is there already a UNIVERSAL UNANIMOUS HUMAN WILL to hav a reduced range of pay/hr?

Question

[we hav pay/hr range from 1000th to million times world-av hrly pay - every worker in the world [4 bn], including homemakers [2 bn] & tertiary students, wd be paid US$15/hr [2006 $s] if we had eql pay/hr] - ie, family wrking av hard wd be on US$75,000/yr

which wd u choose?

1] a world in which u were the highest paid person in the world, in which pay/frtnt ranged from $1 to $1 bn, with 1 bn on less than $1/day [200th of world av], 3 bn on lessthan $2/day, 90% on lessthan 10th of av, 99% on lessthan av, 1% on up to a mn x av, with the extreme violence, danger, unpeace, waste, trouble, disease, etc

2] a world in which overpay/underpay is justly limited by limiting fortunes to the maximum a person can earn by their own work, greatly reduced war, crime, poverty & disease, with liberty, equality, fraternity [= global friendliness], low defense costs [in lives [both the killed & the employed in defense industry], taxes, damage & destrctn of person & property]

a no-brainer?

Answer 1

Neither. There is a middle way between these two extremes. Love and respect for all. More pay for innovation, long hours, responsibility, rare gifts than for drudgery. If you were the employer and all your staff were your brothers and sisters, wouldn't you still pay the one who had the best ideas for your business's prosperity much more than the one who only chipped in to wait tables at peak hours and otherwise hung around on street corners?