This isn't anything new. It's essentially Social Credit policy.
In the equation: A + B = C
A is what people make, C is what they need, then B must be the 'Social Credit' / Mincome that people need to bridge the gap and the government must provide.
The whole thing breaks down when you realize that you have to factor in that the B in the equation has to come from somewhere in the economy, and the addition of B to the equation simultaneously decreases A through less employment and lower employment pay (employers/customers to pay the higher taxes) and increases C through the inflation created by giving away money, and thus a similar balance as before will exist anyway.
If I was to give my opinion I would agree with the corporate CEO pay cap (although 12 times might be a little low in practical terms), but disagree with the minimum income concept. Poor and weak corporate governance has created an executive class whose fortunes are no longer tied with the fortunes of their shareholders and to the fortunes of the middle and lower classes who work in these organizations. Hence the stagnation of middle and lower incomes.
|