Kasz216 said:
Badassbab said:
Kasz216 said:
Badassbab said:
I don't think it's a case of the rich getting richer which is the issue, the rich will nearly always get richer. The key issue is when the rich are getting at the expense of others. So for example the board of directors are getting richer by making everyone work longer, for the same or less and by giving each worker ever more tasks without hiring more staff. So while in a way they've made the company more efficient and cost effective, this only really benefits them and no one else. The Government isn't collecting more taxes, the workers aren't getting paid more and society barely benefits from this approach. The only possible benefit is with the extra money the directors are paying themselves they will have more money to spend say on luxury or other items. |
Actually, if they the empoyees are workin longer for the same amount and the employers are making more money. The government is getting more in taxes.
Additionally, say the employees are working for less... and the employers are just "stealing" that money.... the government still gets more in taxes thanks to progressive taxation.
|
Depends really. The extra money the Directors make could be paid as dividends which is taxed at a lot less than what the Government would tax on a salary. Or it could be retained earnings in which case there's no tax provided it is invested back into the company.
|
If it's retained as earnings the rich aren't getting richer though.
Dividends are a good point. Though I would point out dividends would also be paid out to other working class/middle class people.
Stockmarket participation rate in the US is extremly high... not even counting things like pension funds.
|
And that, to reference my other JP Morgan thread, where "too big to fail" is now being discussed, is seting up yet another prime situation where if Wall Street goes bat loco, on a larger scale than JP Morgan did again, there will be strong pull for yet another bail out, lest people's life savings get wiped out.
