It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

physicist mark buchanan wants to limit large incomes.

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

hmm..

I think I know what you're talking about.. not sure that it's necessarily similar to this at all.

the issue is the income/wealth-gap... if it grows too large, society begins to break down. See 18th century France, 19th-20th Century Russia, etc.




posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: sayzaar
I think that anyone saying that other people should give up their money that they earned to others should pony up their money first... ALL OF IT.

If giving some is good, why not all of it? Live off welfare afterwards. Sell all of your cool stuff that you like that cost you money and give that money to others too.


We are talking about earnings here. If the limit were $5million and you EARN £5million a year, then you would continue topping up to that amount each and every year after 'charity' donations and money you spend on yourself and family, so it's hardly like your money would be taken and be left with nothing.
Your "i'm alright Jack" attitude is exactly the problem that's being addressed and the reason that the world is in such a pickle. Why are you unable to consider the future and well being of your own species ? Why are you not willing to work for the betterment of ALL ?
edit on 7-8-2014 by sayzaar because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
I am not sure if forced wealth distribution is the way to go, rather we need to do away with greed and this obsession with money.

I also own my own business. I count myself very lucky that I was born/raised with the intelligence and attitude, and given the opportunities to get me to this point. The amount I would have to be earning before I gave up the excess is well below 500k I can tell you.

I would say me and my family lead a relatively humble existence, we are not particularly materialistic or flashy, but then I am sitting here on my ipad in front of my TV while there are some who can't even afford to eat. Even this makes me feel uncomfortable so I can't imagine ever feeling right living it up a Yacht or razzing around in an expensive car.

@hoosierdaddy71 is finding and end to the untold suffering cancer causes not reward enough, why the obsession for financial reward?



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Scouse100

That sound good. But you know some pharmaceutical company will make billions so why not the guy that figured it out?
He might win a Nobel prize but could only accept half of the winnings.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
a reply to: Scouse100

That sound good. But you know some pharmaceutical company will make billions so why not the guy that figured it out?
He might win a Nobel prize but could only accept half of the winnings.


Don't get me started on pharmaceutical companies



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Hoosierdaddy71

hmm... it's interesting to contrast this aspect.

the soviet union, for all it's faults, seemed to be very keen on rewarding designers or engineers, or scientists.

hence they always seemed to work the name of the designer, or the lead designer, into the designation/product name.

perhaps we should have regulations that give rights to the engineers and designers of a product, or at least a bigger share of the patent.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: sayzaar
I can see where he is coming from although i think 500K is a little on the low side. It's when someone's personal wealth becomes obscene that i have a problem with it.
What kind of a species are we when we allow a small number of people to own most of the money. What kind of a species are we when we allow a small number of individuals to bathe in the best that life has to offer whilst the rest mostly live in squaller. When children are homeless and starving.
Nobody on this planet should have more money than they could ever reasonably expect to spend, just sitting in the bank making them ever more money for nothing through interest.
I think the guy simply wants a system where nobody is hungry or homeless or in debt having their lives ruined.
It can be done, but we have to cleanse the planet of the greediest most despicable heartless scum first !!


Well said

www.forbes.com...

85 individuals have more than 3billion.

I hope our world burns & soon.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
There are other solutions. It would involve major corporations such as Wal-Mart and the Waltons having to pay their employees more based on their own wealth and profits that year. It would be a fluctuating income for the lower paid employees but on a good profit years the employees are going to get paid more. If the owners and CEO's want to make more money, they have to raise the lowest paid tier employes a percentage of that increase. If the CEO wants a 50% increase in pay than the lower tier employees must see a 20% increase in pay.

Hope that makes sense.

The way I see it, is that the problem with the wealthy is they pay employees scraps while they horde and invest their money leaving less money in circulation giving the poor less buying power.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: calstorm

There is a professor recently who took $90k less a year & it came out to $3/hour for every employee. Only 90k.
m.dailykos.com...

How do you completely change a global mindset of right/wrong overnight? I've long believed a salary cap needs to be in place. If the US pres makes X amount, no one should be paid more. Why do people hold ideology over their own potential salary increase? Maybe after the next collapse, we will have a politician who will promote something like this. We need baby steps but we are only heading in the wrong direction as disparity blatantly increases.
edit on 7-8-2014 by Eunuchorn because: Added link



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
The ant and the grasshopper fable comes to mind. I didn't do a damn thing so you have to feed me!
I know to many people that make bad choices with their lives and suffer as a result. I see no reason to reward them for making bad choices.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 03:56 PM
link   
a reply to: thirdcoast

50k? I'm lucky to have more than 50 quid lol jeeze I'm in the wrong business



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Eunuchorn

That is incredible that he did that! However what I am talking about wouldn't even apply to schools or small businesses. Only the top profit companies like Wal-mart.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: calstorm

One of my favorite things to say to ppl is the 7 Walmart heirs inherited more money than the bottom half of Americans are worth.

Step 1 is capping salaries where funds have obvious other sources they can be funneled to for good of the company & all employee wage increases.



posted on Aug, 7 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: sayzaar
I don't oppose charity.
If it isn't given freely, it isn't charity. I am all for you giving all of your money to those that you think deserve it.
What makes you so special that you can divvy out other people's money?
ETA... Where does it stop? Will you be checking people's pantries? If I have one too many boxes of Cheerios on the shelf, should they be forcibly taken to give someone that has one less box than I do?
edit on bu312014-08-07T17:18:16-05:0005America/ChicagoThu, 07 Aug 2014 17:18:16 -05005u14 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join