Earlier quoted context omitted.
Off the top of my head: - Tie tax rates/benefits/penalties to the discrepancy between CEO/C-suite pay and average/lowest-paid employee pay - Tax benefits to companies who provide enriching programs for employees (like some universities that offer tuition benefits and programs to help you get mortgages, etc) - Tax penalties for not giving COL raises each year Etc.
>- Tie tax rates/benefits/penalties to the discrepancy between CEO/C-suite pay and average/lowest-paid employee pay All that's going to do is cause companies to jettison their lowest paying employees. For instance, Apple would outsource janitors to another company (i'm pretty sure they already do that) and spin out apple stores/genius to another company. That way, the only people you have left are tim cook and other…
Our system is completely fucked.
But we're all stopping shy of having THAT conversation, so to address some points:
> All that's going to do is cause companies to jettison their lowest paying employees. For instance, Apple would outsource janitors to another company (i'm pretty sure they already do that) and spin out apple stores/genius to another company. That way, the only people you have left are tim cook and other highly paid engineers/designers making 6 figures. Yay we fixed the pay gap!
True, but this would still overall be beneficial because the CEOs of those janitorial companies are now paid more in line with the janitors, which means that the working conditions are more likely to improve.
> Sound like that would push employers into moving more of their compensation to year-end bonuses, which can be arbitrarily raised/lowered without being subject to "COL raises". In other words, "good news, you have received a COL raise of 5% this year! bad news, your year end bonus has dropped by 5%"
Probably, but how many employees in America get year end bonuses? Because I've gotten like...2 and I've worked a decent range of jobs. They're way less common than you think. Yes, this would probably mean the people at the top would start taking from the middle instead of the bottom to retain their profit. It's not ideal, but I'd rather someone be stuck renting longer/have to cut their grocery bill (middle class) than end up homeless (lower class).
You're right about the enrichment programs, though, now that I think about it. There's a reason I mostly saw that in universities, I'd imagine.