10% or 10:1 Social Contract

How much more are one person's skills and labor worth compared to another's?

Ben & Jerry's corporate effort to keep salaries within the company at a 10:1 ratio were a failure. Their goal was that the highest paid executive would make no more than 10 times the lowest paid employee. Over time, they said they couldn't get qualified executives for that lowly amount (or couldn't make any money paying people higher than minimum wage?) I mean, how rich should someone get selling ice cream ? Or, do you need the most highly qualified financial wizards in the country to manage the sales of ice cream ? What's wrong with this picture?

Well, Ben & Jerry washed their hands of the idealistic failure, sold the financially successful company to a giant conglomerate, and feel they can do better by donating the millions they made to charity than they could by trying to run a company under higher principles. I've got news for anyone who thinks this is a great model: (secular) charity comes in a poor fourth to corporations, government, and religion.

Many sects mandate or recommend a 10% principle -- that is, you are required or should donate 10% of your income to the church. The churches have gotten wealthy this way.

What if a group of people tried to put Ben & Jerry's 10:1 ratio into real life practice. Let's call it a "social contract group." Individuals participating would form a group whereby the highest paid individuals would agree to assist in some way the lowest paid individuals. The amount of assistance would make their income levels 10:1 -- that is, any income an individual made that was over 10 times the wage of the lowest wage earner would be donated and used by the organization to either supplement the lower income wage or pay for their schooling, or whatever. Presumedly, people being helped could move up in the ranks to reduce their amount of assistance, and give back to the group. The group would seek to be representative of the surrounding socioeconomic environment, accepting new members as it was capable of managing the financial infrastructure.