Over the course of the year following Dan Price’s April 2015 announcement, he was embroiled in a legal battle with his brother Lucas, co-owner of Gravity Payments. Lucas Price sued Dan, claiming that his brother had violated the 2008 agreement governing the ownership and management of the company. Under the terms of that agreement, Dan owned 67.5 percent of the company, and Lucas stepped away from what had previously been his day-to-day involvement in the company. Lucas sued in part, because he says his brother had failed to involve him even in very major decisions-including the decision to change how much Gravity workers were paid. The lawsuit also claimed that Dan was paying himself too much. Court documents showed that Dan had tried to get his own total compensation raised to $5.5 million, which amounted to more than half of the company’s total revenue. At the time of writing, the judge in the case had agreed to the two brother’s request to be allowed to attempt to resolve their problems out-of-court, through mediation.

Answer the following Questions:

What consequences, good and bad, short- and long-term, can you reasonably foresee from this appointment?

What principles might be cited to defend this position? What principles might it violate?

What would be the virtues necessary for someone to be a good compensation czar? What vices would make such a person bad in this position?

Should government set a "maximum wage" limit in the way that it sets a minimum wage?