My challenges are inquiry, I am interesting in flushing your idea out. So no need to take any of these questions as hostile.
pay all overtime with an increasing multiplier (reducing labor supply) - why do all productivity gains go only to the bottom line and not to overall quality of life - this is way automation/globalization is looked at as bad.
How would the local companies compete against Asia(others) where there is no chance of overtime hours approaching anything close to what we have here? Overtime is a pretty common practice so it not in an insignificant amount of productivity loss and burden on companies.
use public sector employment to ensure every person that wants one has a job (reduce private sector labor supply)
Which industries would these be in? Would they aim to be profit neutral or a new government service? Do you think they should get a monopoly in the industry in order to compete or are they just a player in the market? If they take a huge lose one year is that covered by the taxpayer or is the taxpayer only a part-shareholder? Can these public companies fire employees for normal misconduct? Are they forced to hire other undesirables? Do you limit time in the public service or can one spend you whole career in it?
limit management salaries to a multiplier of employee pay (productive improvement as a society should be shared)
Do you worry in a potential loss of jobs as managerial types especially in small firm hire less low-cost labour to maximize their own salary? Does the rule hold true for contractors (one service I’ve contracted pays their employees as low as $2.75/h as that is good in their country)? Does this apply to local sub-contractors or only labour who meet the definition of an employee? How do you deal with industry that deal in commission or piece work compared to management who are salaried[is it just average]? What kind of penalties do you so for companies found not to be in compliance? How long do they have to adjust if the ratio is distorted?
make college the new high school - if automation is going to continue to reduce labor need, our dollar requires that we create things that only a 1st world country with a lot of R & D can do - we cannot compete with the world on widgets
Do you think a collage education helps most employees be more skilled in the workforce? Do you think education is where our best R&D is coming from?
welcome globalization, but only for countries that meet our labor standards
Does that mean tariffs against Asia/South America? Do you worry about being leapfrogged considering much of the growth is in those regions and many American companies would have to completely restructure or flee?
I propose redistributing money from those with a low marginal propensity to consume who obtained it thru unbalanced access to the economy to those that have a high marginal propensity to consume.
Does it not seem shortsighted though that “low marginal propensity to consume” people (like myself) are spending less on investment and growth well “high marginal propensity to consume” create all the problem, that is to say, shortsighted to encourage a culture of high consumption low production?
I don’t mean to sound insensitive. I will fully admit I could afford tax hikes with out big impacts on my lifestyle unlike many. My concern is waste…I realize not everyone in my situation is me, but do you really think the alternative use of my investment dollars as tax dollars creates economic prosperity? We are talking governments who collect huge sums of money yet continue to run insane deficits and ridiculous levels of underfunded liabilities. I don’t have a problem with Socialistic dream of Healthcare, Free Education, Universal income, Homes for all etc. the problem becomes in every example these systems are design to fail in the longterm[for short-term benefit]. Look at any current system of single payer — which one running for any length of time isn’t reducing services year on year or has skyrocketing costs? Same for education.
Lowering taxes might not create jobs. It’s obviously not a direct relationship, but one does need to admit that is us wealthy people who are creating the jobs yes?
This where the hypocrisy of conservatism comes out for me. You have no problem with nepotism and dynasties that contributes to an eventual oligarchy and that some how that passes the litmus tests of "fair" and "hard work".
I originally thought you were joking, but just so you know 100% of my wealth creation is for my children and future grandchildren and if a government takes it away ~ your going to lose rich people in droves or have a real war on your hands. You want to talk motivators, leaving a better world for our child is right near the top!!!
.
