Talk:Maximum wage

message: Who wrote the opening paragraphs of this article? One of the topics of highest agreement among professional economists (read, not wanna-be socialists who took high school economics) is the connection between increases in the supply of high powered money and inflation. I'm sorry, but high wages alone do not create inflation. I would like someone to walk me through an economy where the high powered money supply is fixed, and the advent of high wages, or rising wages in some sectors or for some individuals results in economy-wide inflation. It just dosen't happen. The opening paragraphs of this article are irresponsible. They are a fantasyland excuse for implementing a maximum wage. While I am against a maximum wage law, I do admit that some of the arguments presented have some truth, such as the ability of wage controls to equalize the wealth distribution. (I would point out that price controls do equalize wealth - we all tend to be poorer). However, advocating wage controls as a method to prevent changes in the valuation of currency is pure fantasy; this simply does not happen without changes brought about by central banks in the money supply.
In addition, a valid but overlooked criticism of this policy is that it is totally unenforcable. The United States has outlawed most drugs, prostitution, and many forms of sports betting. However, these activites still occur in black markets throughout the nation, and the world for that matter. I find it hard to believe that the government would be able to enforce maximum wage/wealth laws without an army of investigators, enforcers, prosecutors, and the like. The US has a global army employed in the fighting of narcotics trafficing and by the IRS to investigate tax compliance. All the resources placed in these enforcement roles are essentially wasted - drugs are readily available in the US and tax avoidance couldn't be easier. It could be argued that the deadweight loss placed upon high wealth generating activites by this form of extremely progressive taxation would be more burdensome and unattractive than the original conditions which prompted such a policy. 
-Md Economist
:I just came across this article and at least challenged some of the most doubtful assertions (I probably should have deleted them, anyway, I didn't).  Hopefully the article imparts a more proper understanding now. Mgunn 18:57, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Enforcement would require the elimination of cash money and direct linking of accounts to a person with an automated limit for how much money any one person can receive in a year. Not impossible, but it would require major changes to financial systems. Of course fraud could still take place by people buying themselves a car via their business or the payment of bribes in cars and gold, but this would all be limited and be punishable by jail time (large settlements to stay out of jail wouldn't exist anymore because no one is supposed to be rich anymore). P.S. the stuff about inflation does indeed not make a lot of sense and even if it's true it shouldn't be the main selling point, the main selling point should be the limitation of income and wealth inequality and the positive effects that would have for anyone who's not in the 1%.89.99.122.33 (talk) 00:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please 

message: I think most of the material in here is just bogus/wrong, and it sounds like much of the article was written by a high school economics student.  I generaly avoid deleting wide swathes of text, but much of this articleprobably warrants it.  I think the main points are: (1) explain what a maximum wage is (2) Some economists used to view wage controls as a way to fight inflation... this view is quite discreditted (3) no serious group advocates a maximum wage.  If there are no objections, I'll redo the article. Mgunn 21:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite / Delete? 

message: I heard today that Obama is going to limit corporate earnings in his aid packages. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iYX--wRrv7CQhjxb9FFjidsIvjLQD964VDDG0 should this be included in the article? wiesel (talk) 20:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obama maximum wage 

message: I was wondering if the article should discuss the disincentives for governments to impose a maximum wage or have extremely high tax rates for the highest marginal rate because according to the laffer curve you want to tax income at the point where government tax revenue is maximized. In addition, in the 1990s the highest federal tax rate in the U.S. was 39.6% for personal income taxpayers and in addition interest rates (federal funds rate) were low because Alan Greenspan recognized the productivity revolution that began in 1995 compelling him to set low interest rate targets for the federal funds rate. Basically, tax rates and interest rates were low during the 1990s and the commodity price level was much lower in the 1990s versus the 2000s, signifying that in certain instances when income is not taxed in a punitive manner, but maximized to maximize government tax revenue, you do not need a maximum wage but sound fiscal and monetary management of the economy to reduce inflation, and promote greater economic growth and government revenue. Someone please respond to these comments to induce further discussion on the subject.65.110.146.154 (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A maximum income law does not mean total taxation as a percentage of GDP has to increase. If you tax everyone 100% above say, $1 million per year, this will affect less than 0.5% of people (in the US) you can use the additional tax income to lower taxes on the other 99.5% of people (if you eliminated all taxes for income below $1 million you could bring down total taxation to something like 10% of GDP, so don't worry about that Laffer Curve). So for every person who has to pay more taxes 199 people end up paying less taxes and it is well known from psychology that going from a net income of $30k to one of $40k is much more motivating than any income beyond $1 million. To disagree with this you'd have to deny every psychological study on the subject AND you'd have to believe the richest 0.5% are supermen who produce more value than 199 ordinary people combined.89.99.122.33 (talk) 00:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the Laffer Curve be discussed in this article?

message: "Maximum Total Earnings legislation suggests that when a person has accumulated sufficient wealth that they can survive on the interest alone they must stop working and allow someone else to work. This theoretical concept assumes there is a set amount of work to be done in an economy, and is not supported by any major form of modern economic thought. Attempts to reduce unemployment by removing people from the labor force, as is proposed by this theory, have been a failure.[citation needed]"
This reeks of NPOV problems. Also, what are the related concepts supposed to be? :-P I propose deletion, if not of the entire section at least this text and insertion of actual related concepts/topics by name. Nlalic (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related concepts...? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Maximum wage. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/history/chapter1.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090331193522/http://justcauseit.com/blogs/susan-janvrin/would-maximum-wage-make-life-better to http://www.ou.edu/class/econ3003/book/area1c12.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:10, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified