U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-04-2019, 12:30 PM
 
3,995 posts, read 1,061,372 times
Reputation: 4613

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by txbullsfan View Post
CEO Dan Price slashed his salary to give employees a raise shares more good news:
https://www.aol.com/article/finance/...ares/23826099/

Please read the article.

Some take away's from the article:

"Price, who helms the Seattle-based payment processing company, famously slashed his $1 million salary in 2015 to give all employees a minimum $70,000 salary."

"While Price said he still wishes other companies would follow suit and make big changes to address inequality, he's glad he did. The experience has also taught him a lot about himself, he added, and underscored that he made the right choice.

"I took a seven-figure pay cut in order to afford the initial increase, and my life has gotten richer for it," he said. "I feel a bigger sense of purpose and harmony in my life knowing that we as a team are proving that there's a better way to do business."

- End article excerpts

The CEO Dan Price said this quote previously:
"I never want to make screw-you money like the rest of the financial services industry.

After you read the article, some questions:

1. Is the United States economy incredibly capitalistic overall?
2. In effect, is our economy incredibly predatory overall?
3. Is Dan Price's mindset common among CEOs and top income earners or is it unique?
4. Do the statistics show we have a growing income inequality problem here in the US?
5. According to Dan Price's mindset and multiple studies, is growing income inequality harmful to people and ultimately society?
6. Is Dan Price showing that income inequality is a more manageable issue and that it is possible to reasonably address?
7. Would it be possible for other CEO's and the top 5% of income earners to do what Dan Price did?
8. What happens when we try to reasonable address income inequality like Dan Price did?
Sorry for the slap in the face, but $70k in Seattle is not a lot.

As altruistic as he may be, slashing one's own salary rarely results in significant raises once distributed, even in a dollar-for-dollar dispersion of the funds, as either a flat value or a flat percent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-04-2019, 12:42 PM
DKM
 
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
3,290 posts, read 1,141,068 times
Reputation: 3097
He was full of it. Had an ownership stake and was doing this for publicity. Everybody wants to make more money if they can.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 01:13 PM
 
8,673 posts, read 9,383,801 times
Reputation: 7085
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post

CEOs get compensated around $15m per year on average. The average person makes $25k/yr. You think CEOs are working 600 times as hard as the average person? The whole idea is absurd on the face of it. CEOs are highly compensated because they're in a position to abuse our economic system. No more, no less.

Your post is exhibit A. as to why we can't make any kind of progress right now. You are either literally lying or fantastically misinformed. As the average CEO in The US makes less than $300K per year.

The average of the top 1/4 of 1% of CEOs is ~$17MM. Even by your atrocious mathematical standards that's a long way from THE average.

The average pay for US workers in 2019 is $47,000.

CEOs are well paid because very few people are able to do the job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 02:04 PM
 
3,592 posts, read 2,431,657 times
Reputation: 2752
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
Your post is exhibit A. as to why we can't make any kind of progress right now. You are either literally lying or fantastically misinformed. As the average CEO in The US makes less than $300K per year.

The average of the top 1/4 of 1% of CEOs is ~$17MM. Even by your atrocious mathematical standards that's a long way from THE average.

The average pay for US workers in 2019 is $47,000.

CEOs are well paid because very few people are able to do the job.
The best reference I've found so far is here:
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/sites/g...ation-data.pdf

It's including corporate CEOs, not people who are the CEO of their restaurant or blog or whatever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 02:15 PM
 
3,995 posts, read 1,061,372 times
Reputation: 4613
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
Your post is exhibit A. as to why we can't make any kind of progress right now. You are either literally lying or fantastically misinformed. As the average CEO in The US makes less than $300K per year.

The average of the top 1/4 of 1% of CEOs is ~$17MM. Even by your atrocious mathematical standards that's a long way from THE average.

The average pay for US workers in 2019 is $47,000.

CEOs are well paid because very few people are able to do the job.
Why would you want to continue earning normal wage income past brackets which take you beyond a 30% federal tax rate?

Comp much beyond $300k base (or roundabout) is often delivered via RSU (restricted stock units) which vest annually. They're tricky in the sense that the income is taxed upon vesting, not when you sell them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 02:55 PM
 
2,852 posts, read 782,688 times
Reputation: 5049
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tencent View Post
[b]Yet the problem is Uncontrolled capitalism leads to annihilation, starvation and death.

Uncontrolled capitalism does not exist in the USA, does it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 03:35 PM
 
8,673 posts, read 9,383,801 times
Reputation: 7085
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddm2k View Post
Why would you want to continue earning normal wage income past brackets which take you beyond a 30% federal tax rate?

Comp much beyond $300k base (or roundabout) is often delivered via RSU (restricted stock units) which vest annually. They're tricky in the sense that the income is taxed upon vesting, not when you sell them.
Is you point that you think I didn't know that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 03:44 PM
 
3,995 posts, read 1,061,372 times
Reputation: 4613
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
Is you point that you think I didn't know that?
I write for everyone in the audience.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-04-2019, 05:23 PM
 
Location: Ohio
20,481 posts, read 14,560,155 times
Reputation: 16702
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddm2k View Post
Sorry for the slap in the face, but $70k in Seattle is not a lot.
That's a good point.

I remember being over a friend's house and another friend, Gary, being there. A friend of Gary's had gone to California, and he had called to talk to Gary. Gary asks what he's doing, and his friends says he's delivering pizzas and getting paid $30,000/year.

Gary also delivers pizzas but he only gets $10,000/year. He thought he was going to go to California and be rich getting $30,000/year.

The thing is, Gary took a $3,000 pay cut, because at the time, $30,000/year in California was equal to $7,000/year here.

Gary couldn't even afford his own apartment. He was living in these seedy motels and boarding houses. They only good thing is that delivering pizzas allowed him to drive all over different parts of town and he could find cheaper motels and boarding houses. He was moving every 2 weeks just to save a little bit of money.

After 4 months of that, he packed it in and came back, got his old job back and got his own apartment.

$10,000 may not be a lot, but at least Gary could afford his own apartment, and he couldn't do that in California even when earning $30,000/year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_ View Post
The average of the top 1/4 of 1% of CEOs is ~$17MM. Even by your atrocious mathematical standards that's a long way from THE average.
And even that's a lie.

Federal law requires the reporting of total CEO compensation to shareholders.

Most people don't know that and propaganda artists rely on people's ignorance when making claims.

For example, it was widely reported that the CEO of Anthem Blue Cross got $23 Million.

That was a lie. He actually got $7 Million in cash and $16 Million in compensation, mostly various classes of stocks that have severe restrictions on their sale and require reporting to the SEC when sold, plus other benefits like auto, travel, housing and such.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 07:51 AM
 
Location: Log "cabin" west of Bangor
5,710 posts, read 6,885,358 times
Reputation: 10427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Federal law requires the reporting of total CEO compensation to shareholders.

Most people don't know that and propaganda artists rely on people's ignorance when making claims.
This is true for publicly traded companies (but not for private companies). The 10Qs and 10Ks (quarterly and annual report filings are all available through Edgar and free to peruse by anyone interested.

Quote:
All companies, foreign and domestic, are required to file registration statements, periodic reports, and other forms electronically through EDGAR. Anyone can access and download this information for free. Here you'll find links to a complete list of filings available through EDGAR and instructions for searching the EDGAR database.

https://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml




-----------------------------------------------------


The problem here, is that some people seem to be operating under the severely mistaken impression that companies/businesses exist for the benefit of the employees. This is not true, nor has it ever been true.


Companies exist for the benefit of the *owners*. In the case of publicly traded companies, this includes the shareholders, who have purchased shares of the company and are, in fact, part owners of the company.


I own shares of a number of publicly traded companies, most of which pay me dividends, which are a share of the profits due me as an owner. One of those companies is Watsco (NYSE : WSO). I exercised options on Watsco over ten years ago at $11.00. As of this past Friday, those shares are worth more than $160.00 each, a more than 10x increase in valuation. In addition, Watsco pays me a quarterly dividend, which was increased by 10% to $1.60/share as of this past January. Not only has the value of my shares increased substantially since I became one of the owners, but the dividends paid have also greatly exceeded my purchase price.


The CEO of Watsco works for me and the other shareholders. We, through the Board of Directors which are elected by the shareholders, determine the compensation of the CEO and other executives. As far as I am concerned, the CEO of Watsco is doing a good job and is earning his pay...which, for 2018 was a base salary of $725,000.00, plus up to 60 hours of personal use of the company aircraft, plus performance based restricted stock benefits not to exceed $20MM.


Hey, Dorian...do you think you could do as good a job for me as Mr. Albert Nahmad has done? Not even in your dreams. Heck, I doubt that *I* could have done as well...no, scratch that, I *know* I could not have done as well...which is why I am happy to pay him $725k+ to do what I cannot, while I sit back and enjoy the fruits of his labor, not having to lift a finger except to pick up a pen and sign the proxy form each year. Does he 'make' more than I do? Sure he does...but I would have made nothing if it were not for his expertise, and the stock and dividends re-invested in my retirement account will help to make my 'golden years' (coming soon) more comfortable.


Do I care about the difference in pay between Mr. Nahmad and the bottom-tier employees? Nope, not in the slightest- if one of them could do what he has done, I would be paying him the big bucks instead. The employees agree to perform a particular task at a rate which the company is willing to pay, and for which the employee agrees to work, so long as he is capable of performing the task. Does the employee 'deserve' any more than that? No, he does not. An employee does not get paid what he is worth (or what he *thinks* he is worth), he gets paid what the job is worth.


If an employee takes a job scrubbing toilets for $7.25/hr, then that's what he deserves- nothing more, nothing less. The amount that the CEO is getting paid is completely irrelevant. The amount of money that the employee spends on rent is completely irrelevant, as are the amounts he might spend on food, booze, cable TV or anything else. All of those things are choices made by the employee and have no bearing on how much the CEO is paid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top