3 ms·

> Because as a tech worker your salary is likely already well above the level that it would need to fall in order for us to achieve meaningful level of wealth e

> Because as a tech worker your salary is likely already well above the level that it would need to fall in order for us to achieve meaningful level of wealth equality (not complete equality, but equal-ish) Why would you want that??? I think it's awesome the common Joe can learn programming on the internet and earn huge bucks. Why cancel that of all things? And then, I don't think your suggestion for equality would work. If my work was significantly taxed above $100K, I'd stop earning more at that point because work is very stressful to me and I'm not going to do it if I don't get the benefit of it; and I'd most definitely not go into any sort of risk (like starting a startup) in that world. If I can't even bang on a keyboard without someone feeling entitled to get the majority of my product, well then I'm not doing it, sorry. Everybody would lose - I'd pay much less taxes overall, and innovation from my side would grind to halt. (now I earn slightly less than $100k, but also live and work in Europe).

nicoburns 4y ago
> If my work was significantly taxed above $100K, I'd stop earning more at that point because work is very stressful to me and I'm not going to do it if I don't get the benefit (now I earn slightly less than $100k, but also live and work in Europe). Everybody would lose - I'd pay less taxes overall. Perfect. You get a less stressful life. And you working less creates job opportunities for others. Other people win just by you (and other high earners) earning less. They don't have to earn more. Their money is worth more if there is less total money in circulation.
- emteycz 4y ago
  No, I don't get a less stressful life, I'd get a much more stressful one. One, maybe two years I earn a lot, and then 2-5 years next to nothing. I must plan my life according to the needs of my mental health, not fiscal calendars of some social engineers who can't understand that one size doesn't fit all and can seriously hurt some people (yeah, even those who earn a lot some years are still just humans, and sometimes sleep on the street another year too). And it's a life where I am forbidden to do useful things that others want me to do and I am willing and able (which is not always, or often) - just because someone said "you did enough in this arbitrary period of time, give us your money or don't do it at all". Don't even start about me owing the society, because in my view the society owes me a lot for the pain it caused me, gave me nothing of value, and tries very hard to keep me from obtaining the little I have. And the bill keeps growing. The idea that this should not only prevail but continue to worsen gives me chills. Sorry - nothing personal, but I really, truly hate every bit of your idea of the world. From the beginning where people "should earn less so we are equal" to the end where it's "perfect that engineers work less" and the bit where you just assume I'd lead a less stressful life, even though you know nothing about me - typical of people of your opinions.
  - nicoburns 4y ago
    > And it's a life where I am forbidden to do useful things that others want me to do and I am willing and able (which is not always, or often) - just because someone said "you did enough in this arbitrary period of time, give us your money or don't do it at all". No you're not. You're free to do whatever you like. You just won't receive as much money in return as you would otherwise have done. > From the beginning where people "should earn less so we are equal" to the end where it's "perfect that engineers work less" To be clear, to the extent that there is a difference, I think that people with high earnings should be taxed more not that their nominal income should be lowered or restricted. And I think that it would be good if people had the freedom to choose to work less while still earning enough to comfortably live on. If you want to continue working as much as you currently do then all power to you. It was you who said further up the thread that would choose to work less.
    - emteycz 4y ago
      > No you're not. You're free to do whatever you like. You just won't receive as much money in return as you would otherwise have done. You say no and then you say the same thing I said, lol. > It was you who said further up the thread that would choose to work less. No, I said your idea would force me to work less and I also said that it'd have a serious negative impact on me and my health.
      - nicoburns 4y ago
        It wouldn't force you to work less. If you think earning less would have a serious impact on your mental health, then spare a thought for those who already earn dramatically less than you, and still would (although not by quite so much) after such a change was implemented.
        emteycz 4y ago
        I can't spare a thought for them when my own existence is endangered. I'm thinking about them a lot now, and donate when I can, but that would have to end. The problem here is being forced to work less at a time when I'm able to work more. It's not fair to make me earn less just because I wasn't able to spread out my work across the calendar because of my mental health issues.

nicoburns 4y ago

> If my work was significantly taxed above $100K, I'd stop earning more at that point because work is very stressful to me and I'm not going to do it if I don't get the benefit (now I earn slightly less than $100k, but also live and work in Europe). Everybody would lose - I'd pay less taxes overall. Perfect. You get a less stressful life. And you working less creates job opportunities for others. Other people win just by you (and other high earners) earning less. They don't have to earn more. Their money is worth more if there is less total money in circulation.

emteycz 4y ago
No, I don't get a less stressful life, I'd get a much more stressful one. One, maybe two years I earn a lot, and then 2-5 years next to nothing. I must plan my life according to the needs of my mental health, not fiscal calendars of some social engineers who can't understand that one size doesn't fit all and can seriously hurt some people (yeah, even those who earn a lot some years are still just humans, and sometimes sleep on the street another year too). And it's a life where I am forbidden to do useful things that others want me to do and I am willing and able (which is not always, or often) - just because someone said "you did enough in this arbitrary period of time, give us your money or don't do it at all". Don't even start about me owing the society, because in my view the society owes me a lot for the pain it caused me, gave me nothing of value, and tries very hard to keep me from obtaining the little I have. And the bill keeps growing. The idea that this should not only prevail but continue to worsen gives me chills. Sorry - nothing personal, but I really, truly hate every bit of your idea of the world. From the beginning where people "should earn less so we are equal" to the end where it's "perfect that engineers work less" and the bit where you just assume I'd lead a less stressful life, even though you know nothing about me - typical of people of your opinions.
- nicoburns 4y ago
  > And it's a life where I am forbidden to do useful things that others want me to do and I am willing and able (which is not always, or often) - just because someone said "you did enough in this arbitrary period of time, give us your money or don't do it at all". No you're not. You're free to do whatever you like. You just won't receive as much money in return as you would otherwise have done. > From the beginning where people "should earn less so we are equal" to the end where it's "perfect that engineers work less" To be clear, to the extent that there is a difference, I think that people with high earnings should be taxed more not that their nominal income should be lowered or restricted. And I think that it would be good if people had the freedom to choose to work less while still earning enough to comfortably live on. If you want to continue working as much as you currently do then all power to you. It was you who said further up the thread that would choose to work less.
  - emteycz 4y ago
    > No you're not. You're free to do whatever you like. You just won't receive as much money in return as you would otherwise have done. You say no and then you say the same thing I said, lol. > It was you who said further up the thread that would choose to work less. No, I said your idea would force me to work less and I also said that it'd have a serious negative impact on me and my health.
    - nicoburns 4y ago
      It wouldn't force you to work less. If you think earning less would have a serious impact on your mental health, then spare a thought for those who already earn dramatically less than you, and still would (although not by quite so much) after such a change was implemented.
      - emteycz 4y ago
        I can't spare a thought for them when my own existence is endangered. I'm thinking about them a lot now, and donate when I can, but that would have to end. The problem here is being forced to work less at a time when I'm able to work more. It's not fair to make me earn less just because I wasn't able to spread out my work across the calendar because of my mental health issues.