you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I don't believe those are the only two options, maybe they are in the current political system. I couldn't accept 100 million if I worked with people I knew weren't getting paid adequately, even if I thought I did 10% of the work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    They are the options though, he can then share his if he wants which others have done or mandate a minimum or something but that is for unions to do.

    I absolutely could, the alternarive being for neither to have it and it be kept.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -1 points 2 months ago

    I think that's narrow-minded but maybe I'm being naive. As neither one of us are in that position we can only continue to speculate. But until major actor throws their weight behind a union they are effectively a part of the owner class. You can't have 100 million dollars and not be a part of the owning class, at some point you stop being a worker and I think that amount is when you no longer have to work while still having a good life (like 5 mil). If the options were keep it or lose it to the owners, you're right keeping it is the better option.

  • source
  • parent