A person making $100K a year is a lot closer to someone making $45K a year than the executives making many millions a year.
Not really, because someone making $100k per year has $55k each year to invest in capital. And capital compounds. 20 years later that person will be making millions per year too, while the person making $45k is forever stuck there with no opportunity for escape.
Like you pointed out yourself, it is the wealth gap, not the income gap, that is pertinent.
But in this specific case (the link in OP), the discussion is centred around employee/employer relations. In that context it’s employee compensation that seems more relevant to the discussion.
Employers have control over how much they pay people, so if they are complaining about “lazy people”, it feels fair to point out lowered compensation and benefits year over year if you factor in inflation.
Not really, because someone making $100k per year has $55k each year to invest in capital. And capital compounds. 20 years later that person will be making millions per year too, while the person making $45k is forever stuck there with no opportunity for escape.
Like you pointed out yourself, it is the wealth gap, not the income gap, that is pertinent.
I can agree with that overall.
But in this specific case (the link in OP), the discussion is centred around employee/employer relations. In that context it’s employee compensation that seems more relevant to the discussion.
Employers have control over how much they pay people, so if they are complaining about “lazy people”, it feels fair to point out lowered compensation and benefits year over year if you factor in inflation.