[BMiles2112]

Only if you reduce the costs of living in America concordantly. Of course, this is called 'deflation' and is very destructive.
I have two problems with that:
First, if the corporations pay out $20,000 less annually, on average, to each employee, that would have two effects. It would increase the profits of the company, which would be used for some other purpose. The money doesn't disapper from the economy. Also, the price of the product would likely go down, offsetting the deflationary effect of lower wages earned by its employees.
Second, given the option of working for less or not working at all, which would you choose?

[Lazamataz]

Also, the price of the product would likely go down, offsetting the deflationary effect of lower wages earned by its employees.

This is known as 'deflation', and -- while I am not an economist, I've had a few courses -- is extremely destructive to modern economies. Cash hoarding begins to occur, as cash becomes more valuable by the day. People tend not to spend valuable cash. The concept of interest on loans is negated -- people can simply borrow money that becomes more valuable by the day. Lenders won't lend.

You are hoping for a scenario that would pretty much ruin the country.

Second, given the option of working for less or not working at all, which would you choose?

*sneer* That's a hell of a choice. Lose your left leg, or only your left foot.

[RussianConservative]

Less monies, mean less price to buy items, mean less item produced or price drop...but what of input prices (you know, resource, energy to make item)? They not go down, so profit margin slip and less produced, then less paid to peoples or more peoples fired and cycle start again...deflation.

[RussianConservative]

Salary and tax work on bell curve. At some point less pay mean fewer worker because they use time spent at work for something more profitable then that...so you cut pay and eventually no one work. Same as tax, you raise tax and eventually no one produce, not worth what left.