(08-16-2021, 12:21 PM)The Real Marty Wrote:

(08-16-2021, 08:12 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Well, technically, it's not a wealth redistribution. I think the wealth gap is a very real problem. Instead of the government redistributing the wealth, I'd like a law that limits the wealth of the highest paid employee to 100x more than the lowest paid employee. This includes all benefits and stocks. If the lowest paid full time employee makes 30k, the CEO can make 3 million.

Tax loopholes need to be cleaned up for this to work, and we need to include company benefits (like carsor housing costs), but this is how I'd reduce the wealth gap. If a CEO wants more money, increase the company's profit and raise the employees salary.

So if an NFL quarterback makes $35 million, then the ball boy has to make $350,000.

If he's a full time employee, yes. But I'm not sure it would work like that in practice. The owners would look at the revenue and have to decide how much they want to make. So, they figure it how much they want to pay the lowest paid employee and redistribute the rest. Let's say they can afford to pay the vendors and ball 75k, then the players/owners would not be making more than 7.5 mil. In a smaller organization like the NFL, this might result in higher salaries than normal for the peons, but that's the point, generally speaking. 

You guys are right in pointing out that companies would try to work around this by starting multiple companies or creating llcs, but I don't feel like this is impossible to regulate. I think the obvious way is to scale it to size. 

The ultimate goal is to redistribute wealth in a way that does not go through the government, raises the wage for the workers, and reduces income inequity.

---