4 ms·

I agree with you entirely. Honestly I have to think that people with this logic don't truly believe it, the cognitive dissonance would be too high. Rather they

• TaylorAlexander 12y ago
  I hope you will read my comment adjacent to yours, rather than simply assure yourself that what you already believe is correct. You can theorize that I simply don't understand, but I offer an explanation for why this is the case in my other comment. Simply put, most workers would get paid more than they typically would, but the workers at the very top may get paid less. This would be true in any scheme that seeks to balance out the pay of those at the top, since there would no longer be huge sums of money from the exploitation of those at the bottom. If you don't believe exploitation exists, I urge you to look into the state of capitalism in the 1850's when Karl Marx was forming his opinions and compare that to the state of WalMart workers today. Exploitation is a default component of capitalism and is not simply some imagined issue made up by those who wish for a more egalitarian society. And apparently other commenters have mentioned that coops can have the same kind of pay structures as normal companies. For example someone noted that one company limits the pay to the CEO to 75x the lowest worker's pay, and he currently sits at just 60x. This is closer to pay differences we saw in the US in the 1960's. But certainly when you pay the people at the bottom a fair wage, there may be less cash to throw around at the top. This is not a design flaw.