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.
"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?
The problem is predatory and crony capitalism.
Lobbyists spend billions a year purchasing politicians to tailor the market in their interests while punishing everyone else.
Why would you think it is desirable to have income equality?
Extreme income inequality is evil.
We pointed out how it is evil during the cold war when most were poor in the Soviet Union while the cronies and politicians were very rich.
That is the direction we are headed in the USA, if not already there.
You show me Big Corporate CEO like JP Morgan or Goldman Sachs and I will show you cronies that are deeply embedded in the US Government.
There are 20 banking lobbyists for every politician in Washington DC.
Sounds like the Soviet Union.
Bernie Ebbers
Ivan "Ivan The Terrible" Boesky
Jeff Skilling
Bernie Madoff
Jordan Belfort
Allen Stanford
___________________________
The truth is traders, bankers and executives are busted regularly for everything from oil frauds (like selling old oil as new and grading frauds), banking frauds (like small town bankers keeping two set of books or Wells Fargo's bogus accounts scam), tax frauds (like Enron), stock frauds (like insider trading, manipulation etc.) and wholesale business fakery (like Theranos).
___________________________
People like you adopt cynical, close minded, "most successful people must be cheaters" attitudes in order to justify otherwise unsupportable/weakly supportable political and economic thinking.
Has any head CEO for the too big to fail banks ever been thrown in jail?
You know, the ones that get paid the most because they take all the "risks" lol.
With all the various pay-to-play scandals, news reports on (legal) rigging of Ivy League admissions, etc. in recent years, it's hard for me to believe that anyone still thinks elites are being compensated for their talent. It's a good ol' boys club of rich people helping each other extract wealth from common people by leveraging their monopoly on capital. They run companies into the ground, accept a golden parachute and then take board positions on their friends' companies. It doesn't take some kind of genius gift of foresight to stroll into an existing company and cut expenses by firing 10% of the workforce and demanding the remainder work 10% harder for no money.
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.
There is a lot of thugs running the financial firms today.
There was a secret recording of some of these thugs looking for insider trading secrets from competing banks and nothing was ever done to them.
Who the heck says busting my chops except some mafia thugs.
John Mack, a close friend of Samberg’s who had just stepped down as president of Morgan Stanley. At the time, Mack had been on Samberg’s case to cut him into a deal involving a spinoff of the tech company Lucent — an investment that stood to make Mack a lot of money. “Mack is busting my chops” to give him a piece of the action, Samberg told an employee in an e-mail.
All the niceties and little things you don't appreciate in life are the result of Capitalism. Yet the problem is Uncontrolled capitalism leads to annihilation, starvation and death. I'm fine with that but the majority of Americans are not. During the Great Depression - Americans DIED of starvation and malnutrition...Our soft little hearts cannot deal with that in the modern era - Therefore NO pure capitalism for YOU!
.
A little fact checking: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/scien...ates-46713514/ Nobody died of starvation in The Depression. The Dust Bowl calamity was caused by the "perfect storm" situation of the hottest, driest decade of the century in the lower Plaines coincidental with the unwise encouragement by the fed govt for farmers to keep planting wheat on wheat, year after year.
The necessities of life-- air, water & food-- are cheaper here than in any other area of the world. The wealthy get wealthy by selling their goods & services to those willing to pay the price. Nobody is getting screwed unless they chose to be. (Why would anybody pay $1000 for a telephone? Insanity.)
This is not 12th century England where the rich got rich by taxing the peasants and forcing them to pay against their wishes. "Income Inequality" is a wedge issue fantasized by politicians in order to rouse the ignorant rabble.
I have no problem with CEOs making a lot more money than people who clean their offices, for example, but what I do object to are companies who pay their CEOs over $10 million a year, while the company's "bottom rung" employees work in some kind of "sweat shop" environment are paid less than $10 an hour and told that they should go on some kind of government assistance to be able to afford decent food, housing, and medical care. (Btw, I am not talking about young part-time fast-food workers, but about adults who don't live with their parents and who work a minimum of 40 hours a week.)
Last edited by katharsis; 10-06-2019 at 10:19 AM..
I have no problem with CEOs making a lot more money than people who clean their offices, for example, but what I do object to are companies who pay their CEOs over $10 million a year, while the company's "bottom rung" employees work in some kind of "sweat shop" environment are paid less than $10 an hour and told that they should go on some kind of government assistance to be able to afford decent food, housing, and medical care. (Btw, I am not talking about young part-time fast-food workers, but about adults who don't live with their parents and who work a minimum of 40 hours a week.)
Capitalism in our countries history was actually more preferable.
Most Business Owners did all the hard work starting the company from the ground up.
Their number one customer, was customers that bought their products or services, not shareholders.
The business owner personally knew the workers and lived in the same town and supported the community.
When times got bad, the business owner along with everyone else took a paycut.
Todays Capitalism is rather Satanic and evil.
The Big Corporations were started years ago.
These CEOs did not start the business, all the hard work was already done where most business fail.
When times get tough, the CEOs pass the risks to those below them by layoff half the workforce and give themselves a bonus.
With the Big Corporations, the headquarters could be in one state and the work houses in another. The CEO does not know the workers and could give a fig about the town or community where the workers are.
When the business does fail, the CEOs escape with a golden parachute and leave the workers and tax payers holding the bag to do the cleanup.
Some people seem to always want a big, bad Boogey Man to rant and rave against. Somehow it makes them feel better to be able to point to someone else and blame them for all of their own shortcomings or for the shortcomings of other people. Moral indignation is a powerful stimulant to one's ego.
What was that old saying? "Don't blame you. Don't blame me. Blame that guy behind the tree."
Why would you think it is desirable to have income equality when it's very obvious that not everyone is equal in their knowledge, skills, ability, or desire to work hard and productively?
CEO's are paid (compensated) for their foresight and leadership ability which affects the entire company. Their decisions may affect the jobs and livelihoods of thousands of employees and many more thousands of their family members. There is no comparison between the importance of their job and the importance of a clerk or laborer at the bottom of the totem pole.
Trying to make everyone's salary equal (or nearly so) simply discourages incentive to work harder and work smarter. Why would anyone put forth the extra effort if it's just going to pay the same as coasting through the work week?
If that’s true why do executives get “golden parachutes” when they are forced out? They get millions regardless of their performance. Look at the college admissions scandal, and that’s only the ones that got caught. How many alumni donated to a school to influence their kids getting admitted? It’s not about talent. Far from it. It’s a get rich quick club, greed, networking among the wealthy. Why should a CEO make a fortune and the workers almost need government aid just for basic living expenses? It’s disgusting.
Last edited by Matthew_MI; 10-06-2019 at 06:33 PM..
With all the various pay-to-play scandals, news reports on (legal) rigging of Ivy League admissions, etc. in recent years, it's hard for me to believe that anyone still thinks elites are being compensated for their talent. It's a good ol' boys club of rich people helping each other extract wealth from common people by leveraging their monopoly on capital. They run companies into the ground, accept a golden parachute and then take board positions on their friends' companies. It doesn't take some kind of genius gift of foresight to stroll into an existing company and cut expenses by firing 10% of the workforce and demanding the remainder work 10% harder for no money.
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.
Exactly!
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.
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.
