NationStates Jolt Archive

"There is a terrible amount of income inequality around the world. Some people are earning almost nothing, while others are earning billions of €uros/dollars every year. This is a disgrace. This inequality causes a feeling of misery and hopelessness among the people who are paid the lowest wages. Inequality causes terrible poverty and wealth is never shared. A more equal society will be for the benefit of all humanity.

This proposal will require than noone will get paid more than 100% more than anyone else in each country around the world. This will help to dramatically reduce poverty and will create a better, more equal world for everyone."

Please endorse this proposal and help fight poverty.

United Socialist States of Europaland

Income gaps of any kind are meaningless in my country.

Inequality causes terrible poverty and wealth is never shared.

Is it really never shared? Does this mean there are no such things as charity, and people like Bill Gates for example doesn’t give hundreds of millions of dollar each year to such charity?

This proposal will require than noone will get paid more than 100% more than anyone else in each country around the world.

So are you saying that the income is gauged on the country or by the world? Is this saying if I have a powerhouse economy I will be giving money to someone who has an imploded economy? That in itself is stupid, if a government doesn’t care that the economy is bad or does but can’t do anything about it, you shouldn’t steal money from my country so it’s fair. While we are on this whole everyone is paid the same do you realize how stupid that is? Since when should I be paid the same amount as a doctor lawyer or CEO when they put in far more than 40 hours a week? That makes perfect since let’s all get paid the same for increasing different levels of work in time and difficulty sign me up for mall cop! 20 hours a week and I can live as good as the best brain surgeon in the world!

The primary goal of any human is to become better than his or her neighbor; that's just basic instinct. If there is only a little possible improvement, morale will drop to almost nothing.

"There is a terrible amount of income inequality around the world. Some people are earning almost nothing, while others are earning billions of €uros/dollars every year. This is a disgrace. This inequality causes a feeling of misery and hopelessness among the people who are paid the lowest wages. Inequality causes terrible poverty and wealth is never shared. A more equal society will be for the benefit of all humanity.

This proposal will require than noone will get paid more than 100% more than anyone else in each country around the world. This will help to dramatically reduce poverty and will create a better, more equal world for everyone."

Please endorse this proposal and help fight poverty.

United Socialist States of Europaland

Wait so if a single bum refuses to work, then nobody will be allowed to make money? This proposal is insane. The only way to enforce it is through tyranny. And even if all the wealth is evenly distributed now, it's not unreasonable to suggest that the same rich people today will again be the richest people in twenty years. When the Union took away plantations after the Civil War, many of the same plantation owners and their families that lost their fortunes in 1865 were the wealthy elite again by 1890.

While we in Gurthark support improving the lives of the least fortunate, and have a tax structure which effectively creates a maximum income, this proposal goes much, much too far.

Effectively, you are stating that a country with a minimum wage of $4 U.S./hour should have a maximum wage of $8 U.S./hour. This all but removes any incentive for people to move from unskilled to skilled labor, to acquire an education, or even to work their hardest.

Gurthark believes in capitalism seriously tempered by social welfare and the protection of common goods, but we do, fundamentally, believe in capitalism. Our minimum wage guarantees a full-time employee 150,000 bersnaps/year (10 Bersnaps is approximately $1 U.S.), half of which is the guaranteed welfare granted to all citizens regardless of occupational staus; our maximum available income is 2,000,000 bersnaps/year. This prevents shocking gaps between rich and poor, but also preserves a real financial incentive structure, and a very strong economy (not, admittedly, one of the strongest in the world--but we believe that the economy is there to serve the people, rather than the other way around, and we believe ours is doing an admirable job of serving our people). We believe that this resolution would make such strong economies all but impossible.

Sincerely,
Miranda Googleplex
United Nations Ambassador
Community of Gurthark

(not, admittedly, one of the strongest in the world--but we believe that the economy is there to serve the people, rather than the other way around, and we believe ours is doing an admirable job of serving our people)

False dichotomy. The economy is just there...it's just a name given to all the transactions that occur between individuals. It neither serves nor is served by anyone.

(not, admittedly, one of the strongest in the world--but we believe that the economy is there to serve the people, rather than the other way around, and we believe ours is doing an admirable job of serving our people)

False dichotomy. The economy is just there...it's just a name given to all the transactions that occur between individuals. It neither serves nor is served by anyone.

Perhaps I let my rhetoric get away with me a little there. All I was trying to say was this: Some governments run their countries with their eyes fixed firmly on economic indicators such as GDP per capita. They consider themselves successful when these figures go up, and unsuccessful when they go down. We in Gurthark, by contrast, think that "economic health" measures like GDP per capita tell only part of the story about the well-being of our people (unlike most hardcore socialist nations, we do think it's an important part, but it's just one part). We try to create policy that helps keep these figures up, *in so far* as we believe that doing so serves our citizens. However, when we think a policy would not improve our citizens' well-being in net, we avoid it, even if it would "improve our economy" by the standard measurements. That's what I meant by the economy being there to "serve the people," rather than the other way around.

Sincerely,
Miranda Googleplex
United Nations Ambassador
Community of Gurthark