3 ms·
I believe the person you’re responding to is only interested in take-home pay divided by hours worked and whether or not that number >=$100. I am not sure wheth
by newbie789 5y ago
I believe the person you’re responding to is only interested in take-home pay divided by hours worked and whether or not that number >=$100. I am not sure whether or not the requisite $100/hr number to become immune to bribery is pre- or post-tax.
The premise seems to be that if the police made $99/hr, you could easily get better services out of them by handing them a $100 bill, because then they’d make an extra dollar. However if they are making $100/hr, they’d become morally unassailable at that price point.
It’s a somewhat odd argument because instead of responding to a somewhat flippant comment about what it would take to have better interactions with law enforcement, we’re now arguing about hourly wages. It’s a pretty neat way to avoid addressing the actual issue at hand.