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.
Running a large corporation takes more talent than you will ever conceive of. CEOs deserve the pay they are negotiating. Companies are willing to pay because talented CEOs bring extreme value to their organizations.
You dont know many CEO's of large companies personally do you?
Above average intelligence, usually. But deserving of the pay? Very very rarely.
I think fewer people have a problem with paying successful CEOs than they do with the fact that failing CEOs get bonuses, gold parachutes and a seemingly endless number of offers for their next place to practice their incompetence.
There are a few celebrity CEOs for whom this is the case. However, for the overwhelming vast majority of CEOs, company failure equals personal failure equals a drastic cut in pay, prestige, and future prospects.
The original question deserves a post. Does it need to be addressed. History says that yes it does. And historically in the US the people at the top have realized this. Will it happen this time? Its not looking promising. What happens then, historically speaking. nothing good.
Technological changes may make this time different, its hard to say. But we should not rely on them.
And as one person pointed out, wealth inequality, or income inequality? They're very very different.
There are a few celebrity CEOs for whom this is the case. However, for the overwhelming vast majority of CEOs, company failure equals personal failure equals a drastic cut in pay, prestige, and future prospects.
CEO's that OWN a company thats true. but once you get into the upper reaches of publicly traded companies thats completely false.
Last CEO I knew personally ran the company into the ground, blew hundreds of millions, and walked off with 10 million in earnings over 3 years, plus a unknown payment when he left.
And if you read the news, you know this is not uncommon.
I think this is pretty flawed reasoning. By your logic, the government has should have no involvement regarding minimum wage either, yet reality is that government regulations are needed to some extent because corporations have the ability to do things that the average person can't compete with individually.
When other countries have lower costs of labor and our government controls all aspects of currency, it's inevitable that our government should have some involvement in the labor market. The question is how much.
Exactly. Setting wages is price fixing when done by private parties, yet it is fine if it is done by the government? No. It is not fine. There should be no minimum wage. The price at which workers agree to trade their time and talent for pay should be a private matter between the employer and the employee with no collectivistic interference by the government whatsoever.
And you simply accept the fact that the government controls all aspects of our currency? And as a result should have involvement in the labor market? Simply wrong. The government needs to get out of the business of manipulating our currency, and the government needs to get out of the business of manipulating private wages. We have become so inured to collectivistic interference, that we treat it as axiomatic rather than the invasion of our liberty that it actually is.
Exactly. Setting wages is price fixing when done by private parties, yet it is fine if it is done by the government? No. It is not fine. There should be no minimum wage. The price at which workers agree to trade their time and talent for pay should be a private matter between the employer and the employee with no collectivistic interference by the government whatsoever.
And you simply accept the fact that the government controls all aspects of our currency? And as a result should have involvement in the labor market? Simply wrong. The government needs to get out of the business of manipulating our currency, and the government needs to get out of the business of manipulating private wages. We have become so inured to collectivistic interference, that we treat it as axiomatic rather than the invasion of our liberty that it actually is.
Liberty is poverty? No really. Remove the minimum wage, and we see a race to the bottom. Now while thats great for some folks at the top, for everyone else it kinda sucks. A lot.
We have a government to help manage things in the best interests of our society, this is one good example of them. Same with child labor laws. and many many other things.
Quote:
Setting wages is price fixing when done by private parties, yet it is fine if it is done by the government? No. It is not fine.
It is PERFECTLY fine. one benefits the parties...the other...benefits the parties. But WHICH party matters, one is a corporation, the other is the people. Some folks-weirdly enough-value people over corporation
CEO's that OWN a company thats true. but once you get into the upper reaches of publicly traded companies thats completely false.
Last CEO I knew personally ran the company into the ground, blew hundreds of millions, and walked off with 10 million in earnings over 3 years, plus a unknown payment when he left.
And if you read the news, you know this is not uncommon.
I know of one who seems to be doing it right now. If it happens -- and I'm almost certain it will -- it'll be the third company said CEO has caused (or significantly helped) to crash-and-burn. In both previous instances he walked away with a ton of cash. I'm pretty sure he's looking to do it again.
=============================
Most of us seem to be correctly addressing income inequity, which is the issue facing the nation. However, some of us still seem to be stuck on the 'straw-man concept' of income inequality. The two terms are not synonyms; they don't mean the same thing:
Inequity = lack of fairness or justice
Inequality = not the same
Income inequality is NOT the issue. It simply doesn't make sense to expect the janitor and the CFO to have equality of income. Not a single politician or public servant is advocating for it, and anyone who tries to tell us otherwise is either trying to (a) sell us something we neither need nor want, or (b) distract us from something else. I mean, such a thing is nowhere near the realm of reality, possibility, feasibility, or even desirability.
Most of us seem to be correctly addressing income inequity, which is the issue facing the nation. However, some of us still seem to be stuck on the 'straw-man concept' of income inequality. The two terms are not synonyms; they don't mean the same thing:
Inequity = lack of fairness or justice
Inequality = not the same
Income inequality is NOT the issue. It simply doesn't make sense to expect the janitor and the CFO to have equality of income. Not a single politician or public servant is advocating for it, and anyone who tries to tell us otherwise is either trying to (a) sell us something we neither need nor want, or (b) distract us from something else. I mean, such a thing is nowhere near the realm of reality, possibility, feasibility, or even desirability.
Actually I kind of agree, most people absolutely do not want income equality. When they refer to income inequality they really mean the growing divide between the haves, and the have nots. And while the vast majority think income inequality is good, that stops at a certain level. And that level is fairness.
The guy who got lucky in the genetic lottery? Not fair.
The guy who despite doing a bad job gets massive income? Not fair.
The guy making money because of who he knows? Not fair.
The guy who had a new idea that made him millions? Fair.
The guy who worked hard and invested? Fair.
But if you started saying the children of the rich should inherit nothing, people go ballistic.
If you said any company that folded should have its CEO's money confiscated? Are you crazy?
What if insider tradings penalty was seizure of all your money? Why would that be a unreasonable penalty? A traffic ticket can do the same to a poor person!
Income inequality should be an issue for working people
Assuming they are skilled workers underpaid
But if they are on disability or some form of social welfare or unskilled workers
income inequality is a non issue
Liberty is poverty? No really. Remove the minimum wage, and we see a race to the bottom. Now while thats great for some folks at the top, for everyone else it kinda sucks. A lot.
We have a government to help manage things in the best interests of our society, this is one good example of them. Same with child labor laws. and many many other things.
It is PERFECTLY fine. one benefits the parties...the other...benefits the parties. But WHICH party matters, one is a corporation, the other is the people. Some folks-weirdly enough-value people over corporation
I'm sorry, you have no right to tell one party what to pay another. And no one has the right to use physical compulsion (violence) to force one party to pay another more than he wants too. It's preposterous that in a free country we would allow this warped collectivistic thinking. But there it is.
Gambling is a sin too. Gambling hurts the little people. Gambling is immoral. Gambling is illegal. UNLESS IT IS RUN BY THE STATE, who then victimizes the stupidest segment of the population so that they can redistribute their near-poverty income to others.
The hypocrisy of the minimum wage is as bad as the hypocrisy of allowing the government to run gambling operations like the Mafia to shake down the citizens.
How about this? You have a problem with your pay? Get better and be more valuable. Stop looking to the police power of the state to confiscate money from others to lavish upon the incompetent.
The minimum wage should be repealed, and the government should NOT BE PRICE FIXING WAGES. The public good be damned, there is no public good when basic freedoms are violated.
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.
