The Democrat Utopia
- Thread starter GBR0988
- Start date
Big Red 40
New member
Yep i started working for my company 25 years ago, mainly because i couldn't afford healthcare for my family, any other way, and 25 years later that's still true . I've had to pass on several opportunities that I may have liked better, because their overall package wasn't as good. (No insurance, no pension, bad 401K program etc) I would love to see all of that separated from my employer so id have true freedom to do what i wanted.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mierin
Donor
When someone is making 365x as much as another person making $13/hour, there should be course correction in how we place value on people.
Danny Bateman
Donor
You’re right. Welcoming the crushing weight of the latter’s boot upon the former’s neck is really the way to go.
Landlord
Banned
The person is making that much. We aren't giving it to them. I don't have any assessment of how I value Jeff Bezos. I don't know the guy, I don't care about him, I don't assess whether he's good or bad or anything like that. But I pay for Amazon prime.
Maybe instead of telling the government to take away more of his money I should just stop giving him money? I'm not making an argument I'm just exploring an idea. How does how much person X vs person Y makes extrapolate into us valuing them? The money I make is little related to how much people value me, but much more related to me doing work and doing good work and earning it.
DevoHusker
New member
Mierin
Donor
Money is how society places value on people. I’m talking in general here. It doesn’t mean you as an individual think one person is better than another because they are paid more. But we (collectively) have decided that. We’ve decided people who program video games are worth more than most painters. Even if the latter might be more talented. In this example it’s basically just supply and demand, so it makes sense. The former is creating something more people want. On the other hand I work on policy to try to increase a financial company’s profits. In reality I’m probably only making like 20 people in the universe happy but making more than most artists.
This is a way I started thinking about it recently. In an age where there are millions of people employed just to make the wealthy more wealthy, not because they are benefitting society in any way, there needs to be something that prevents poverty as that gap gets bigger and bigger. Especially when the people in or close to poverty might be working 40 hours and be doing something that helps a larger # of people.
Not relevant. There is no one debating that some people should get paid a lot more than others.
Last edited by a moderator:
Big Red 40
New member
Is it possible to work 365x harder or do 365x better work than another person ? Nope. So using that as a measure of ones “worth” doesn’t work very well .
Mierin
Donor
Not sure if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing, heh. We use money as a measure of worth, but someone can't be worth 365x more than someone, imo. (As I posted somewhere, I could buy the argument that someone who saves lives might be).
Last edited by a moderator:
Danny Bateman
Donor
Our public policy is reflective of the value we assign to different groups of people. Ideally, it should benefit everyone or failing that, the largest number of people possible.
The question should be our policy be more beneficial to the Bezos's of the world than the average Joe. Bezos is kind of the exception to the rule because he seems to have actually worked his way up the ladder and made his own fortune, rather than inheriting it. Regardless, does our society justify policy that makes it easier to grow/maintain/keep more of your own wealth if you have as much as Bezos at the expense of people who don't have those means?
That's the argument here: That public policy has unduly benefited those of means because it's "good for the economy."
The question should be our policy be more beneficial to the Bezos's of the world than the average Joe. Bezos is kind of the exception to the rule because he seems to have actually worked his way up the ladder and made his own fortune, rather than inheriting it. Regardless, does our society justify policy that makes it easier to grow/maintain/keep more of your own wealth if you have as much as Bezos at the expense of people who don't have those means?
That's the argument here: That public policy has unduly benefited those of means because it's "good for the economy."
Mierin
Donor
It's not really an argument. It's an undeniable yes. Although it is a different topic than taxation. One could be for low taxes and want a lot of the policies that benefit only the wealthy be changed. Like bailing them out because they're "too big to fail," removing regulations that keep people safe, putting a cap on what corporations can be sued for, letting them schmooze politicians and help write policy (which is how much of the former happens), letting them off easy when they break the law because they're only committing "white collar" crimes. IMO, no one should want taxes to be lowered until the other stuff is fixed.
Nice related read here:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikecollins/2015/07/14/the-big-bank-bailout/#776729a32d83
Last edited by a moderator:
B.B. Hemingway
Donor
Luckily, we live in a capitalistic society, and you don't have to let that happen....
We could just solve all of this by implementing a consumption tax.
BigRedBuster
Active member
Nothing about what a person makes indicates the value as they as a person. It’s a value of what they are doing and what they did to get there.
No.
ZRod
Active member
Yeah, we should probably ignore how things were done for most of last century, and refuse to go back to something that worked.
BigRedBuster
Active member
No we haven’t. The people paying those two people have decided how much they value the service they are providing and that is heavily indicative of how easy it is to find a person that can do that service.
Nothing about that is indicative of them as a person.
I know now an amazing person who is the beer cart girl at our local golf course. But, I’m not going to pay her the same as I’m going to pay my heart surgeon who is a total egotistical prick.