explains why they can't ever seem to stop even though they already are filthy rich. It was never healthy to begin with.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Formfiller@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago

90% tax rate over 1million a year including capital gains. No cap on social security

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] NutWrench@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 days ago

I predict we're going to see our first trillionaire by the end of the decade. It's beyond obscene. If you "earn" (lol) more than 5 million dollars a year, you should have that part taxed at 100%

[-] monotremata@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 days ago

Musk is currently trying to negotiate a pay package from Tesla, which, if approved would pay him roughly a trillion dollars over the next decade. It's into the "not really comprehensible by humans" range.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/10/musks-1-trillion-pay-plan-doesnt-force-him-to-keep-focus-on-tesla-critics-say/

[-] dellish@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Why the fuck does this ugly cunt need more money?? It's just a small dick competition at this point.

[-] Trollivier@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 days ago

Maximum profit laws.

[-] klammeraffe@lemmy.cafe 22 points 4 days ago
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago

This is a stupid idea. The ultra wealthy make a tiny portion of their income through wages- that's kind of the entire point and problem of capitalism. It is ownership of capital that drives the income of the ultra wealthy. Jeff Bezos's salary from Amazon is only $80,000 per year, and he is one of the richest people on Earth. Maximum wage laws only hurt workers, while not impacting the ultra wealthy at all. When you see the giant compensation packages of CEO, very little of that is actually in wages. It's in stock in the company, and other non-cash benefits. Even if you restrict this practice, that wouldn't have done anything to prevent the wealthiest people on Earth from getting where they are since they are all founders or descendants of founders. I can't think of a single billionaire who got there from wages or any kind of compensation working for someone else- it's all ownership of capital.

[-] gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

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:

  • people shouldn't be allowed to have a salary of 1 million
  • that the ultra rich aren't ultra rich because of their salary
  • believe that we should tax ultra-high income individuals highly
  • believe that we should tax ultra-wealthy individuals highly

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.

[-] markovs_gun@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Kickforce@europe.pub 9 points 4 days ago

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Devjavu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 3 days ago

What you meant to say is we need a wealth tax.

[-] HulkSmashBurgers@reddthat.com 8 points 4 days ago

Also capital gains tax should be based on total net worth. So if fElon sells some stock, his capital gains tax is based on his obscene net worth.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 7 points 4 days ago

Financial obesity is an existential threat to any society that tolerates it, and needs to cease being celebrated, rewarded, and positioned as an aspirational goal.

[-] verdi@feddit.org 4 points 3 days ago

That won't solve the borrow, die, repeat. It's a great idea and should definitely have been implemented yesterday to modify the incentives of middle management but we REALLY need to start taxing people on a "personal GDP" after a certain level.

Space Kare pays proportionally 1\10 of the taxes I pay without having a "wage".

"Oh, you want to buy twitter for 50b, here's your M&A property tax of 25%"

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] BigMacHole@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago

This article is TERRORISM (according to Trump's Republican Administration!)! If you would like to NOT be Terrorists please SHOOT UP A CHURCH IN A MAGA HAT instead!

[-] ClassStruggle@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 days ago

We desperately need to get rid of billionaires and follow that up with millionaires

load more comments (15 replies)
[-] NeilBru@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

"It's not that I must always have a lot. I mist always have more than everyone else. Forever. And everyone else must show their enthusiasm about me having the most."

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
769 points (100.0% liked)

politics

26140 readers
3080 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS