771

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

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

Let’s make it 5 times minimum wage.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I think that there should be fixed levels of income from jobs, alongside universal benefits and a ceiling on wealth and assets. Personal wealth should have a hard cap, while businesses have their cap determined by employee head count. There can also be an UBI income lotto funded by companies, which allows them to increases their wealth cap - effectively allowing them to healthily grow as reliance on AI increases. People who had jobs displaced by AI get access to the income lotto first, followed by the disabled.

Education shouldn't just be free, it should be treated as job, paying people according to their grades. This encourages people to focus on their studies and a healthy work/life balance, instead of having to constantly juggling a meeting ends gig.

We have centuries of inherited rot from capitalistic practices, it would take a radical restructuring to make things fair. Similar to the Constitution and Magna Carta, where principles and rules are laid out to prevent absolute monarchy. Billionaires are the kings of our time, so we should have an economic ruleset designed from the outset to prevent their existence.

[-] quick_snail@feddit.nl 2 points 1 week ago

This, but make minimum wage equal to the maximium wage.

[-] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

need it to cover all compensation but I agree. ben an jerrys had single digit multiples for the highest paid. don't see why we can't do 100.

[-] GuyLivingHere@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

So:

A loan of $1 m is given to Mr. Richbitch McDouchebag based on owning $1 m worth of stock.

Eventually that loan has to be paid off.

When McDouchebag sells off some stock to pay the loan, the amount paid presumably enters a bank account, either in their name or in the name of a numbered company they control, yes?

That's income. Apply tax to it before they pay off the loan. In Canada, the top marginal tax rate is 33%, so $330k minus the other marginal tax amounts for the lower brackets would be applied before this money can go to pay off a portion of that $1 million loaned.

It's either this, or we rip up the income tax act alongside finding a different revenue stream for the government.

I'm for whatever we can get on board with most people, because I am pretty sure most of us who aren't accountants hate filing income taxes.

If we instead got most of our money from other things that the government sold, then (a) big companies couldn't use the same accounting tricks to hide income, as we would no longer be taxing those precious profits of theirs (b) the rest of us wouldn't have to go through tax pain every April.

I realize that for some people, they get things like tax credits for a bunch of things like home renos, etc.

Perhaps under a no income tax system, the incentive to do these activities that reduced their income tax would have to be changed to something more tangible, like a guaranteed lower rate on utilities or something. I dunno.

[-] Soleos@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I'm sorry, either I'm dense or your explanation is confusing. How is what you described different from the capital gains tax?

[-] GuyLivingHere@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

I don't think it is functionally any different; just applied to a different asset being sold. Most capital gains are from property sales, aren't they?

[-] Soleos@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Depends on what class you are, which I think a lot of comments in this thread understandably seem to assume from a middle class perspective, even assuming "wage" as the main source of wealth.

Real estate is one major source of capital gains, but for a lot of the 1% and investors, capital gains is primarily from financial instruments, i.e. stocks, bonds, etc.

[-] paraplu@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

I agree with the sentiment, but it's worth noting that the current excesses of CEO compensation through stock incentives are a response to a poorly implemented attempt to curb high CEO salaries.

We do need to reign in CEO compensation, but directly going after wages made the problem worse. I don't see the article addressing this, but a Clinton-era policy aimed to curb excessive CEO wages. IIRC the ratio of CEO pay to lowest paid worker within the same company was as bad as 30:1 at the time, but has since ballooned to hundreds: 1.

Maybe something as simple as capping stock incentives at N% of total compensation could work. But we'd need to make sure we're not just encouraging a new way to skirt around the legislation like last time.

[-] oopsgodisdeadmybad@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago

I mean I'm still thinking of you have more money than you and all your currently alive descendants could possibly spend in their lives, you shouldn't be able to receive any money for anything at all.

And once you cap out how much you are able to spend personally, anything you get at that point should already be at least halved, if not stricter.

No idea about specific numbers, but I like this as a starter.

There shouldn't be any billionaires at ALL. And very few multi millionaires. And by "multi", I mean I'm the double digit millions. That should be the extreme high end. Nobody needs that much, even with today's prices.

[-] frustrated@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

No chance anything that actually attacks inequality ever gets implemented through existing legislative channels.

[-] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Could the United States Follow This Lead?

😂

[-] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Switzerland had a vote on this in 2013. Max would be 12x the min. The motion lost thanks to corporate propaganda.

But there is the shining example in the Basque region of Spain... in Mondragón, the highest and lowest paid workers in Mondragón, for example, remains about six to one.

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

politics

26192 readers
2346 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