• I think so.

    Why has CEO pay exploded while real workers wages have remained stagnant or in many cases gone down in terms of purchasing power? Factoring in inflation, workers are in fact making less to day than 50 years ago.. Pathetic. All this while CEO and exec pay has exploded. Why? What is a CEO doing today that they weren't 50 years ago? Is it worth the pay explosion? Id argue no. However, worker productivity has increase 3 fold yet pay hasn't? Why are CEOs only reaping the benefits of the average workers hard work? I propose a "maximum" wage for CEO pay of 50-1


  • It's crazy how much people are getting paid nowadays.

    It's absolutely insane. All the heads of companies are getting paid this ridiculous amount, while the common employees are left scrounging for scraps. I think the maximum wage should be high, very high, but not ridiculously high. There will always be the competition the drive, it will be hard to get that high, and hard to stay that high while all your underlings are competing with you and with each other for the big paycheck, so I think there will always be drive. But the less money wasted on people who don't need it, (The people who are already getting a very large paycheck) and that money can be distributed among the common workers, it can be used to create new jobs within the company, (who doesn't want more jobs?), or it can be used to provide more health benefits for the common workers. I think all the conservatives who oppose the maximum wage law should notice the NEW JOBS I put in there.

  • Max wage or tied together

    Rather than just raising wages with the company raising prices, or with the cost of living rising, tie the lowest paid worker with the highest paid worker. So if the lowest paid worker is only making $8.50/hr, then the highest paid worker (CEO, president, etc.) could only be paid, for example, 20x that amount, or $170/hr. This will keep the cost of living down as nearly everyone will be in the sweet spot (not too expensive, not too cheap). However, a max wage would help bring about this and it would also, if not too far gapped (i.E. $7.25/hr min, $65839/hr max), could keep cost of living down. I believe thatis one fear of raising the min wage, the other being the company will simply charge more for their product or service. But if the vast majority are on wage ceilings (max wage), they can only drive their prices so high...

  • Explosive Debt Ceiling

    Title says it all. Inflation is caused by minimum wage rising. Unfortunately, that is how it works. I wish it wasn't so I could make more than the guy at the movie theater selling soda and popcorn at $10 an hour. The issue is with Liberty based economics (that of a free and unregulated trade industry) versus the redistribution of wealth (through taxing the rich or middle class and giving it to the poor through Welfare and unemployment) also known in the study of political Sciences as political sciences as Socialism, Communism, or even Marxism. Socialism and communism have always failed due to defense budgets. Our economy would fix itself if we stopped our government from wasting trillions of US dollars on Defense spending for our military and FEMA/DHS acquisitions. The issue is with our leaders wasteful spending not our minimum wage.

  • Wage is mostly determined by Rank

    If a person does not have a rank or a degree should he or she not be employed because of it?
    If a person making millions was to lose everything they had and start all over would they even know where to start?
    Many of workers making minimum wage works their butts off to bearly make it by. This is not right.

  • Plain and simple

    The money system was originally meant to keep money circulating... The minimum people keep the money circulating whether they like it or not through taxes and bills. A maximum wage cap would balance money issues with the upper end of earnings, and create a balance for the minimum earnings people. If you believe people should earn more then 10 million a year, what make said person so valuable, and more importantly why can't someone live off 10 million a year? It would force the hands of the rich to actually spend their money putting it in charities, or even other businesses creating more jobs either way and benefitting more people. Keep it in circulation, and the hands of people who actually need it instead of four walls building interest and collecting dust...America is suppose to be the land of the free, not the land of the rulers. Without a maximum wage cap, the slave and master system is still present, just a longer chain.

  • Would big companies leave?

    Huge companies are already leaving the US and outsourcing jobs to factory workers around the world. Nike as an example pays a sweatshop work in China around $1303.32 USD a year. Nike also pays Michael Jordan $75-$100 million (amount changed depending on what website I ways citing) to just sit around and they can use his name. Getting back on topic Switzerland has a 12:1 ratio. Opinions above have 200:1. When Switzerland made the switch big name Swiss companies like Nestle, Swatch, and Glencore never left. Nestle has a quarter million workers and follows the law of the land. If the US is to adopt the law will American companies accept it, and if they don't do we even want them in America?

  • The top 1 percent own almost half the worlds wealth

    It's scary that about 100 people control more money then The massive 7 billion population. We are the majority yet we let these few godking billionaires keep all the money for themselves. Why need to ask ourselves why these people have so much power and why we allow them to keep this insane amount of wealth while the rest of us do all the work to keep their businesses running for wages that most people can barely live on. When you think of it we are almost like slaves working under these giant global corporations.

  • Money is not infinit

    While its true that most people require wealth as an incentive to achieve, why does the sky have to be the limit? Let's say we restrict people from earning more than $5 million a year. Are our future doctors going to drop out of med school? Are construction workers going to stop building? Of course not. But it may remove the incentive for businesses to try and screw over their employees in order to make a few extra bucks. Plus the maximum wage would not restrict the amount a business is allowed to earn, companies can still make as much money as they want but instead of spoiling their executives, that money can be spent on hiring more workers and invested into the business itself.

  • There should be a maximum wage.

    The rich keep becoming richer and the poor are becoming more poor. In my opinion, the world should be as fair as possible for everyone and to do that we need to make sure no one is taking in so much money that the economy is affected by it. In my readings the top 10% of wealthiest people have 90% of the money while the other 90% only have 10%. No wonder why there is so much debt in this world (individuals and countries alike). If an individual can't live a happy life making a million dollars a day then they need to take a good look at people making 30,000 a year such as myself. Less money for the rich (but are still rich), the more money for everyone else.

  • Minimum? Yes. Maximum? No.

    A minimum wage serves a purpose in saying "Alright, this is the minimum amount you can pay a person because we don't want people to basically be doing slave labor for pennies when there is no other option." Ever since FDR was present we had that because people like Rockefeller were taking advantage of people to make profit. However, there should not be a maximum wage for one reason if not the others specified by those who also agree with me: If I'm an employer, I should have the right to pay my employees as much as I want. If I personally want to make myself bankrupt paying my top employee 400k a year, that's my choice, not the governments. I do, however, believe there should be a maximum wage for congressmen, given they can increase their own pay check any time they want as much as they want.

  • Maximum Wage Laws go against the Pursuit of Happiness.

    The Right to the Pursuit of Happiness requires there not be a limit to that pursuit.

    Besides, personal success should be relative to the success of one's business. If my business becomes a $100,000,000,000 dollar business, that is paying $35 billion in taxes, I better by able to get a large paycheck off it.. It's MY business, MY money. MY paycheck...

  • There should never be a maximum wage law

    In today's world, there is simply no need of a maximum wage law, as it unconstitutional to limit how much a person can earn, as this can severely affect the person's economical income, personal spending and quality of life. In addition, such laws would potentially demotivate employees to work harder in their respective jobs as there would be a 'limit' placed on how much they can potentially earn in a given period of time.

  • Government manipulation in free markets kills incentives

    To trust central planning of an economy to a government is akin to putting more trust in said government than in the collective supply and demand relationships in the marketplace. While it may be difficult to think about CEOs and other high paid executives are a supply on this market and a maximum wage is essentially a price cap on labor. Depending on where this cap is set it could have different effects but one very possible scenario is one in which the incentive to be productive is hindered because the ability to get a reward from that production is hindered by regulation. While some may advocate that the cap be set high enough that it only affects the obscenely rich such power of regulation should not be give to any one entity and be left to the free markets.

  • The concepts of minimum or maximum wage laws defeat the point of money

    Any restrictions on wages are an assault on the basic concept of money. Money is several things, 1) a means of compensation for losses, such as lost time, injuries, personal distaste and so on. Money is based on the idea of MUTUAL agreement on a price to compensate party "a" who has lost a thing of value. In this case time and perhaps distaste in doing unpleasant work. 2) Money is also a means of communication of how much relative value an INDIVIDUAL places on a specific thing. A third party to the transaction demanding to intervene in the price setting process is violating both fundamental functions of money.

  • There should be no maximum wage.

    Runaway gaps between earners can have a negative impact upon social cohesion, behaviour, health and wellbeing. But inequality isn’t simply an evil to be addressed. Whilst it may well be wrong that the Chief Executive of a corporation earns 250 times the wage of their most lowly employee, it is manifestly fair that their most lowly employee should earn substantively more than someone who chooses not to go to work and to rely on welfare instead. Inequality is not always a social evil; sometimes it is a social good, spurring individuals to work, aspire and succeed.

  • There shouldn't be a maximum wage law.

    I feel that there shouldn't be a maximum wage. It is almost outrageous. The rich DESERVE the money that they get, while the poor people don't work hard enough, and can't get any money. It isn't fair to limit that amount; because the rich work harder than anyone to get where they are.

  • No maximum wage

    People earn the money and study hard for it. Hard working woman and men working to get a better future and life for their selves. While other people slack and do not put in effort thats why there a minimum wage. I believe the money is earned for people who want to achieve in life. - does not include lottery winners.

  • No maximum wage limit

    All I have to say is go ahead and work really hard for a low wage while I don't have to work hard at all and get paid the same amount as you. It would be a fair advantage to me. If I'm the boss and I have 2 people apply for the same job but I hire both of them and the maximum is $20 an hour why not take advantage of both of them. They would be working their butt off for me so I could get even more money , because I wont have to pay them as much as I would if there isn't a limit. So either way the rich would become even richer and the poor would still stay poor. So all of you people who say yes put yourself into this, you and your friend have the exact same job. But you work harder, longer and do more than your friend that would make you mad because you would want a higher pay than them but since there would be a limit then you couldn't get paid more therefore you are the one who is getting screwed around. That would be fair come on hopefully all of you are smarter than that. Pulse that owner would be very happy to get richer off of the poor which would be you. And if u are a boss saying there should be a limit then you need to rethink about your life going around screwing the people who don't have as much money as you.

  • There shouldn't be a maximum wage.

    There are all sorts of jobs but some of them are harder than others. For instance two people have the same job but the boss tells one of them do do another thing on top of what they are doing. That would be a disadvantage because that person put in more work than the other.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.