I know it's always a hot-button issue with us lefties, and while I certainly appreciate sincere attempts to address the problem, it's always seemed to me a matter of whose ox is being gored. What I mean is: Yes, you want to want to make sure some bank CEOs don't reward themselves with eight-figure bonuses for gambling recklessly with government-backed deposits, but on the other hand, if you've been a longtime shareholder in Apple Computer, you've probably thought a guy like Steve Jobs was worth every penny he could get. So yes, rich people's taxes need to be raised, and by a lot, but if we're going to talk about controlling wages, I think we're much better off devoting our efforts to the lowest earners, not the highest ones.
Put simply: if a guy like Howard Schultz wants to pay himself 20, or 50, or 100 million dollars a year to run Starbuck's, fine. Let's just make sure all of Howard Schultz's employees are earning wages that can allow them to live decent and comfortable lives.
---Vitelius
Comments