Environmental Economics

I’m surprised you don’t object to this. Here’s my two cents worth.
1. No one deserves 1000 times more that another worker.
2. I’d make laws to limit salaries but that won’t work.
3. So I’d tax very progressively
4. You are the economist here so break it down. Working 80hr/wk deserves twice as much as 40/wk- spending time and money to train for more difficult work(ie. doctors) deserves say 5-20 times more. Making better life decisions, applying yourself, other good choices deserves a little more. Add these things up and you maybe can justify a 50-100 times ratio not a 1000.
5. the other things, more smarts, 7 feet tall, good contacts, right place right time, family connections all are just the luck of the draw. they are not earned. they are luck. Tax luck very progressively. Kobe 90%. Warren 95%. Government services need to be paid for somehow.
Make luck pay more. That’s my view of fair share.

No one deserves 1000 times more that another worker.
Why not?
I’d make laws to limit salaries but that won’t work.
You’re right, that won’t work. Incentives generate productivity.
So I’d tax very progressively
Again, why? Because of your arbitrary definition of fairness, you seem to want to create incentives against trying to earn more.
You are the economist here so break it down. Working 80hr/wk deserves twice as much as 40/wk
Overtime is often paid at 1.5 regular wages. I assume then that you are opposed to overtime pay?
“- spending time and money to train for more difficult work(ie. doctors) deserves say 5-20 times more.”
Arbitrary. If I want to pay my doctor 50 times more than I pay my babysitter, shouldn’t that be my choice?
“Making better life decisions, applying yourself, other good choices deserves a little more.”
Arbitrary. I’m picturing in your world a formula or menu of how much you get for what…You showed up for work today ($10), you didn’t surf the internet ($5)…
“Add these things up and you maybe can justify a 50-100 times ratio not a 1000.”
Where’s the line? And why do you (or anyone for that matter) get to decide?
Consider two factories both producing widgets. Widegets are produced by individuals and require no specialized training. In factory A, all workers get $100 a day regardless of how many widgets each worker produces. In factory B, all workers get $1 per widget produced.
Which factory do you think is going to produce more widgets? Which factory do you think will produce higher average wages for its workers?
“5. the other things, more smarts, 7 feet tall, good contacts, right place right time, family connections all are just the luck of the draw.
they are not earned. they are luck.”
I was having fun with #’s 1-4, but this is just nonsense.
Kobe is paid what Kobe is paid because a lot of people are willing to pay a lot of money to watch Kobe do what Kobe does. While I agree that you can’t teach height, there are plenty of 6’6″ people out there who can’t do what Kobe does. I am 6’3″ and can’t even come close.
By your definition, everything everyone does is a crap shoot and no one should be rewarded for the outcomes.
“Tax luck very progressively. Kobe 90%. Warren 95%. Government services need to be paid for somehow.”
This can be done without creating disincentives to be better at what you do…

Continued from above and awaiting response.
Hi Mal,
Tim Haab has replied to your comment:
1. No one deserves 1000 times more that another worker.
Why not? BECAUSE THEY CAN NOT WORK THAT MUCH HARDER. THEY ARE LUCKY
2. I’d make laws to limit salaries but that won’t work.
You’re right, that won’t work. Incentives generate productivity. FREE MARKETS WORK BEST
3. So I’d tax very progressively
Again, why? Because of your arbitrary definition of fairness, you seem to want to create incentives against trying to earn more. YOU WILL ALWAYS EARN MORE JUST LESS MORE
4. You are the economist here so break it down. Working 80hr/wk deserves twice as much as 40/wk
Overtime is often paid at 1.5 regular wages. I assume then that you are opposed to overtime pay?
“- spending time and money to train for more difficult work(ie. doctors) deserves say 5-20 times more.”
Arbitrary. If I want to pay my doctor 50 times more than I pay my babysitter, shouldn’t that be my choice? YES BUT THEY WILL PAY MORE TAXES
“Making better life decisions, applying yourself, other good choices deserves a little more.”
Arbitrary. I’m picturing in your world a formula or menu of how much you get for what…You showed up for work today ($10), you didn’t surf the internet ($5)… ARBITRARY NOT A FORMULA BUT TRUE
“Add these things up and you maybe can justify a 50-100 times ratio not a 1000.”
Where’s the line? And why do you (or anyone for that matter) get to decide? THE LINE IS NEGOTIABLE , THE FEDS DETERMINE THE PROPER TAX PROGRESSIVITY
Consider two factories both producing widgets. Widegets are produced by individuals and require no specialized training. In factory A, all workers get $100 a day regardless of how many widgets each worker produces. In factory B, all workers get $1 per widget produced.
Which factory do you think is going to produce more widgets? Which factory do you think will produce higher average wages for its workers? FACTORY B
“5. the other things, more smarts, 7 feet tall, good contacts, right place right time, family connections all are just the luck of the draw. they are not earned. they are luck.”
I was having fun with #’s 1-4, but this is just nonsense.
Kobe is paid what Kobe is paid because a lot of people are willing to pay a lot of money to watch Kobe do what Kobe does. While I agree that you can’t teach height, there are plenty of 6’6″ people out there who can’t do what Kobe does. I am 6’3″ and can’t even come close.
By your definition, everything everyone does is a crap shoot and no one should be rewarded for the outcomes. YOU ARE MISSUNDERSTANDING ME. KOBE STILL MAKES HIS MILLIONS. DID KOBE WORK THAT MUCH HARDER DEVELOPING HIS TALENT THAN OTHER 6’6″ ERS OR DID HE HAVE A GENETIC DISPOSITION(LUCK)? . I FACTOR IN THE HARDER WORK
“Tax luck very progressively. Kobe 90%. Warren 95%. Government services need to be paid for somehow.”
This can be done without creating disincentives to be better at what you do…YOU ALWAYS MAKE MORE JUST LESS MORE.
Tim, Do you really think a progressive tax system is bad and do you recall the historical rates. I didn’t look it up but I heard Ben Stein said it was ~90% when he was a kid.