Friday, February 05, 2010

The Maximum Wage

The Maximum Wage

There was a time when the American dream meant a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage. Remember, we are a nation of immigrants, many of whom came to this country with little more than the clothes on their back. For them, it was enough to build a safe life where their children would never face the hardships that brought them to our shores. That was the American dream.

Today, however, the American Dream is one of mansions and private planes. It is a dream of wealth, fame and power so limitless that it can never, actually be achieved. This dream has created a new generation of Robber Barons who are willing to do almost anything, destroy the environment, enslave workers in the most oppressive conditions, and even start wars in order to add one more million to their already bloated bank accounts. And we have allowed them to do it.

It’s time for that to end.

For years, we have had a minimum wage in this country. I think we need a maximum wage as well.

I propose that we limit income (salary and bonuses) to one million dollars a year. That’s it. That’s all you can make. I don’t care if you’re a big movie star, a baseball player or the president of Pepsi. One million. No more.

Does this sound un-American to you? Does it stink of socialism or communism? Well, how American is it to have people going to bed hungry? To have parents working two and three jobs to pay for their children’s medical expenses? How American is it to support dictators and fight wars over oil?

Does this mean I’m against people getting rich? Absolutely not. I believe that success, hard work and innovation should be rewarded. If you bring a company from bankruptcy to solvency, write the great American novel or design a better mousetrap you should definitely make good money.

The question is, “how much money, is good money?” Right now, according to our society, the answer to that question is, “as much as you can possibly get.”

The truth is one million dollars a year is a shitload of money. It’s enough for mansions and Rolls Royces and first class trips around the world. In other words, you’re going to be just fine.

But there are a lot of people making one hell of a lot more than that. For instance, over the last three years, the top 5 executives at 20 financial institutions (all of whom received bailout money) had combined compensations of over 3.2 Billion dollars. Do the math. That’s 100 guys averaging over ten million a year whose companies were inches away from bankruptcy.

All I’m suggesting is that they get a pay cut from dirty, stinking, ridiculously rich down to just very, very rich.

We stand at the brink of both economic and environmental collapse. We are all going to have to make sacrifices and if that means that some CEO is going to have to settle for last year’s Lear Jet then so be it.

So what am I suggesting here? Am I talking about massive taxes or automatic garnishing of the wages of millionaires? No. All I’m suggesting is a simple salary cap. How the company chooses to spend the millions they will be saving is up to them.

But, here are a few suggestions.

Lower your prices.

Sick of all those fees your bank is charging you? What about your cellphone bill or cable company? How about the interest rate on your credit card that just skyrocketed? You can’t afford to pay for health care but the CEO of your insurance provider can afford to buy his own private island.

Pay your employees more.

In 1981 the average CEO made 42 times more than his average employee. Today that average is 431 to 1. WalMart CEO H. Lee Scott received $29.7 million in 2007, which is 1,314 times the salary of the average Walmart employee. And, of course, those are American wages. If you compared CEO salaries to offshore employees where wages are often set at pennies an hour, those ratios would be in the tens of thousands.

Treat your employees better

And it’s not just salaries. We’ve heard the excuse over and over, “We can’t afford to give our employees health care/Better working conditions/child care, etc. Well, we’ve just put a few extra million dollars in your coffers to do just that. And again, the offshore situation is far worse. Although I wont go so far as to say that we use slave labor to build our products, it’s not that far from the truth. Policies which we would find abhorrent in the US, child labor, unsafe conditions, massive hours etc. are common practices at American run companies all over the world.

Treat the environment better

Again, we’ve heard the excuse, “We can’t afford to clean up our factories.” Well, I for one believe that if you’re taking home 20 million dollars and you’re still poisoning our planet, you’re not trying hard enough.

Be a better citizen

If corporations are to be given all the rights of a citizen (as the supreme court just mistakenly ruled) then it’s time for them to take on the responsibilities of a citizen. None of us live in isolation. We all have a shared duty to take care of our communities, our children, our planet and our people.

You might say that the maximum wage would only provide a small fraction of the funds we need to solve the massive problems of our time and you’d probably be right. However, this isn’t just about the money. It’s about the motivation. With salaries capped, our business leaders can no longer benefit from some of the destructive and dangerously short sighted policies they have used in the past.

These are people in positions of tremendous power and power, as we all know, corrupts. We cannot eliminate the consequences of that corruption but we can, at least, rein in the rewards.

The truth is I believe in capitalism. I believe that hard work, innovation, and even good luck should be rewarded but I also believe that the unrestrained quest for wealth is dangerous and if we’re not careful it might just transform the American Dream into the American Nightmare.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

14 Comments:

Blogger Urban Barbarian said...

Interesting.

If you ran or came up with Walmart, how much money do you think you should make each year compared to your average checkout guy/girl?

Mind you, you're in charge of all the Walmarts everywhere. Maybe you even "created" Walmart. All of these people rely on you to intelligently run your business and steadily employ them.

$1M a year? Same as the guy or gal that came up with something the equivalent of the Slap Chop? A guy that created one product and maybe you even carry this one product in your store. He'll make as much as you do. Does that seem fair?

11:52 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

Nope. You're absolutely right. it is definitely not fair.

But it is also not fair for the guy who runs walmart to make so much while his employees work at wages well below the poverty line.

Or who keeps his prices low by buying from manufacturers who work 9 year old children 16 hours a day.

If CEO's started caring more about our environment, their employees and their customers and if I didn't have to pay to bail them out I'd be happy for them to make tons of money.

The truth is there are definitely aspects of my idea that I'm uncomfortable with but if we're going to survive on this planet we have to change the culture which values wealth and the accumulation of stuff so highly.

and

Does the slap chop guy really make a million a year? Damn. I'm in the wrong line of work.

12:12 PM  
Blogger Urban Barbarian said...

LOL. Slap Chop... Probably more.

I think a higher minimum wage is a better answer, perhaps. If you're paying employees/manufacturers higher wages than there's less to skim off the top, right?

Also, what happens when everyone makes, say, $60K+ a year? Then $60K is the new lower income ratio. There's still going to be the haves and the have nots. Which, of course is not your point. I believe you're talking about observing certain human rights/needs, such as food/shelter, etc.

I think the idea is to create jobs with fair incomes and provide reasonable subsidizing for the homeless/sick/elderly. Does a maximum wage create those things? Honestly, I have no idea.

12:37 PM  
Blogger Parvenue said...

Let me try to recast your argument in a less controversial, and perhaps more achievable way...

With a tip of the hat to the Josephson Institute for Ethics, what needs to happen is a recognition of and support for all "stakeholders" in a particular situation.
Walmart needs to consider the management, the shareholders, the customers, the employees, the local community, the suppliers, etc. in its policies and business practices. It seems that the management and shareholders' interests are the only ones that have been considered and that is the problem...

This is what generally has to change in this country...more concern for all stakeholders and not just the few powerful ones.

The culture/media needs to get behind this, but won't since it is against the powerful's interests.

I guess we need to rely on Republicans to make this happen since they have the extraordinary gift of making people vote for things that are against their own interests.

1:04 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

Absolutely, I couldn't agree with both of you more.

I would much rather have a system without my, albeit somewhat arbitrary, salary restrictions.

If we, not only as a nation but as a world, could agree on basic human rights, basic minimum wages, and basic protections for our environment there would be no need for my crazy ideas.

The problem is we haven't been able to do it and the corporations now wield so much power in the world that they are very difficult to overcome despite the fact that (as you say Parvenue) they are frequently working directly against our own best interests.

1:17 PM  
Blogger greebs said...

The salary cap idea makes sense - though I think I'd go higher than $1MM and put in some measures to adjust it every now and again. But it would be meaningless if the company funnels those savings back into nicer office chairs, etc. - the key is to spread it around. And a salary cap only works when every "team" has the same amount to play with.

The employer/CEO ratio is something that could be boxed in, and I suppose could even possibly work. But I think this is an idea that I like - but sounds better in concept than execution.

That all being said, your criticisms of the current structure are spot f-ing on. Testify!

1:33 PM  
Blogger Parvenue said...

One of the many many problems I have with the salary cap is determining who gets to decide what it is....No doubt there are millions of Americans who consider $100,000 a fortune....when I first started practicing law in 1974 and got a job making $1200 a month I recall thinking "Boy, if I could make $25,000 per year I'd be set"..

2:24 PM  
Blogger Steve said...

Parvenue,

That's particularly true when you think about the billion people in the world who subsist on less than a dollar a day.

The truth is most people in the US are stressed about money but almost everyone in this country would be considered wealthy when compared to most of the population of the world.

I picked one million a year because from my perspective that would allow someone to do pretty much whatever they wanted and to provide for their children.

Is it the right number? Probably not. Could we all agree on what's right? Don't know.

Do we need to start looking more carefully at what we value in this country?

Absolutely.

Thanks for the great comments!

Steve

2:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10:59 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Again, another opinion with which I couldn't agree more. Sure, the number would be hard to establish and there would be all of these "new" ways to avoid declaring your salaries, but it is increasingly disturbing that most corporations and the people running them are interested in wealth for wealth's sake.

And as far as the supreme court ruling...don't get me started. Until a corporation can be put behind bars, serve and die in the military, or just simply breathe, there will always be a difference between them and you and me. It's not even like a corporation can vote. (perhaps I shouldn't even mention this because maybe now it will happen.). Why not just get to the point of this already. Rich people think they are more important and believe they are entitled to more influence in our political future. At least in the days of the 3/5ths compromise the absurdities were more explicit... It is likely nit far off that are vote will simply be weighted against our adjusted gross incomes. (At least that would get people to declare their income instead of hiding it overseas or by other shady means.)

Sorry for the tangent. Nice post.

5:57 AM  
Blogger Steve said...

Never apologize for a good tangent.

I couldn't agree more.

I was actually thinking of writing a blog on just that theme.

If corporations want to be treated as citizens they should act like them.

10:32 AM  
Blogger yaya said...

This is class war.

Where do I sign up?

11:53 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have really great taste on catch article titles, even when you are not interested in this topic you push to read it

5:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read about it some days ago in another blog and the main things that you mention here are very similar

4:58 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home