Society/Culture Why is there not a salary cap, for life?

[CountryRace]

Say one, was only allowed to have 240 million dollars

And everything (or 99.99% perhaps) extra, went to some sort of United Nations fund for people suffering from war or natural disaster.

Would this be a terrible idea?

It is not as if we live in a 'perfect' state of capitalism currently



http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfre...talism-unless-we-denounce-its-false-prophets/

http://www.fairytalecapitalist.com/

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/04/27/too-big-to-fail-distorts-capitalism/

 

[Werewolf]

In principle I agree, just as there is a minimum wage, there should be a maximum wage.

 

[Scotland]

How many people in the World draw a salary more than $240m?

The problem with wealth disparity is rarely income disparity, it's asset disparity.

 

[CountryRace]

Asset cap

I used salary cap as sporting terminology as this is a footy discussion board

 

[Slippery Pete]

The OP's fairy-floss theory rests on the flawed premise that a government can and should be trusted to use excess more wisely than an individual.

Among other reasons I think the state of this nation's finances proves that no, they can't.

 

[CountryRace]

The OP's fairy-floss theory rests on the flawed premise that a government can and should be trusted to use excess more wisely than an individual.

Among other reasons I think the state of this nation's finances proves that no, they can't.

Why are billionaires to be trusted with a significant power?

Are they magically more trustworthy than democratically elected goverments?

 

[Present Not Past]

Philanthropy needs to be encouraged more in this country and needs to be better organised. There's no reason why the wealthiest Australian aren't giving more back to Australian society - and not just to the arts.

 

[Big_Birdy]

Philanthropy needs to be encouraged more in this country and needs to be better organised. There's no reason why the wealthiest Australian aren't giving more back to Australian society - and not just to the arts.

The wealthiest 1% pay 17% of the tax in this country. The wealthiest 10% pay 46% of the tax in this country.

They give plenty back.

 

[CountryRace]

The wealthiest 1% pay 17% of the tax in this country. The wealthiest 10% pay 46% of the tax in this country.

They give plenty back.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...ionaires-who-paid-no-tax-20150429-1mw2zp.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-...lian-companies-pay-less-than-10pc-tax/5775870

 

[Present Not Past]

The wealthiest 1% pay 17% of the tax in this country. The wealthiest 10% pay 46% of the tax in this country.

They give plenty back.

Oh dear, sorry to have rattled your cage
Tax is not about giving - it's not philanthropy, which is what I was talking about. I was talking about people in Australian society who are able and can afford to give, there I've underlined and bolded it, some of their wealth back to society.

 

[CountryRace]

Oh dear, sorry to have rattled your cage
Tax is not about giving - it's not philanthropy, which is what I was talking about. I was talking about people in Australian society who are able and can afford to give, there I've underlined and bolded it, some of their wealth back to society.

But the point is they don't by and large here or elsewhere hence why not have a cap of 400/800 million and the rest goes to philanthropy type issues?

Why would you require more than 800 million dollars?

 

[Present Not Past]

I bring this point of philanthropy up becaue it is a lot more common overseas than here in Australia - I don't know why.
As for a cap - it just think it wouldn't work. I think in a free country people should be encouraged to give their money rather than have it taken off them - taxes excepted. Taxes are the price you pay for being a citizen of so called free country. After you've paid your taxes you're free to do what you like. There just needs to be a spirit of helping people who are worse off than yourself if you have the means to do so.

 

[Present Not Past]

But the point is they don't by and large here or elsewhere hence why not have a cap of 400/800 million and the rest goes to philanthropy type issues?

Why would you require more than 800 million dollars?

Bill Gates has 79 billion dollars and he plans to give most of it away to causes that are important to him and his family. We need more people like Bill Gates in the world.

 

[CountryRace]

Bill Gates has 79 billion dollars and he plans to give most of it away to causes that are important to him and his family. We need more people like Bill Gates in the world.

Melinda

It is good that's it trendy amount some of the yank elite

 

[CountryRace]

I bring this point of philanthropy up becaue it is a lot more common overseas than here in Australia - I don't know why.
As for a cap - it just think it wouldn't work. I think in a free country people should be encouraged to give their money rather than have it taken off them - taxes excepted. Taxes are the price you pay for being a citizen of so called free country. After you've paid your taxes you're free to do what you like. There just needs to be a spirit of helping people who are worse off than yourself if you have the means to do so.

Are we free?

For example in America there has been laws that people are not allowed outside the house 10pm-6am, the last couple week or so.

Look at security laws. The west has deemed freedom is less important than being 'safe'.

Hence - why not be somewhat less free and when you achieve a billion dollars or whatever the figure, the extra goes to the needy?

 

[Present Not Past]

Are we free?
Hence - why not be somewhat less free and when you achieve a billion dollars or whatever the figure, the extra goes to the needy?

That's why we pay taxes. It's up to us to ensure our government does it's best to ensure this happens.
Are we free? Yes we are. If you doubt this then have a look oversees.

 

[CountryRace]

That's why we pay taxes. It's up to us to ensure our government does it's best to ensure this happens.
Are we free? Yes we are. If you doubt this then have a look oversees.

I look at the like of the Vikings and they have some rules; where 51% or so of natural resources, must go to the state. which i guess goes to schools, hospitals, people in need etc. seems to work.

Is it a similar idea is it not? Instead of a salary cap, it's making a salary cap of sort for the multinational in question at the source. (Sort of)

Yes I am aware there are bad things and places on earth with different level of freedoms.

 

[Present Not Past]

I look at the like of the Vikings and they have some rules; where 51% or so of natural resources, must go to the state. which i guess goes to schools, hospitals, people in need etc. seems to work.

Is it a similar idea is it not? Instead of a salary cap, it's making a salary cap of sort for the multinational in question at the source. (Sort of)

Yes I am aware there are bad things and places on earth with different level of freedoms.

Social ownership of the resources and the means of production? Sounds strangely familiar

 

[Schache It Off]

It's their money, they do what they want. So much envy in that post. OP cannot contain his hatred for rich people he needs to resort to the state to limit how much people can own in their life and therefore argues on emotions.
Awaits for income inequality, evil capitalism and other pinko propaganda outcries.

The wealthiest 1% pay 17% of the tax in this country. The wealthiest 10% pay 46% of the tax in this country.

They give plenty back.

Leftists just don't get that at all.

 

[Summer Nights]

We should cap people's looks too. Like, people wo are too talented and beautiful should have a limit to their sexiness. It's not fair on the rest of us.

 

[Big_Birdy]

We should cap people's looks too. Like, people wo are too talented and beautiful should have a limit to their sexiness. It's not fair on the rest of us.

Don't think there aren't people out there who think that's a good idea.

Some also can't stand creativity,

http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidthompson/2007/08/shaping-young-m.html

 

[clogged]

Among other reasons I think the state of this nation's finances proves that no, they can't.

Private debt dwarfs public debt in Australia.

 

[Little Big John]

Don't think there aren't people out there who think that's a good idea.

Some also can't stand creativity,

http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidthompson/2007/08/shaping-young-m.html

What's the point you're making here in regards to the link and what you've written in your post? I'm not following.

 

[Gus Poyet]

Philanthropy needs to be encouraged more in this country and needs to be better organised. There's no reason why the wealthiest Australian aren't giving more back to Australian society - and not just to the arts.

Perhaps they aren't giving because they see how many people rort the welfare system.

 

[Big_Birdy]

What's the point you're making here in regards to the link and what you've written in your post? I'm not following.

It relates to the post I quoted.