Equal wages just kills this, that's why. I will simply say that I'm smarter and harder working than the vast majority. I deserve to be rewarded. More importantly, it's an incentive to be harder working.

Rather than necessarily setting all wages the same, providing a minimum stipend* may retain many of the same positive effects without eliminating economic rewards for more work, innovation, etc. The first 10k or so can do a lot to help people get people out of the zone where they have to make bad long-term choices just to make ends meet week to week.

Of course, the wealth still needs to come from somewhere, but for sake of argument.

* Say $10-20,000, though setting this to something realistic will actually depend on a lot of variables, both personal and regional. Defining "equal wages" is tricky. (Also, the possibility of sudden, huge medical costs, for example, can sabotage the entire system, but that's true now.)

You'd better hope someone benevolent is in charge of minting that global currency.

I didn't down or upvote simply because I think it's an honest suggestion. But it's impractical because the diversity is too vast to warrant an equal playing field such as you're suggesting. There are those that try really hard and succeed magnificently, while there are those that sit back and are too lazy to get anything done and would rather collect welfare. There are polar opposites too, those that try really hard but fail, and those that are lazy and somehow succeed.... you're telling me that no matter where these groups fall, they should all receive equal wages? Reiterating that I didn't downvote you, I can certainly see why someone would. So the explanation I just noted is simply my view and what I've seen and ultimately your concept is not practical nor fair.

In essence, what you're suggesting is communism. Unless i'm misreading your comment, in which case could you please clarify "wages".

Eliminating hunger is a noble goal. Equal prices is a terrible goal and not a way to eliminate hunger.

You can't have equal prices everywhere. If you want to try to force prices to be equal, you would ruin the price system. Without a working price system you would end up with something like the USSR.

Why is equality the ideal? It's not people in the "first world" that are starving, so why not look at what works in the first world? The problem is that in the countries where people are starving, they don't have the economic freedom that enables the wealth that means you don't have to starve.

So I hope that there will be more economic freedom in poorer countries. Then they will be able to achieve a higher standard of living.

> Equal wages/prices for all regardless of geography,

Why?

There are different costs and benefits to living in different places, so why wouldn't the wages vary as well?

And, if you think that that the cost differences can be eliminated, Hawaii is going to become very crowded.

What's your recommendation for something to read about economics, a question I asked HN readers

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=415683

with fewer answers than I expected from this erudite group.

I don't understand why you got downmodded. Although I don't agree with you on equal wages/prices, I do +1 to you just for the freedom of speech sake.

If you've been flamed for this recently, then you have probably been informed of the idea's utter bankruptcy. Why post it again?

How about free food for everyone?