this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
782 points (97.9% liked)

politics

26151 readers
3399 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

With wealth inequality and billionaire control over American society growing ever more obscene, it’s well past time to implement a maximum wage limit.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GuyLivingHere@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 days ago (1 children)

So:

A loan of $1 m is given to Mr. Richbitch McDouchebag based on owning $1 m worth of stock.

Eventually that loan has to be paid off.

When McDouchebag sells off some stock to pay the loan, the amount paid presumably enters a bank account, either in their name or in the name of a numbered company they control, yes?

That's income. Apply tax to it before they pay off the loan. In Canada, the top marginal tax rate is 33%, so $330k minus the other marginal tax amounts for the lower brackets would be applied before this money can go to pay off a portion of that $1 million loaned.

It's either this, or we rip up the income tax act alongside finding a different revenue stream for the government.

I'm for whatever we can get on board with most people, because I am pretty sure most of us who aren't accountants hate filing income taxes.

If we instead got most of our money from other things that the government sold, then (a) big companies couldn't use the same accounting tricks to hide income, as we would no longer be taxing those precious profits of theirs (b) the rest of us wouldn't have to go through tax pain every April.

I realize that for some people, they get things like tax credits for a bunch of things like home renos, etc.

Perhaps under a no income tax system, the incentive to do these activities that reduced their income tax would have to be changed to something more tangible, like a guaranteed lower rate on utilities or something. I dunno.

[–] Soleos@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I'm sorry, either I'm dense or your explanation is confusing. How is what you described different from the capital gains tax?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Switzerland had a vote on this in 2013. Max would be 12x the min. The motion lost thanks to corporate propaganda.

But there is the shining example in the Basque region of Spain... in Mondragón, the highest and lowest paid workers in Mondragón, for example, remains about six to one.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (7 children)

The problem of this is always the same. Contractors. Is your janitor holding the wage of your CEO down? Easy fix, you are the CEO. Fire the janitor and hire a cleaning company. Since the employees of the cleaning company are not your employees, their wages are no longer relevant.

At some point, the CEO can just have its own company of 1 employee (himself) which owns 100% of the stakes of the real company, and he can also be CEO of the real company. The real company would just pay massive amounts to the CEO company for "IP" or "consulting".

This policy can be implemented voluntarily by companies, but I don't think a government can make a law to implement this policy without obvious loopholes.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

None of that would matter if Switzerland also set a minimum wage.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't see what Switzerland has to do with any of this. And why it would be fixed if Switzerland set a minimum wage.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I told you: Switzerland is the only country to have held a referendum on maximum wages.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

Could the United States Follow This Lead?

😂

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 2 points 4 days ago

need it to cover all compensation but I agree. ben an jerrys had single digit multiples for the highest paid. don't see why we can't do 100.

[–] frustrated@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

No chance anything that actually attacks inequality ever gets implemented through existing legislative channels.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›