Topic: A CEO, a Tea Party member, and a union worker sit at a table with 12 cookies.
Ks !KansasxqvM started this discussion 15 years ago #11,397
The CEO takes 11 of the cookies, then whispers to the Tea Party member, "I'd watch that guy. I think he's trying to get your cookie".The gap between CEO and average U.S. worker pay rose from a ratio of 263-to-1 in 2009 to 325-to-1 last year.
325:1
You could pay a CEO 25x the pay of an average employee and hire 300 more... something about this scenario reminds me of Rome.
http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/where-gone-jack-welch-ceo-pay-rise-while-193022445.html
I hope Walter sheds some light on how this is a good thing, he is after all, an expert opinion expert.
| Poll option | Votes | Percentage | Graph |
|---|---|---|---|
| CEOs EARN that money! | 3 | 16% | |
| That's fucking ridiculous! | 12 | 63% | |
| lol polls | 4 | 21% |
Voice of !WisdomHsuU joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 10 minutes later[^] [v] #205,137
Even though the CEO rakes in 325x more money, they still have the responsibility of fulfilling the shareholder's demands and they get a higher share because of this importance. What I find even more ridiculous than this is the idea of bailing out these highly-paid CEOs and their companies while over 10% of the nation is unemployed.
Ks !KansasxqvM (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 11 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,138
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
I guess the conflict of interest is totally beyond you? 300 more employees or projects to potentially bring in more profit? Do you not understand business, or profits at all?
I guess the conflict of interest is totally beyond you? 300 more employees or projects to potentially bring in more profit? Do you not understand business, or profits at all?
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 17 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,142
@previous (Ks !KansasxqvM)I totally understand that. The problem is that WE aren't the shareholders, meaning our opinions of how to run business just gets ignored. Did you know that thanks to inflation, we get paid about 40-50% less than those in the 90s in spite of our seemingly higher payroll?
Ks !KansasxqvM (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 24 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,149
@previous (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
No Americans are shareholders? Hmmm... that seems like a pretty wild theory Walter. You keep drinking that koolaid, bud. I understand inflation lol.
> they still have the responsibility of fulfilling the shareholder's demands and they get a higher share because of this importance
Not really, they mostly just approve or disapprove of things. They sign off on stuff basically. No way in HELL do they earn that kind of pay. Sometimes, I honestly think you are delusional, and I don't mean that as an insult, I'm just being honest.
No Americans are shareholders? Hmmm... that seems like a pretty wild theory Walter. You keep drinking that koolaid, bud. I understand inflation lol.
> they still have the responsibility of fulfilling the shareholder's demands and they get a higher share because of this importance
Not really, they mostly just approve or disapprove of things. They sign off on stuff basically. No way in HELL do they earn that kind of pay. Sometimes, I honestly think you are delusional, and I don't mean that as an insult, I'm just being honest.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,155
@205,142 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
So, what you’re trying to say is the minimum wage should be removed or lowered?
So, what you’re trying to say is the minimum wage should be removed or lowered?
Ks !KansasxqvM (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 35 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,160
@previous (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
Imagine how much CEO's could make then! Certainly they would use the extra profit to create more jobs, right? I mean these guys are RESPONSIBLE, we can trust them to always do what's best for the employees, company, shareholders, the environment, and the economy right?
Imagine how much CEO's could make then! Certainly they would use the extra profit to create more jobs, right? I mean these guys are RESPONSIBLE, we can trust them to always do what's best for the employees, company, shareholders, the environment, and the economy right?
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 9 seconds later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,161
@205,149 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
By we, I mean you and I and all who think like us. Of course there are American shareholders, but they do not think like us. They may ACT like they think like us, but they'd do
anything to keep their 9-digit payroll.
> I honestly think you are delusional
I may be delusional, but at least I'm not as delusional as the shareholders that keep on supporting their high payroll.
@205,155 (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
I support the end of the federal reserve.
By we, I mean you and I and all who think like us. Of course there are American shareholders, but they do not think like us. They may ACT like they think like us, but they'd do
anything to keep their 9-digit payroll.
> I honestly think you are delusional
I may be delusional, but at least I'm not as delusional as the shareholders that keep on supporting their high payroll.
@205,155 (protip !!pMmAiEwOm)
I support the end of the federal reserve.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 35 seconds later, 36 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,162
@205,160 (Ks !KansasxqvM)
No. The unions stand in the way of these upstanding companies who truly wish to hire more working class persons for living wages that respect the employees’ dignity.
No. The unions stand in the way of these upstanding companies who truly wish to hire more working class persons for living wages that respect the employees’ dignity.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm double-posted this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 42 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,169
@205,161 (Voice of !WisdomHsuU)
> I may be delusional, but at least I'm not as delusional as the shareholders that keep on supporting their high payroll.
Do you even know how this works? Once a year, you get a huge pile of proxy voting documents in the mail. They’re often wrapped in a plastic shrinkwrap. It’s a shitty scantron that varies by third-party voting provider. You’re presented a list of resolutions (2–12, in my experience) and can vote in various ways—usually something like yes, no, or abstain. The resolutions about executive pay are usually worded oddly and either have a specific resolution number or use a double negative to be unclear.
The board of directors always gets to include their recommendations with these voting documents, and they always are in favor of higher executive pay.
The shareholders are either middle class people with retirement funds—and they don’t give a shit about it—or srs bzns investors who have been taught in business school that executive pay reflects the competitiveness required to keep executives; their pay is always growing, never decreasing, and the business establishment NEVER suggests otherwise.
It’s the system, bud, and the wealthy investors with power are paying off their wealthy executives who are in control. The working class has zero say, except through the (corporate-owned) press, community activism, and their elected representatives. Every single outlet of dissent and discourse is controlled—directly or ideologically—by the establishment.
(I’m not rambling about The Man, conspiracies, or hurr durr librul bias… this shit is real.)
> I may be delusional, but at least I'm not as delusional as the shareholders that keep on supporting their high payroll.
Do you even know how this works? Once a year, you get a huge pile of proxy voting documents in the mail. They’re often wrapped in a plastic shrinkwrap. It’s a shitty scantron that varies by third-party voting provider. You’re presented a list of resolutions (2–12, in my experience) and can vote in various ways—usually something like yes, no, or abstain. The resolutions about executive pay are usually worded oddly and either have a specific resolution number or use a double negative to be unclear.
The board of directors always gets to include their recommendations with these voting documents, and they always are in favor of higher executive pay.
The shareholders are either middle class people with retirement funds—and they don’t give a shit about it—or srs bzns investors who have been taught in business school that executive pay reflects the competitiveness required to keep executives; their pay is always growing, never decreasing, and the business establishment NEVER suggests otherwise.
It’s the system, bud, and the wealthy investors with power are paying off their wealthy executives who are in control. The working class has zero say, except through the (corporate-owned) press, community activism, and their elected representatives. Every single outlet of dissent and discourse is controlled—directly or ideologically—by the establishment.
(I’m not rambling about The Man, conspiracies, or hurr durr librul bias… this shit is real.)
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
Ks !KansasxqvM (OP) replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #205,173
Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 32 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #205,189
It is true that a CEO's pay is ridiculous, but then so are the salaries of many professional athletes, actors, musicians, etc. They are not working harder but they tend to be very, very adept in the field they are in. Sure there are some immoral, ineffective, or inefficient CEOs and CEOs who only got to where they were by knowing the right people, but we should not project them onto everyone. Most of them do their jobs quite well and earn their keep. What is more worrisome is how easy it is for them and their companies to evaid their social obligations, ie: taxes and fair accountability for their actions.
The fact is, the largest corporations in a free market society are very competitive and need to attract the best and brightest. That is why they tend to pay their leadership so well.
The fact is, the largest corporations in a free market society are very competitive and need to attract the best and brightest. That is why they tend to pay their leadership so well.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #205,191
@previous (Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG)
> The fact is, the largest corporations in a free market society are very competitive and need to attract the best and brightest. That is why they tend to pay their leadership so well.
lolbusinessestablishmentline
> The fact is, the largest corporations in a free market society are very competitive and need to attract the best and brightest. That is why they tend to pay their leadership so well.
lolbusinessestablishmentline
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #205,192
@205,189 (Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG)
Tell that to enron, or lehmans brothers... Or well, any of them really. Just scream that into the night sky at the top of your lungs and maybe god will make your wish come true.
Tell that to enron, or lehmans brothers... Or well, any of them really. Just scream that into the night sky at the top of your lungs and maybe god will make your wish come true.
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 13 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #205,198
It is ridiculous and most companies are waking up to this and not paying CEO's so god damn much. The CEO's who own their companies shouldn't be allowed to pay themselves whatever they want. That's bullshit and IMO goes against the laws that are supposed to protect stockholders. They should only be allowed to pay themselves through dividends. That way whatever they pay themselves per share, they have to pay the same amount per share to every other stockholder.
KBR !!7Enb4sycc joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,246
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
> goes against the laws that are supposed to protect stockholders
Putting shareholders before humanity as a whole.
Oh, okay.
> goes against the laws that are supposed to protect stockholders
Putting shareholders before humanity as a whole.
Oh, okay.
sim !Ep8pui8Vw2 replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,249
KBR !!7Enb4sycc replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,251
@previous (sim !Ep8pui8Vw2)
The problem here isn't money getting diverted away from shareholders by CEOs. It's the fact that there's that much money to waste, and yet, poverty still exists.
The problem here isn't money getting diverted away from shareholders by CEOs. It's the fact that there's that much money to waste, and yet, poverty still exists.
sim !Ep8pui8Vw2 replied with this 15 years ago, 49 seconds later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,252
Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4 replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,271
@205,251 (KBR !!7Enb4sycc)
It wouldn't just protect stockholders. It keeps CEOs/owners of corporations from paying themselves any arbitrary amount, which leaves more money to grow the company, hire more people, pay people more, give more benefits, etc, since they can't just take that money.
Sorry not every solution involves just taking money away from the rich and giving it to the poor.
It wouldn't just protect stockholders. It keeps CEOs/owners of corporations from paying themselves any arbitrary amount, which leaves more money to grow the company, hire more people, pay people more, give more benefits, etc, since they can't just take that money.
Sorry not every solution involves just taking money away from the rich and giving it to the poor.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 12 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,282
@previous (Broseph !!fxnDb+Ve4)
Our kind KBR is arguing the general point, which agrees with yours, that the problem is not specifically the general revenues or amounts paid, but that our American system does not appropriately distribute funds. There are massive market inefficiencies that concentrate wealth in few hands.
TL;DR: scarcity of distribution is the problem
Our kind KBR is arguing the general point, which agrees with yours, that the problem is not specifically the general revenues or amounts paid, but that our American system does not appropriately distribute funds. There are massive market inefficiencies that concentrate wealth in few hands.
TL;DR: scarcity of distribution is the problem
Voice of !WisdomHsuU replied with this 15 years ago, 38 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,314
@205,251 (KBR !!7Enb4sycc)
Poverty still exists because of government corruption, not disposable income.
Poverty still exists because of government corruption, not disposable income.
(Edited 24 seconds later.)
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,318
Anonymous E replied with this 15 years ago, 7 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,327
StatistSocialist3000 joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 56 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,384
You guys are asking the wrong questions... I'd love to talk to you on Skype or something real time about it.
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 11 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,399
StatistSocialist3000 replied with this 15 years ago, 23 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,411
protip !!pMmAiEwOm replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,412
StatistSocialist3000 replied with this 15 years ago, 4 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,416
sluggy joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 2 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,510
Look at companies that had large layoffs one year. See what kind of bonuses the upper suits got.
If you believe the CEOs really earn what they deserve (they don't) think about what would happen to a consulting firm that suggested a CEO make leas money.
They won't get any more work.
If you believe the CEOs really earn what they deserve (they don't) think about what would happen to a consulting firm that suggested a CEO make leas money.
They won't get any more work.
Born this Way !dLadyGAgAA joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 1 minute later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,511
cat !COOOOOLbus joined in and replied with this 15 years ago, 3 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,513
i opened this thread thinking it was a riddle
Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG replied with this 15 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,563
@205,192 (E)
> Sure there are some immoral, ineffective, or inefficient CEOs and CEOs who only got to where they were by knowing the right people, but we should not project them onto everyone.
Thanks for killing my buzz. You will receive a fine in the mail.
> Sure there are some immoral, ineffective, or inefficient CEOs and CEOs who only got to where they were by knowing the right people, but we should not project them onto everyone.
Thanks for killing my buzz. You will receive a fine in the mail.
Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG double-posted this 15 years ago, 5 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,566
For the record, CEO pay is ridiculous. It's unfair when they misrepresent things to shareholders and vote their own raises. But regulating peoples' salaries will cause far more problems than it solves. The answer is to educate the public about this as much as possible, which will help penalize CEOs for incompetence and reward them for success. What I'm saying is that just because someone, be they a doctor, rapper, or sports star, makes a lot of money does not mean they are not talented or creative or industrious enough to earn it. Some people just have skills and abilities which are in high demand and hence a lot of organizations compete for their talent. That's the fairest outcome, so long as they pay their taxes and earn their keep.
Anonymous I replied with this 15 years ago, 14 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #205,573
@previous (Freecode !!4IKKtS9GG)
These people make decisions that put people out of work. They are able to make this obscene amount of money because of the way our economy is set up. They dont earn it. They take more than their share because they can.
They mostly get their positions through connections or extreme douche Baggary. If people knew what really went on, they would ... do nothing. I forgot people don't give a fuck if they can buy their beer and porn.
I don't care.
These people make decisions that put people out of work. They are able to make this obscene amount of money because of the way our economy is set up. They dont earn it. They take more than their share because they can.
They mostly get their positions through connections or extreme douche Baggary. If people knew what really went on, they would ... do nothing. I forgot people don't give a fuck if they can buy their beer and porn.
I don't care.