4 ms·
I hear this argument quite often, but it IS the market’s will. In fact, if the market got what it wanted, many towns and villages would just not be viable. My
by toxik 6y ago
I hear this argument quite often, but it IS the market’s will. In fact, if the market got what it wanted, many towns and villages would just not be viable.
My point is not that minimum wage is bad, but rather, redistribution of wealth is necessary.
- fridif 6y agoWho are we redistributing it from? It seems it is always the not overly secure people who have to have their wealth redistributed.
- c2h5oh 6y agoIf a breaking point is reached any wealth is distributed. Violently, inefficiently and unfairly, but all of it. Where do you think the support for communism came from in early XX century?
- taurath 6y agoWhich proposal is that? The ones about putting more taxes on people making over $400,000 a year?
- fridif 5y agoWith inflation and cost of living rising so much, is 400k pretax really "insanely rich"? I can barely afford my house and car, which middle class people of 50 years ago had no issues affording. Aren't there many more people out there making 50M a year who should be targeted before I am targeted?
- toxik 6y agoWealth redistribution to support small towns would be taken from large cities. Large cities are typically enormously profitable. Wealth redistribution to support poor people would be taken from businesses. This is a typical social welfare model.
- imtringued 6y agoIf unemployment is low then this is not a matter of viability though. Redistribution of wealth is necessary but only to the point where it enables productive work to be done.
- Workaccount2 6y agoMy "radical" take is that we need to crush wages. Mcdonalds cook - $40k/yr Senior Dev - $130k/yr CEO - $180K/yr I don't know how something like this could be implemented, but we are on a fast track to 95% of wages going to 5% of workers.
- NovemberWhiskey 6y ago>we are on a fast track to 95% of wages going to 5% of workers Really? Based on what data? The US Census Bureau has data on the aggregate share of income in Table H-2. For 2019, the top 5% of households received 23.0% of aggregate income (a bit lower than 2018 and 2017). Looking back 25 years before that to 1994, that number was 21.2% and (eyeballing it) seems to have been fairly range-bound in the 20-23% range since the early 1990s. The data starts in 1967, where that number was 17.2%.