Should there be a salary cap?

[Obsrvr]

Should there be a salary cap?

On politicians, yes. They can't control themselves.

On earnings of the rest of us, no.

 

[dust1n]

Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.

I would be near reckless with it. There should be a salary cap within any institution of a certain size in relation to the lowest paid worker and to the median wage. Did you have a reason why there shouldn't be rather than an ol' quip from days yonder? I can't imagine why a CFO would need to make three million dollars from a company that employs people at 6.75 an hour.

 

[dust1n]

From what I've seen *** kissing is what it really takes to get ahead at minimum wage jobs. Hard work and trying hard has done nothing for me except to add on to life's frustrations because it's a fact the best candidate does not always get the job.

Don't get me started on the food industry. I have bones to pick with all sorts of food places, even mom and pop joints.

 

[Falvlun]

I would be near reckless with it. There should be a salary cap within any institution of a certain size in relation to the lowest paid worker and to the median wage. Did you have a reason why there shouldn't be rather than an ol' quip from days yonder? I can't imagine why a CFO would need to make three million dollars from a company that employs people at 6.75 an hour.

Another great point. Maybe not so much a salary cap but a wage ratio that must be met.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Another great point. Maybe not so much a salary cap but a wage ratio that must be met.

Or, seeing that proponents of wealthy people perpetuate the claim that rich people need their money in order to create jobs and build the economy, then I assume they wouldn't have a problem with enforced and regulated investment and job creation for a percentage of all income/worth over a certain threshhold.

 

[Me Myself]

I really think you misunderstand me. I work countless hours each week helping the poor. More so now that I have retired.

Yes, I pay my Daughter's tuition and books and yes I gave her a car which is 10 years old now and will not be replaced till I see a four year degree.

She works and pays her apartment, clothes and food. For her to go another semester, all I require is to see her grades.

Just what have I done so wrong here?

Its not about doing wrong, its about equalling some oportunities here.

Your children sound blessed for having a father that gives back and hopefully they have learned from this attitude. Likewise, they are blessed with a father who worked so hard, so they should be blessed to have aqcuired this same traits, what better way for that than to let them work for what they want, in a reasonable and fair way?

I never had a job because parents payed all for me and I decided to focus on my studies, b ut to be fair, I got lazy and failed way more than how much it should be allowed. Now I am looking for a job. My parents didnt ask me, but i just feel to guilty for failing some of e subjects I failed, I need to pay them myself.

The thing is, saving your kids work is not always good. Making them work for scholarships doesnt sound bad AT ALL and honestly, having kids is expensive. As a father it is completely normal you want to help them, but for when they can go to college, they are women and men already. I have a friend in US that was on a scholarship and worled two jobs cause she didnt have a choice, else she starved.

Simply paying their food and shelter and letting them have a scholarship is very good help. The fact that they need to be "good enough" is very good for them.

As a father, the best blessings you can give are way better than financial. My friend didnt have a father...and I dont want to talk about her mother(as much as she loves her).

Being a good example and a moral support and role model is around the best and most valua le things a parent can give their kids. (And of course, supporting them economically when they are unable )

 

[Alceste]

Or, seeing that proponents of wealthy people perpetuate the claim that rich people need their money in order to create jobs and build the economy, then I assume they wouldn't have a problem with enforced and regulated investment and job creation for a percentage of all income/worth over a certain threshhold.

I can get behind that. If you're going to insist on everybody calling you a "job creator" instead of a "greedy *******" you will surely have no problem with regulation that ensures your wealth is actually creating jobs.

 

[Obsrvr]

Don't get me started on the food industry. I have bones to pick with all sorts of food places, even mom and pop joints.

dusty, would love to hear your war stories.

 

[Panda]

If there was a salary cap what would be the incentive for people to take promotions and take more stress and responsibility?

 

[Falvlun]

If there was a salary cap what would be the incentive for people to take promotions and take more stress and responsibility?

I think that is one of the issues with a salary cap, however, making $3 million still has to be a whole lot more of an incentive than making $30,000.

But right now I'm really liking the "proportionate distribution" concept, where there is no wage cap per se, but the highest paid cannot be paid more than X times the amount of the lowest paid worker, or something of that sort.

 

[Quintessence]

What would be the incentive to work?
I mean, once a person reaches the salary cap.

If there was a salary cap what would be the incentive for people to take promotions and take more stress and responsibility?

Similar questions, with similar answers: honor, virtue, integrity, values, desire, and will.

Are these things really nonexistent these days? Do people honestly require incentives to do what is right? To do what they value? To do what they desire? To uphold their own virtues? Seriously? Because if so, that is incredibly depressing and speaks horrible things about our money-crazed culture.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I think that is one of the issues with a salary cap, however, making $3 million still has to be a whole lot more of an incentive than making $30,000.

But right now I'm really liking the "proportionate distribution" concept, where there is no wage cap per se, but the highest paid cannot be paid more than X times the amount of the lowest paid worker, or something of that sort.

Why? because things would be more fair?

Who told you life would be fair?

Money is not distributed, there is nothing fair that has anything to do with this.

Employee's are nothing different than a nut or a bolt or a screw with the exception you have to keep them safe when they work.

Workers are nothing more than a commodity that should be paid market price for their services.

The resources a company has or it's revenues or for that matter what anyone else in the company makes is really none of your business.

When you get hired, you make your deal so live with it or negotiate a better deal if you can.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Please let me try to put this into perspective. Lets say you have cable and pay 50 dollars for their service. That is the agreed upon price or the deal you accepted.

Another company comes along and offers you the same service for 25 dollars. What do you do?

Lets now say both companies went out of business and the only cable service available now costs 100 dollars. What do you do?

You either pony up a hundred bucks or do without cable right?

Why is hiring employees any different?

 

[Panda]

Are these things really nonexistent these days? Do people honestly require incentives to do what is right? To do what they value? To do what they desire? To uphold their own virtues? Seriously? Because if so, that is incredibly depressing and speaks horrible things about our money-crazed culture.

How is being the boss "right"? A lower position means there is a very good chance my job is generally less stressful, I have less responsibilities and could likely have just as much job satisfaction.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Why? because things would be more fair?

Who told you life would be fair?

Money is not distributed, there is nothing fair that has anything to do with this.

Employee's are nothing different than a nut or a bolt or a screw with the exception you have to keep them safe when they work.

Workers are nothing more than a commodity that should be paid market price for their services.

The resources a company has or it's revenues or for that matter what anyone else in the company makes is really none of your business.

When you get hired, you make your deal so live with it or negotiate a better deal if you can.

I know I'm just starting out going into our second year in business, Rick. But I look at our employees differently than what you've mentioned here. I see that they're people with their own ideas and their own lives. I think if I were to look at them as no more than a commodity, I feel I would be stripping them of their humanity.

It's kind of like if I were to look at our customer base as nothing more than numbers in our P&L sheets and Income/Expense sheets, I feel I'd be stripping them of their humanity, too.

I realize it's messier, more difficult, and takes longer to work out issues and ideas, but I fully own that decision to look at them this way, and for me, in the long run over each quarter I've found more success approaching the business that people are our greatest and most valuable asset. More than operations, more than sales, more than marketing, more than the books, and more than the infrastructure.

I'm not saying that my way is the only way to run a business, or that my way is better, but so far it's working really well for me and for us as a whole community while I'm at the helm. YMMV, I guess.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Heather, some of my employees made 75 dollars an hour and they where worth every penny. My lowest starter employee made 15. This is skilled labor. If you have talented people pay them what their worth and not a penny more.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Heather, some of my employees made 75 dollars an hour and they where worth every penny. My lowest starter employee made 15. This is skilled labor. If you have talented people pay them what their worth and not a penny more.

I don't see how this is related to what I posted.

Teaching is a skilled profession, too, BTW.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I don't see how this is related to what I posted.

Teaching is a skilled profession, too, BTW.

I did not mean to imply your employees are unskilled, please forgive me. How it relates to your post is, business will have up times and down. During up times, other people may open a business and compete with you so you have to pay your people what they are worth. If someone steals your people and pays them more than they are worth, they will go out of business. What you don't want is to short change them and they leave you because another company paid them what they are worth.

Business has down cycles. When the going gets rough, you don't want second class people just to save a buck or two. Only the very best survive the down times and excellence will get you through. The thing is, you have to stay detached from your employees or they will take advantage of you.

In good times you can absorb some things, in bad times it will take you down.

I'm sure you will find the balance to make things work, just remember employees will let you down when you need them the most. Try to keep friendships and employer/employee relationships seperate if at all possible.

Easy to say, hard to do.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I did not mean to imply your employees are unskilled, please forgive me. How it relates to your post is, business will have up times and down. During up times, other people may open a business and compete with you so you have to pay your people what they are worth. If someone steals your people and pays them more than they are worth, they will go out of business. What you don't want is to short change them and they leave you because another company paid them what they are worth.

Business has down cycles. When the going gets rough, you don't want second class people just to save a buck or two. Only the very best survive the down times and excellence will get you through. The thing is, you have to stay detached from your employees or they will take advantage of you.

In good times you can absorb some things, in bad times it will take you down.

I'm sure you will find the balance to make things work, just remember employees will let you down when you need them the most. Try to keep friendships and employer/employee relationships seperate if at all possible.

Easy to say, hard to do.

Thanks for the explanation. I understand better where you're coming from now. :yes:

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Please let me try to put this into perspective. Lets say you have cable and pay 50 dollars for their service. That is the agreed upon price or the deal you accepted.

Another company comes along and offers you the same service for 25 dollars. What do you do?

Lets now say both companies went out of business and the only cable service available now costs 100 dollars. What do you do?

You either pony up a hundred bucks or do without cable right?

Why is hiring employees any different?

It's different because a prospective employee is often in a position where they can be taken advantage of.

If someone doesn't have work, then the job he's applying for could mean the difference between keeping a roof over his family's head or not. Even if the prospective employer is a completely stand-up guy, it's a skewed situation, so they're not negotiating as equals. The employer is in the position of power in a way that someone buying cable TV isn't.