3 ms·
I agree with that (you're talking about Piketty's direct redistribution), but there is a tinge of "tax the other guy more because he's making more than me and i
by bcherny 9y ago
I agree with that (you're talking about Piketty's direct redistribution), but there is a tinge of "tax the other guy more because he's making more than me and it's not fair and I'll never be in his bracket anyway so I won't have to deal with it" to your argument.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- NTDF9 9y ago>> it's not fair and I'll never be in his bracket anyway so I won't have to deal with it And he wouldn't be in my bracket so he doesn't have to deal with struggles either.
- utexaspunk 9y agoIt's more like "tax the guy whose work is being disproportionately rewarded in comparison to everyone else". I wouldn't argue with the idea of a doctor making more than a dishwasher, or possibly even a good hedge fund manager making more than a doctor. But 1,000 times more? No way!
- jstanley 9y agoFortunately, this isn't communism and you're not a dictator. People aren't awarded money arbitrarily... Nobody will pay you more than you're worth. If a good hedge fund manager is able to make 1000x as much as a good doctor, he is worth 1000x as much as a good doctor, by definition, no matter how distasteful that might seem.
- bcherny 9y agoYou and @utexaspunk may be talking about different things. I believe @utexaspunk is saying that salary should be tied to the amount of social good you do. You are saying that the market sets salaries based on how much value you create, as measured in dollars.