S12: Income Inequality Reduction Act (tabled)

[fhtagn]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: JustinTimeCuber

[fhtagn]

*cricket chirping sounds*

[JustinTimeCuber]

I think this is a good idea because rising income disparities are killing the middle class. Does anyone really think that the CEOs of companies do 300 times the work as their average employee? That's what the current income differences would imply. I'm open to changing the exact figure in the bill (currently 30 times) if it seems necessary. I believe Former Delegate Jacobin American wrote the original legislation.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Would there be any legal issues with this bill?
[post #3000]

[fhtagn]

So if this passes, how can we expect the excess money to actually go to the employees lower on the totem pole? Does this cap include bonuses?

Also, for someone who is running a large company where the top earners make that much more, if this were put in place, what incentive would there be for them to stay in the South, vs moving their operations elsewhere?

[JustinTimeCuber]

Also, for someone who is running a large company where the top earners make that much more, if this were put in place, what incentive would there be for them to stay in the South, vs moving their operations elsewhere?

Good point. Maybe this would be better on the national level.

[West_Midlander]

Also, for someone who is running a large company where the top earners make that much more, if this were put in place, what incentive would there be for them to stay in the South, vs moving their operations elsewhere?

Good point. Maybe this would be better on the national level.

The points made by the Speaker and the Delegate from Missouri are all valid.

The bill doesn't ensure greater income for low-wage earners and it's likely that extra money would go directly into the business. While stimulating the economy, it would not provide for a greater standard of living for the poor and middle class, just a technical reduction of income inequality by not lifting up workers and lowering the wages of the company owners.

Also: Companies would be able to leave the South (due to this regulation) with relative ease while staying in Atlasia. I think measures (a tax) to prevent outsourcing (on the federal level), a minimum wage increase (on the state or federal level), and a CEO multiplier cap, such as is proposed in this bill, on the federal level would better suit the needs of the Southern worker.

[West_Midlander]

Also, for someone who is running a large company where the top earners make that much more, if this were put in place, what incentive would there be for them to stay in the South, vs moving their operations elsewhere?

Good point. Maybe this would be better on the national level.

If the bill sponsor, JustinTimeCuber, suggests that this policy would be better approached on the federal level, perhaps we should table it?
Awaiting analysis by AZ

[diptheriadan]

I should note that AZ is currently working on analysis of this bill.

[diptheriadan]

Here's AZ's analysis:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1h_jfUNraRiRXVYQmNzT1NPaXh0akt6cU5ENU9BR1EzNmRZ/view

[JustinTimeCuber]

Order! The question is on the motion to table. Members, please vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN. You have 48 hours.

[West_Midlander]

AYE

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

AYE

[JustinTimeCuber]

AYE

[diptheriadan]

Did no one read the ing analysis?!?

[JustinTimeCuber]

Did no one read the ing analysis?!?

What? I read it.

[fhtagn]

Why exactly are we tabling it?

Just based on the analysis, it makes more sense to just kill it vs table it for another time.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Why exactly are we tabling it?

Just based on the analysis, it makes more sense to just kill it vs table it for another time.

What's the difference between killing it and tabling it?

[JustinTimeCuber]

Why exactly are we tabling it?

Just based on the analysis, it makes more sense to just kill it vs table it for another time.

What's the difference between killing it and tabling it?

it's mostly a DINO (difference in name only) from what I could tell.

Main difference is that iirc tabling doesn't require cloture, and since we seemed to be in agreement on not passing the bill as it is written I thought that would be the most efficient means to do so.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Why exactly are we tabling it?

Just based on the analysis, it makes more sense to just kill it vs table it for another time.

What's the difference between killing it and tabling it?

it's mostly a DINO (difference in name only) from what I could tell.

Main difference is that iirc tabling doesn't require cloture, and since we seemed to be in agreement on not passing the bill as it is written I thought that would be the most efficient means to do so.

Any downsides that accompany the lack of need for cloture?

[JustinTimeCuber]

Why exactly are we tabling it?

Just based on the analysis, it makes more sense to just kill it vs table it for another time.

What's the difference between killing it and tabling it?

it's mostly a DINO (difference in name only) from what I could tell.

Main difference is that iirc tabling doesn't require cloture, and since we seemed to be in agreement on not passing the bill as it is written I thought that would be the most efficient means to do so.

Any downsides that accompany the lack of need for cloture?

I don't think so. If you think about it, if you can't get cloture you aren't going to pass the bill, so you shouldn't NEED cloture to kill the bill, if that makes sense.

[diptheriadan]

Ah, sh**t. I thought that this was the final vote. Carry on.

[West_Midlander]

Why exactly are we tabling it?

Just based on the analysis, it makes more sense to just kill it vs table it for another time.

What's the difference between killing it and tabling it?

it's mostly a DINO (difference in name only) from what I could tell.

Main difference is that iirc tabling doesn't require cloture, and since we seemed to be in agreement on not passing the bill as it is written I thought that would be the most efficient means to do so.

Any downsides that accompany the lack of need for cloture?

I don't think so. If you think about it, if you can't get cloture you aren't going to pass the bill, so you shouldn't NEED cloture to kill the bill, if that makes sense.

[fhtagn]

Anyway, I guess let's get this tabled!

AYE

[West_Midlander]

Ah, sh**t. I thought that this was the final vote. Carry on.

lol