Do believe all people should have approximately the same annual income?

[AreaCode707]

If you believe or don't believe that, why? I'll post my thoughts a few posts down, so I don't contaminate people's answers right off the bat.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
If you believe or don't believe that, why? I'll post my thoughts a few posts down, so I don't contaminate people's answers right off the bat.

So you'd rather the first poster who gives an answer to "contaminate" people's answers?

 

[ProfJohn]

No.

People should get paid what they are worth.

 

[Schadenfroh]

No

 

[RKDaley]

no.

 

[Steeplerot]

30-200k is a big range. 30k is low for living in cities and I do not even see why someone would need 200k, maybe that lady with 14 kids?

 

[masteryoda34]

No because some people have extraordinary talent that all society benefits from, but those people will not reach to their potential if they can make the maximum of 200k with half their brain tied behind their back.

Also, people who make a lot of money aren't stealing it. Someone is WILLINGLY paying them for their services. (besides of course the theifs and crooks like Madoff, etc.)

 

[woodie1]

Negative.

 

[winnar111]

Absolutely. Everyone should have a guaranteed income of $50,000. Max $100,000, after which it is confiscated

 

[mugs]

That's crazy talk

 

[MovingTarget]

Approximately the same? No. That being said, an equitable distribution of wealth is necessary for the long term viability and stability of a democratic society.

 

[LTC8K6]

Obama should set each person's income and decide where and if they work.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Absolutely. Everyone should have a guaranteed income of $50,000. Max $100,000, after which it is confiscated

I think you're being a little harsh. It should be like $150k. Also, everyone has a right to a home and the absolute best healthcare.

 

[rudder]

No, becuase if I ever get a brain tumor I don't want some neurosurgeon who is upset that his salary tops out at $200,000 year operating on me. And I don't want to have to goto McDonalds and pay $35.00 for a happy meal because the fry cook is earning $30,000 a year..

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: MovingTarget
Approximately the same? No. That being said, an equitable distribution of wealth is necessary for the long term viability and stability of a democratic society.

You're right. In a democracy it's crucial that voters should have the rights to the more fortunate members of the genetics lottery. That is the only way democracy can survive.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: rudder
No, becuase if I ever get a brain tumor I don't want some neurosurgeon who is upset that his salary tops out at $200,000 year operating on me. And I don't want to have to goto McDonalds and pay $35.00 for a happy meal because the fry cook is earning $30,000 a year..

But the surgeon doesn't need more than $200k/year to live. Just ask him nicely to do your surgery and he'll do it. After all do you think he'll be able to live with your death on his conscience?

And we should be happy to pay $35 for a happy meal. Don't you have compassion for the cook? What are you, a repuglican?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
If you believe or don't believe that, why? I'll post my thoughts a few posts down, so I don't contaminate people's answers right off the bat.

Heh, if you go down this path, why have a range at all. Just make it so everyone gets the same money and be done with it. With your range, next thing you know people making 30k is gonna complain why other people make 200k and it's not fair.

 

[TheoPetro]

No.

All compensation should be dictated by the market with a minimum livable wage that is set based on the area code of your primary residence (so it coincides with the cost of living for your area).

 

[cubby1223]

You cannot make the poor rich by making the rich poor.

Wealth redistribution on a scale like proposed in the initial post, has never worked to the poor's long-term advantage anywhere in the history of the world.

 

[Wheezer]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
If you believe or don't believe that, why? I'll post my thoughts a few posts down, so I don't contaminate people's answers right off the bat.

hell no...why should some dumb ass kid who bathes himself in the sink of a fast food joint earn 30k?

while a single mom who is working, going to school and raising a child only earns half that if she is lucky.

 

[wirelessenabled]

Originally posted by: winnar111
Absolutely. Everyone should have a guaranteed income of $50,000. Max $100,000, after which it is confiscated

Out of character?

 

[Steeplerot]

Originally posted by: wirelessenabled

Originally posted by: winnar111
Absolutely. Everyone should have a guaranteed income of $50,000. Max $100,000, after which it is confiscated

Out of character?

The script winnar111 needs a tiny bit of debugging it seems.

Guess the repubs are so broke they stopped paying the forumbot developers.

Hax?

 

[Starbuck1975]

Absolutely. Everyone should have a guaranteed income of $50,000. Max $100,000, after which it is confiscated

Do we all get to wear government issued matching jumpsuits?

 

[AreaCode707]

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
If you believe or don't believe that, why? I'll post my thoughts a few posts down, so I don't contaminate people's answers right off the bat.

So you'd rather the first poster who gives an answer to "contaminate" people's answers?

Eh, it's just basic survey rules. You don't hint in your question what you think the "right" answer is.

I think people should be able to earn whatever they can, through a combination of skill, education, effort and luck. Very few wind up making bank that way, but kudos to them if they do. Other people may not have a combination of those traits such that they ever make much in life, or may choose to invest their time and efforts in other ways; I see nothing wrong with either of those.

There are so many people outraged at the execs making tons of cash; I was just wondering how many of those same people truly think that all work really deserves about the same compensation, with limited variation.

To be clear, my own answer to my OP is: No, what a dumbass question.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: AreaCode707

Originally posted by: datalink7

Originally posted by: AreaCode707
If you believe or don't believe that, why? I'll post my thoughts a few posts down, so I don't contaminate people's answers right off the bat.

So you'd rather the first poster who gives an answer to "contaminate" people's answers?

Eh, it's just basic survey rules. You don't hint in your question what you think the "right" answer is.

I think people should be able to earn whatever they can, through a combination of skill, education, effort and luck. Very few wind up making bank that way, but kudos to them if they do. Other people may not have a combination of those traits such that they ever make much in life, or may choose to invest their time and efforts in other ways; I see nothing wrong with either of those.

There are so many people outraged at the execs making tons of cash; I was just wondering how many of those same people truly think that all work really deserves about the same compensation, with limited variation.

To be clear, my own answer to my OP is: No, what a dumbass question.

Seriously, how much execs make is between the them and the stockholders/owners. Why should some random people on the Internet have anything to say about how much those execs make? Of course when government nationalize/bailout a company, the government gets a say as well since government becomes the owner. At that point, it becomes a business decision, and not paying market price for those with critical skills and knowledge, doing critical job, is not a very smart business decision.