More progressive taxes to fund expanded social welfare programs.

I'm not sure if English is your second language or what is going on, but I don't think you understand what the term "slave" means. The people you are referring to can come and go as they please. They can choose who they work for, even decide if they want to work at all and as you pointed out they are paid.

slave - noun \ˈslāv\
: someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay

Here is a link to an online dictionary if you have trouble with any other words:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/

I don't always bump 7 month old threads, but when I do it's to reply to a banned poster.

loooooool bahbah confirmed mad, has to respond to ALL the inequality threads he can find.

Next bump up, Occupy Wall Street.

UNCHAINED!!!!

I'm shocked that I agree with this in general (not sure about the "genetics" part). There are certain types of people that do really well in our society. There are certain people who won't. This isn't racist, or political, or whatever you want to label it.

There is no true equality, because every person plays a different role or contributes a different amount or their labor is valued at a different rate. In my mind a great teacher is much more important than an athlete or entertainer, but the market pays what it pays.

I generally agree that if you took all the wealth in the world and split it up equally between everyone that you would wind up in the same place eventually.

My issue is I'm unsure how I should feel about it.

pretty sure that the best way to achieve income equality is communism

Have you considered destroying to planet as an option?

This. I will see if I can find it but a while ago I read something along these lines. IIRC if you split all the wealth in the US equally we would be in The same situation within four to five generations. People are going to be who they are.

I wouldn't say I am mad. Maybe a little tilted that people think the way OP (ITT) does.

I'm pretty sure OWS is located in a place I am no longer welcome. BTW- I didn't realize this was an old thread.

A majority of the population would still say that it isn't fair, but I do agree that if our goal is income inequality then communism is our best way to achieve it.

How did you find this thread to respond to it?

stop trying to achieve it probably would work better

Looks like the boys at yahoo, "a recent study by academics at Princeton and Northwestern", and "growing numbers of Americans" are ready to team up and tackle this income inequality problem.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-ma...060900788.html

The solution this article is suggesting is to create a maximum wage. Yep, capping a person's wage at a certain dollar amount.

Sort of a silly sideshow of an idea.

Glad to see you say this. By the way you support other silly liberal ideas, including other forms of price fixing, I never know what you will support next.

Yeah, idea of a maximum wage <> to idea of a minimum wage.

there is a correlation between union membership and a stronger middle class

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...me-inequality/

This is so ****ing dumb.

You don't make middle class incomes rise by capping Goldman Sachs CEO pay to a certain amount.

Just looked up this Damon Linker dude. What a history of absolute trash thinking. Why does yahoo have this clown writing articles for them?

http://www.damonlinker.com/works.htm

in theory it would go like this. nobody can spend more than a billion dollars. so the gov would take everything above that use that money to make sure we once again have the smartest kids and best infrastructure in the world.

we used to and now don't, perhaps low taxes and cuts to education and infrastructure have led to this.

not sure how this would play out in theory. id rather we just rather just raise the top tax rate and get rid of loopholes and make sure the 1% more importantly .01% are getting clipped for 50%. use that money to strengthen the country. and I don't mean piss it away on defense.

Its not a wealth tax, so that's not really how it would play out in theory.

didn't read the link but thought it was what ive heard proposed by certain people on the left.

and obv meant reality.

From each according to their ability. To each according to their need.

I need about 5 million a year.

A maximum wage sounds great in theory to zero-thought types (the literal knee-jerk liberal stereotype like LedOut) but would have basically no significant effect unless the cap is low enough to seriously effect people like doctors, lawyers etc. Most of the serious wealthy don't amass that wealth from wages, they get it through capital gains. You'd probably hit a few atheletes and hollywood types and somehow the end result would be more money in the pockets of team owners and studio execs.

than we need an income cap instead of a wage cap