i don't care about income disparity. the only time people should make the same wage is when they work for the same company, at the same level, and perform identically.Well, which would you rather have?
I'm not asking about if the government forced this, I'm just saying, forget everything else. Forget how it's done. Would you rather have a higher income for everyone or a tighter distribution of income?
Well, which would you rather have?
Are we assuming that outflows remain the same?
So what if the other guy's doing well? That doesn't mean that I, or anyone else is getting harmed as a result.
i don't care about income disparity. the only time people should make the same wage is when they work for the same company, at the same level, and perform identically.
Whoa! Perform identically? Are you saying that a person who does the same job, at he same level, but out performs his co-worker should get paid more?
What if his co-worker is a female? Or a minority? :2wave:
I think we all know the answer to that question.
Would you rather have people be more wealthy or wealth more tightly distributed?
Income by itself is a meaningless number without corresponding information about cost of living. For instance, would you prefer to be paid $125,000 in area A or $75,000 in area B without knowing how much it cost to live in either?
Hard to make a decision no? Likewise, I need to know outflows to make an educated choice in your poll.
If you live a wealthier life. Just take it to mean that you can get more of the things that you want.
Except that isn't quite relevant between the poll choices. Increasing income disparity where cost of living is insane is quite different from increasing disparity where even the poor people can live well. Wealth is a relative concept dependent upon costs. Right now we consider $1 not to be of much wealth. Back in the 1850s $1 was a sizable chunk of change.
Just consider a graph where the x-axis is the wealth that you have and the y-axis is amount of people. Would you rather the distribution be tighter about some value on the x-axis or where everyone moves up on the x-axis but the distribution grows larger?
So, the way to have a high pay for some is to make it possible for everyone to have a decent wage. It's called the percolate up theory. Unlike the trickle down theory, the percolate up theory actually works, and doesn't depend on voodoo economics.
The higher the income disparity, the smaller the middle class. That's a recipe for social instability-- and when a handful of people are making thousands of times as much money as their employees, it means large amounts of money are being siphoned out of the productive economy instead of circulating properly.
It also means that our society is going to spend too much money for welfare for people at the bottom of society, instead of paying them proper wages for their labor.
Well, which would you rather have?
Well, you have to realize that merely increasing incomes across the board has no effect at all except stimulus from price lag. In the first case, where disparity is increased, the poor would be worse off when prices re-optimize. In the latter case where disparity is decreased alone one would at least limit political disparity that comes along with excessive wealth and perhaps draw down prices. Remember that money has an arbitrary relationship to wealth.