# Maximum Wage (not a tax bracket)

Discussion in 'Business & Economics' started by Success_Machine, Apr 1, 2011.

1. ### CarcanoValued Senior Member

Messages:
6,865
Its true that in Japan and some parts of Europe there is a much narrower ratio between executive and manual labour incomes.

And I'm sure this is primarily for cultural reasons.

Japan is a 'collectivist' culture...whereas the US is 'individualistic'.

As far as your CALORIC theory of value is concerned, its not all that far from Karl Marx or even Adam Smith...who believed that if a beaver pelt required twice as much effort to acquire as a deer pelt, it should be worth twice as much in arrowheads.

3. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365
I'm not trying to prove my superior knowledge of business, and your line of reasoning is drifting off-topic. That is not the focus of this thread. The maximum wage of the top employees of an organization is the topic of this discussion. Stay on-topic or shut up.

So, you're calling me out? LOL. I don't have to do anything you want me to do. This is a debate. I started it with an idea involving a maximum wage ratio to regulate payscales. It's my idea, not yours. I'm the one who thought it up, not you. From where I stand, you seem to be desperate to prove something.

I have good idea, a maximum wage ratio to regulate payscales. You, supposedly with massive experience, rejected it based on ad hominem arguments. Your experience is contributing nothing of value to this discussion. Perhaps it's time to retire? Out with the old... you know the expression. You're in a rut. You only know one way of doing things.

5. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
No, you only think you have a good idea but you have provided no evidence that it is a good idea.

Like somewhere this has been tried and shown to work.

If you could do it though I think it would be a huge failure simply because I don't think you would find people who would spend the time to get the advanced training and then work hard for just 3 times the pay of the bottom tier who have little to no training (based on how companies are structured only a small number could ever hope to make it to tier 1 and 2 level pay).

So the net is the Third tier is way too hard of a job requiring too much training and sacrifice for way too little remuneration.

You ignore the fact that we now live in a world of global competition, this would prevent a company from raising the pay scales of the much larger bottom tiers and still be able to compete on a price basis with your products, thus keeping the salaries of the upper tiers severely limited, which would ultimately mean that the real talent that drives a company would be siphoned off by international companies simply by offering them four or five times their existing salaries. The net is if we structured our companies like this they would quickly lose out on the competition for talented workers. There would be a HUGE brain drain as talented people went to places where these DRASTIC wage restrictions weren't in place.

Arthur

Messages:
10,296
I am right on-topic = your ideas are completely stupid.

Nope, not calling you out - just trying to get you to understand that you have NO idea what you are talking about.:bugeye: And I'm not concerned with trying to prove anything - it's YOUR stupid ideas and you've done NOTHING to prove that any one of them have ANY viability in the real world. If you cannot show proof of concept (which you CANNOT) then it's you who needs to shut up and just go away...

My experience HAS contributed something to this "discussion." I've shown more than once that you are projecting a fantasy as if it were an idea.

"Perhaps it's time to retire?" That's funny!!!

It shows that your reading comprehension and even the ability to add two numbers together are as poor and feeble as is your understanding of business. I gave you a personal timeline (30 years and 20 years) and you weren't even bright enough to realize that I didn't start the day I was born!! I'm already retired. (Doing quite well and enjoying it very much, too.)

8. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365
Already retired? Well, you know what's next.

I don't need 30 years experience to bring an idea to the table. Nobody should be stopped from bringing an idea to the table because they aren't old enough. Implementing a maximum wage ratio would be easy too, a simple policy statement by the HR manager. That's it.

If society relied on old codgers like you to approve & implement their ideas, nothing would ever happen, innovation would never take place. We'd still be riding horse-drawn carriages and sneering at those new-fangled gadgets those idiots were tinkering with.

You know where most new ideas come from: Youth! Who's buying new ideas? Young people! Who invented them? Young people! You reach a certain age and you're no longer thinking creatively. That's the feebleness that you're experiencing right now. Age. Old people are stupid, that's the status quo, and that's the generation you come from. Sure you might understand one business model, but there are thousands, and they all work! The personnel in the organization merely have to follow the rules. That's all it takes, and it works.

9. ### adoucetteCaca OccursValued Senior Member

Messages:
7,829
Immature people often think that.

Arthur

10. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365

It's also realistic sometimes, because the average education of the retired generation is substantially lower. I can't speak to a specific person's education, but that is the status quo. I've had the experience of trying to teach old people how to use computers and cellphones, and they just don't get it. They don't understand the interface, or the motivation even. The whole idea of it is subjugated to the overriding an philosophy that they carry with them, sometimes it's religion, sometimes it's money, sometimes it's power. New ideas are rejected by them because of their personal philosophy that they hold dear and think represents the majority. I dont necessarily subscribe to that guy's philosophy. I like business, to a point. But I have my own ideas, and he doesn't fit into my business model. I don't think it would work out. How many times have you heard that. I heard it a few times, the reasoning known apparently only to the person who spoke it.

Messages:
10,296
You've bitten off more than you can chew with this one. I'm reporting you for being highly disrespectful and rude.

Old people are stupid, eh? Show me ONE young person on the board of directors of any large company.

Contrary to your ignorant way of thinking, there's NO age limit on creativity - and you also display a gross lack of understand if you actually believe (and you probably) do - that ALL business models work. You either haven't lived long enough to notice - or most likely haven't bothered to even watch - to know that hundreds of different models fail each and every year. And guess which group fails the most often. Give up? It's the NEW ones, like yours, that don't stand a chance.

There's something else about those of us that are older that you aren't even aware of, and it's VERY important - it's called experience. While we may not always catch the winners every time, we know enough to be able to single out which one will fail - like all of yours are doomed to do.

12. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365
You need help, and a thicker skin. I thought you had business experience. Anyone who's had a paying job for more than a day knows that business people are the most vicious people around. I should be paid to communicate with you.

Really? Used the internet recently? Facebook? Mark Zuckerberg. There's millions of others, usually due to nepotism.

People who claim to have experience have been doing the same menial task for the last 30 years. Experience is overvalued.

Doomed? Ha! I'm younger than you! That's the most obvious flaw in your reasoning. All I have to do is outlast you. And I will. Your greed will bring you alot of grief.

13. ### YoYoPapayaTrump/Norris - 2012Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,039
haha i like you succces machine

(in before ban)

14. ### YoYoPapayaTrump/Norris - 2012Registered Senior Member

Messages:
1,039
Oh and a maximum wage would need to be worldwide and enforced with an iron fist. The easiest way would be to tax every penny earned above a certain amount by 100% and have death penalty for fraud.

15. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365

Thanks! I started this thread with little hope of constructive feedback from business types. People who don't like the idea don't have to participate in the discussion.

22. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365
Dude. I don't need your input. If you don't like the idea you don't have to contribute to the discussion, and frankly I'd prefer if you didn't. I don't like your attitude.

23. ### Success_MachineImpossible? I can do thatRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
365

You've pointed out a basic problem with capitalism, fraud, in so many words. It's legal only as long as the customer can be convinced he's getting value for his money - even though he usually isn't. The guy selling him something usually isn't committing massive fraud, but he's probably nickel & diming everyone along the way.

If it is revealed later however, that the guy was not delivering the product or service that was paid for, then coercion is employed.

Like these guys who get paid so much money, it makes headlines. I'm not convinced they're delivering value for that money. Hence, my idea for a maximum wage ratio.

Last edited: Apr 3, 2011