closer to equal pay/hr removes temptation to depart from the work that gives one most intrinsic satisfaction, joy, happiness, fulfillment, to a job wih more money & less [or little, or no] intrinsic satisfaction? [this was plato's definition of justice: everyone doing the work they love best - like liver cells doing liver job, etc]
also: ppl doing satisfying work means higher quality work - eg, overpaying doctors, politicians, leaders, means real healing-loving ppl, etc are elbowed out by the avaricious [read 'naked empress' for a portrait of the AMA as taken over by false docs] - power corrupts, ie, the most avaricious [selfdestructive, evil, false] congregate round the biggest moneypots - eg, papacy, bishops, govt, televangelists - contrast the founding fathers fixing clergy salaries to prevent corruption of religion [fat friars], prohibiting entail, primogeniture to prevent 'pseudo-aristocracies' ie corrupt plutocracies
plus: extreme range of wealth/power is antiliberty
2006-10-13 12:55:52 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Economics
I agree with most of this.
Healing-loving people are mostly "HSPs" (Highly Sensitive People) as defined by Elaine Aron. We do not need more power, we need structures that are not based on "power over" but on personal power.
2006-10-15 04:39:00 · answer #1 · answered by MBK 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So, instead of letting free people decide how much they are willing to pay for something or how much they have to have for their honest toil the value would be assigned. By who?
It seems to me this great decider would take upon themselves an authority both unnecessary and in disproportion to the benefit recieved by any of their subjects.
2006-10-15 08:56:06 · answer #2 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋