Real0ne
Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Income inequality has two meanings to me. 1. The ratio of income of the top earners to the bottom earners, both within a given company, and in the economy in general. 2. The ratio of income to an individual's actual value, something Ken alluded to when he mentioned C level execs damaging their own companies and getting rewarded. I consider it to be a huge threat. This is because the spending of the middle class drives the consumer economy (conservatives will say that it's the money available for companies through stock investment that matters. It's debatable whether that's true as a general principle, and in today's economy, lack of consumer demand is killing things while money is available for investment). If the top dogs are able to get their income without the middle class getting theirs, there will be little incentive to fix the economy. it would be nice to have a world that was not so hell bent on greed. Having a cap on wealth is not different than the rules of no mare than 640 acres of land per person when the settlers came here to prevent monarchies, though we have 51 sovereigns anyway.
_____________________________
"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment? Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality! "No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session
|