Should we hat a person's annual income at 500,000?
They would then be forced to share the additional company profits near their partners (workers).
Answers: The idea of redeployment is a good one in premise, but it is more important to look at ratios and mount, than $$. Caps would also stifle creation, as what incentive would a person have to work anymore than $500K contained by value? big ideas would be lost. Communism tried this and inferior as people were not motivated beyond the sou`wester amount. That said I believe in JP Morgan's rule that the CEO should be paid one and only 20 times the lowest paid person as ratio go. Modern CEO's make between 150 and 300 times the average and around 500-600 times lowest paid. Our ratios for compensation are out of proportion, near the value they bring. If government or market do not fix the issue, Revolutions normally do the job by slaughter most of the Aristocracy, in this case the business ruling private, these events may start sooner than most think.
Not a chance.
That extra income is the reward a party gets for taking a risk, for working harder, for creating or building a business that buys supplies and services from other businesses, employs individuals, provides goods and services, and pays taxes.
Suppose your doctor hits your income cap going on for July or August, and decides to take the rest of the year stale. Why shouldn't he - there's no incentive for him to keep working. If you break a leg skiing in December, are you going to dawdle until January to get treated? And what happens if your kids bring sick even earlier? Are you going to treat them yourself, or try to look their symptoms up online?
Your proposal would bring all of that to a screech halt. It would make the mild recession that we're in presently is look like boom times.
Please, please take a class or three contained by economics and finance! Educate yourself before you even reckon of tampering with the cutback.
This type of approach would guarantee a reduction in creativity and growth. Move departed the socialist concepts and concentrate on value for contribution. Steve Jobs is one of legions of examples. What he's contributed to that company has taken their stock from $7 to 200 surrounded by a few years. Without him, all stockholders would have have none to little of those gains, and may have experienced a loss or getting hold of with diluted value. Wait a second: you want to penalize me because I:
A) own worked harder,
B) have applied my knowledge better (read: am smarter),
C) and enjoy taken more risk
than lower-level people in my cleaning (not my "partners" incidentally, my *employees*, who without my work ethic, smarts and embrace of risk wouldn't even HAVE jobs)?
I think you know MY answer, communist.
Why wouldn't the most hopeful people simply move overseas where they could variety more money?? The heart surgeons, the CEOs, the sport players, etc. Do we really want someone not as talented doing our operation, or running a multi-billion dollar corporation??
The Canadians have this problem beside their doctors. With their socialized medicine, they all come down here to put together more money.
Sometimes you hear what some CEOs or business people get rewarded and it does seem out of control. But your theory seems like a drastically bad one.
if there be such a cap, why are you assuming that there would be any "spare company profits"? because there would not be, the incentive for income over 500,000 would be gone.
and everybody would just move to a country where on earth they could maximize their earning potential and keep their money
No road this is a bad idea. This will get people lack physical exertion. Why try hard if I know that I have ceiling that I will manage? What ever happen to the possibilities are endless? Also if this is the suitcase how can those few lucky rich folks put enough aside for their families to be ably off? BAD IDEA you said it yourself - you owned your own company - would you want someone telling you you could individual make so much if you had the fitness to make more? You can go to Russia or some other communist backwards country if you want those sensitive of limitations on free enterprise
Although Obama and Clinton would disagree, communism hasn't worked in any other country and would not work here. Too many nation are lazy and need an incentive work. The harder you work, the better stale you are. I agree with above posters, this is pure communism, well above unionism.
This be fairly close to the concept that was done during the Great Depression. It didnt work. Its one of the reason why the dpression lasted 11 years. At one point in our history the income levy rate was at 90%. Even in the 1970s the top income import tax rates were in the 70% reach. Is there a serious problem with empire in the higher income brackets not paying taxes...YES. It is true that the smaller quantity you make the more you pay as a percentage of your gross annual income. This is why duty rates should be the same for EVERYONE. Prior to the Great Depression income wasnt taxed untill you made $500,000 a year (in 1929 dollars) and a 6% rate be the top rate paid above the $500,000. It was when FDR get in office and raise taxes and prices in 1932 that really killed inhabitants during the depression. Then when he took us off the gold standard and confiscated everyones nest egg in 1933 that insured that the depression would last untill WW2 8 years latter. FDR and his policies destroyed our country back then. Going spinal column to those policies again will put us in a new grey age. I was watchin CNBC yeasterday and Donald Trump was anyone interviewed. He said that he was building a building not in the US but surrounded by an Arab country. He said that they were tearing that in one piece city down (not just a town but a whole CITY) and rebuilding it from the ground up. The rest of the world is ratification us up because we have been moving towards the policies that the rest of the world have 40 years ago. Today we are burdened with goverment red tape and the rest of the world is going to a exotic age and we are being left of of it. Your request for information, if it were to come to pass again within our country would insure that the US becomes (we are close to it now) a third world country. Donald Trump and his investments outside our country should tell you something. If he wont invest here to buil his country up due to red cassette, do you really think anyone with capitol will invest here. NO. They will whip their investment elsewhere...AS THEY SHOULD.
Read The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes for an accounting of the Great Depression in their own words. NAFTA as has adjectives the "free trade" agreements been bad for cutback. But I am correct about the Depression. Ive read alot on the subject and I know my family history during that era. My grandfather unloved our goverment untill the day he died because of FDR and how his confiscation policies took the home he built surrounded by Ohio. He and my family had to move to California to start adjectives over with nothing gratefulness to FDR.
Let's cut the tongue of Mariah Carey because she sings like an Angel and let's cut the face of Brad Pitt because he is handsome and let's cut Michael Jordan's leg because he can fly while we are at it.
Some sing, some accomplishment and some fly. (We make money)
There is nothing wrong next to singing, acting, flying or making money.
NOTE FOR YAHOO!
This is a metaphor.
I am trying to make a point.
I am not making any threats to Mariah Carey, Brad Pitt and Michael Jordan.
Why are shares of an IPO underpriced? Who benefits and who is hurt by underpricing?
Give me some tips for investing contained by stock market?
Do you surmise that Cosi will ever become a profitable invesment?
What are the best stocks to invest contained by, I own roughly speaking $10,000 to start.?
How do I put up for sale 2 Limited Brand stock certs purchased 15 years ago when I be an hand?
What's a faithful return on one's investments?
I want to invest for more of a long-term concordat, which online site should i use?
What is the decrease for PF employer contribution?
Answers: The idea of redeployment is a good one in premise, but it is more important to look at ratios and mount, than $$. Caps would also stifle creation, as what incentive would a person have to work anymore than $500K contained by value? big ideas would be lost. Communism tried this and inferior as people were not motivated beyond the sou`wester amount. That said I believe in JP Morgan's rule that the CEO should be paid one and only 20 times the lowest paid person as ratio go. Modern CEO's make between 150 and 300 times the average and around 500-600 times lowest paid. Our ratios for compensation are out of proportion, near the value they bring. If government or market do not fix the issue, Revolutions normally do the job by slaughter most of the Aristocracy, in this case the business ruling private, these events may start sooner than most think.
Not a chance.
That extra income is the reward a party gets for taking a risk, for working harder, for creating or building a business that buys supplies and services from other businesses, employs individuals, provides goods and services, and pays taxes.
Suppose your doctor hits your income cap going on for July or August, and decides to take the rest of the year stale. Why shouldn't he - there's no incentive for him to keep working. If you break a leg skiing in December, are you going to dawdle until January to get treated? And what happens if your kids bring sick even earlier? Are you going to treat them yourself, or try to look their symptoms up online?
Your proposal would bring all of that to a screech halt. It would make the mild recession that we're in presently is look like boom times.
Please, please take a class or three contained by economics and finance! Educate yourself before you even reckon of tampering with the cutback.
This type of approach would guarantee a reduction in creativity and growth. Move departed the socialist concepts and concentrate on value for contribution. Steve Jobs is one of legions of examples. What he's contributed to that company has taken their stock from $7 to 200 surrounded by a few years. Without him, all stockholders would have have none to little of those gains, and may have experienced a loss or getting hold of with diluted value. Wait a second: you want to penalize me because I:
A) own worked harder,
B) have applied my knowledge better (read: am smarter),
C) and enjoy taken more risk
than lower-level people in my cleaning (not my "partners" incidentally, my *employees*, who without my work ethic, smarts and embrace of risk wouldn't even HAVE jobs)?
I think you know MY answer, communist.
Why wouldn't the most hopeful people simply move overseas where they could variety more money?? The heart surgeons, the CEOs, the sport players, etc. Do we really want someone not as talented doing our operation, or running a multi-billion dollar corporation??
The Canadians have this problem beside their doctors. With their socialized medicine, they all come down here to put together more money.
Sometimes you hear what some CEOs or business people get rewarded and it does seem out of control. But your theory seems like a drastically bad one.
if there be such a cap, why are you assuming that there would be any "spare company profits"? because there would not be, the incentive for income over 500,000 would be gone.
and everybody would just move to a country where on earth they could maximize their earning potential and keep their money
No road this is a bad idea. This will get people lack physical exertion. Why try hard if I know that I have ceiling that I will manage? What ever happen to the possibilities are endless? Also if this is the suitcase how can those few lucky rich folks put enough aside for their families to be ably off? BAD IDEA you said it yourself - you owned your own company - would you want someone telling you you could individual make so much if you had the fitness to make more? You can go to Russia or some other communist backwards country if you want those sensitive of limitations on free enterprise
Although Obama and Clinton would disagree, communism hasn't worked in any other country and would not work here. Too many nation are lazy and need an incentive work. The harder you work, the better stale you are. I agree with above posters, this is pure communism, well above unionism.
This be fairly close to the concept that was done during the Great Depression. It didnt work. Its one of the reason why the dpression lasted 11 years. At one point in our history the income levy rate was at 90%. Even in the 1970s the top income import tax rates were in the 70% reach. Is there a serious problem with empire in the higher income brackets not paying taxes...YES. It is true that the smaller quantity you make the more you pay as a percentage of your gross annual income. This is why duty rates should be the same for EVERYONE. Prior to the Great Depression income wasnt taxed untill you made $500,000 a year (in 1929 dollars) and a 6% rate be the top rate paid above the $500,000. It was when FDR get in office and raise taxes and prices in 1932 that really killed inhabitants during the depression. Then when he took us off the gold standard and confiscated everyones nest egg in 1933 that insured that the depression would last untill WW2 8 years latter. FDR and his policies destroyed our country back then. Going spinal column to those policies again will put us in a new grey age. I was watchin CNBC yeasterday and Donald Trump was anyone interviewed. He said that he was building a building not in the US but surrounded by an Arab country. He said that they were tearing that in one piece city down (not just a town but a whole CITY) and rebuilding it from the ground up. The rest of the world is ratification us up because we have been moving towards the policies that the rest of the world have 40 years ago. Today we are burdened with goverment red tape and the rest of the world is going to a exotic age and we are being left of of it. Your request for information, if it were to come to pass again within our country would insure that the US becomes (we are close to it now) a third world country. Donald Trump and his investments outside our country should tell you something. If he wont invest here to buil his country up due to red cassette, do you really think anyone with capitol will invest here. NO. They will whip their investment elsewhere...AS THEY SHOULD.
Read The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes for an accounting of the Great Depression in their own words. NAFTA as has adjectives the "free trade" agreements been bad for cutback. But I am correct about the Depression. Ive read alot on the subject and I know my family history during that era. My grandfather unloved our goverment untill the day he died because of FDR and how his confiscation policies took the home he built surrounded by Ohio. He and my family had to move to California to start adjectives over with nothing gratefulness to FDR.
Let's cut the tongue of Mariah Carey because she sings like an Angel and let's cut the face of Brad Pitt because he is handsome and let's cut Michael Jordan's leg because he can fly while we are at it.
Some sing, some accomplishment and some fly. (We make money)
There is nothing wrong next to singing, acting, flying or making money.
NOTE FOR YAHOO!
This is a metaphor.
I am trying to make a point.
I am not making any threats to Mariah Carey, Brad Pitt and Michael Jordan.