Comment by danny_codes
16 hours ago
You’re thinking about this narrowly. The broader implication is rising income inequality. It’s not sustainable. If GINI gets too high it can only end in reform, revolution, or anarchy.
16 hours ago
You’re thinking about this narrowly. The broader implication is rising income inequality. It’s not sustainable. If GINI gets too high it can only end in reform, revolution, or anarchy.
Who gets to decide what the gap can be? Employees? I don't believe there are ever "unbiased, third parties" in these situations. You want to pre-emptively prevent one outcome by controlling the company - but this level of power also comes with side effects. Why take the risk of starting a company when you don't control income? Who's to say people won't want to continually lower that income gap until countries stop innovating? You have to consider the negative side effects of your own solution...else risk thinking about the problem "too narrowly".