3 ms·

If I were King of America, the tax code (and other financial instruments I can't think up on the spot) would reward companies based on the degree to which they

If I were King of America, the tax code (and other financial instruments I can't think up on the spot) would reward companies based on the degree to which they enrich their rank and file employees.

InitialLastName 5y ago
Start off by charging them extra in taxes to cover any welfare their full-time employees qualify for. edit: with a 200% penalty for administrative fees.
- gruez 5y ago
  >Start off by charging them extra in taxes to cover any welfare their full-time employees qualify for. Isn't this equivalent to raising the minimum wage? I'm not sure what's the point of policies like this other for the cathartic effect/grandstanding.
  - function_seven 5y ago
    Not only that, but it incentivizes hiring discrimination based on family status. Are you going to hire the 19 year-old college kid or the 24 year-old single mother of 2? Guess who's more likely to qualify for AFDC?
    - erik_seaberg 5y ago
      It’s a bounty for firing any employee who falls on hard times.
gruez 5y ago
>would reward companies based on the degree to which they enrich their rank and file employees. How would this work? How is this different than a payroll subsidy or the EITC?
- Mezzie 5y ago
  Off the top of my head: - Tie tax rates/benefits/penalties to the discrepancy between CEO/C-suite pay and average/lowest-paid employee pay - Tax benefits to companies who provide enriching programs for employees (like some universities that offer tuition benefits and programs to help you get mortgages, etc) - Tax penalties for not giving COL raises each year Etc.
  - gruez 5y ago
    >- Tie tax rates/benefits/penalties to the discrepancy between CEO/C-suite pay and average/lowest-paid employee pay All that's going to do is cause companies to jettison their lowest paying employees. For instance, Apple would outsource janitors to another company (i'm pretty sure they already do that) and spin out apple stores/genius to another company. That way, the only people you have left are tim cook and other highly paid engineers/designers making 6 figures. Yay we fixed the pay gap! >- Tax benefits to companies who provide enriching programs for employees (like some universities that offer tuition benefits and programs to help you get mortgages, etc) 1. this just sounds like a roundabout way for governments to fund said "enriching programs", except you're now at the whim of the company rather than the government. 2. this worked great for healthcare insurance, right? >- Tax penalties for not giving COL raises each year Sound like that would push employers into moving more of their compensation to year-end bonuses, which can be arbitrarily raised/lowered without being subject to "COL raises". In other words, "good news, you have received a COL raise of 5% this year! bad news, your year end bonus has dropped by 5%"
    - Mezzie 5y ago
      That's the problem with trying to do ANYTHING in our current system: It's going to turn into a circus of definition abuse and loopholes. Not to mention the IRS would be sued to high heaven and this shit would take years to implement, if it were allowed at all. Our system is completely fucked. But we're all stopping shy of having THAT conversation, so to address some points: > All that's going to do is cause companies to jettison their lowest paying employees. For instance, Apple would outsource janitors to another company (i'm pretty sure they already do that) and spin out apple stores/genius to another company. That way, the only people you have left are tim cook and other highly paid engineers/designers making 6 figures. Yay we fixed the pay gap! True, but this would still overall be beneficial because the CEOs of those janitorial companies are now paid more in line with the janitors, which means that the working conditions are more likely to improve. > Sound like that would push employers into moving more of their compensation to year-end bonuses, which can be arbitrarily raised/lowered without being subject to "COL raises". In other words, "good news, you have received a COL raise of 5% this year! bad news, your year end bonus has dropped by 5%" Probably, but how many employees in America get year end bonuses? Because I've gotten like...2 and I've worked a decent range of jobs. They're way less common than you think. Yes, this would probably mean the people at the top would start taking from the middle instead of the bottom to retain their profit. It's not ideal, but I'd rather someone be stuck renting longer/have to cut their grocery bill (middle class) than end up homeless (lower class). You're right about the enrichment programs, though, now that I think about it. There's a reason I mostly saw that in universities, I'd imagine.

If I were King of America, the tax code (and other financial instruments I can't think up on the spot) would reward companies based on the degree to which they enrich their rank and file employees.

InitialLastName 5y ago

Start off by charging them extra in taxes to cover any welfare their full-time employees qualify for. edit: with a 200% penalty for administrative fees.

gruez 5y ago
>Start off by charging them extra in taxes to cover any welfare their full-time employees qualify for. Isn't this equivalent to raising the minimum wage? I'm not sure what's the point of policies like this other for the cathartic effect/grandstanding.
- function_seven 5y ago
  Not only that, but it incentivizes hiring discrimination based on family status. Are you going to hire the 19 year-old college kid or the 24 year-old single mother of 2? Guess who's more likely to qualify for AFDC?
  - erik_seaberg 5y ago
    It’s a bounty for firing any employee who falls on hard times.

gruez 5y ago

>would reward companies based on the degree to which they enrich their rank and file employees. How would this work? How is this different than a payroll subsidy or the EITC?

Mezzie 5y ago
Off the top of my head: - Tie tax rates/benefits/penalties to the discrepancy between CEO/C-suite pay and average/lowest-paid employee pay - Tax benefits to companies who provide enriching programs for employees (like some universities that offer tuition benefits and programs to help you get mortgages, etc) - Tax penalties for not giving COL raises each year Etc.
- gruez 5y ago
  >- Tie tax rates/benefits/penalties to the discrepancy between CEO/C-suite pay and average/lowest-paid employee pay All that's going to do is cause companies to jettison their lowest paying employees. For instance, Apple would outsource janitors to another company (i'm pretty sure they already do that) and spin out apple stores/genius to another company. That way, the only people you have left are tim cook and other highly paid engineers/designers making 6 figures. Yay we fixed the pay gap! >- Tax benefits to companies who provide enriching programs for employees (like some universities that offer tuition benefits and programs to help you get mortgages, etc) 1. this just sounds like a roundabout way for governments to fund said "enriching programs", except you're now at the whim of the company rather than the government. 2. this worked great for healthcare insurance, right? >- Tax penalties for not giving COL raises each year Sound like that would push employers into moving more of their compensation to year-end bonuses, which can be arbitrarily raised/lowered without being subject to "COL raises". In other words, "good news, you have received a COL raise of 5% this year! bad news, your year end bonus has dropped by 5%"
  - Mezzie 5y ago
    That's the problem with trying to do ANYTHING in our current system: It's going to turn into a circus of definition abuse and loopholes. Not to mention the IRS would be sued to high heaven and this shit would take years to implement, if it were allowed at all. Our system is completely fucked. But we're all stopping shy of having THAT conversation, so to address some points: > All that's going to do is cause companies to jettison their lowest paying employees. For instance, Apple would outsource janitors to another company (i'm pretty sure they already do that) and spin out apple stores/genius to another company. That way, the only people you have left are tim cook and other highly paid engineers/designers making 6 figures. Yay we fixed the pay gap! True, but this would still overall be beneficial because the CEOs of those janitorial companies are now paid more in line with the janitors, which means that the working conditions are more likely to improve. > Sound like that would push employers into moving more of their compensation to year-end bonuses, which can be arbitrarily raised/lowered without being subject to "COL raises". In other words, "good news, you have received a COL raise of 5% this year! bad news, your year end bonus has dropped by 5%" Probably, but how many employees in America get year end bonuses? Because I've gotten like...2 and I've worked a decent range of jobs. They're way less common than you think. Yes, this would probably mean the people at the top would start taking from the middle instead of the bottom to retain their profit. It's not ideal, but I'd rather someone be stuck renting longer/have to cut their grocery bill (middle class) than end up homeless (lower class). You're right about the enrichment programs, though, now that I think about it. There's a reason I mostly saw that in universities, I'd imagine.