70 - 100k part 2 (paid, business, moving, good)

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

I mentioned in a former thread that employees should bring in 3 X what they cost the employer. So lets say that you make $25 an hour. You would want to be bringing in $75 an hour. That doesn't mean that it is profit though. Most companies need to pay rent, utilities, phone, office staff, bookkeeper or maybe a payroll company. They have costs just to be in business. I worked for a locksmith company before coming to the Hospital to work. My boss had to make sure we had transportation from the shop to the job sites. Van payments, repair and maintenace cost, gas and insurance cost. He also had to put money back into the business. Training, new tools, other equipment. That all came out of the money we brought back to the shop. He also liked to take money home to his family. They for some unknown reason like to eat and have a roof over their heads. Business owners have all the risks. I think that City_data91 mentioned that in another thread. Sure they have risks. They should also have rewards when things go their way. That is just part of business.

[highlife2]

Originally Posted by littleelvis

Are CEO's more capable today? Maybe I don't know. I would assume they are because 40 years ago you didn't have to deal with some of the things you do today.

I can't answer as to why the proportion is different. I am not sure. If I had to give an opinion it would be I think that 40 years ago you didn't have as money companies making as much money as you do today. During the internet boom is when the salaries really shot up due to all the overnight millionaire companies.

Also the CEO's you are referring to are in the minority. They don't study the CEO's of many smaller companies.

I know its a mystery to me too, I dont understand why multi nationals are making fortunes ..... sweat shops in indonesia fingers in ears LALALALALAL.

[highlife2]

Originally Posted by city_data91

Like I said on an earlier post, a CEO deserves their high salary if they're truly making millions in revenue for the company.

But just because a company makes a lot of money, who's to say the CEO is mainly responsible for their success? If the CEO is the main reason for the success, why does he need so many workers? The workers played a role in making the company successful. If an average worker played a significant role in making the company successful, they deserve a piece of the pie.

And I'm well aware that CEO's at smaller companies don't make as much. But small businesses and big corporations operate completely different. There's no way to compare the two.

They dont make as much because they are doing less or none of thoes exploitive things I listed in another post. You dont make money hand over fist like that without some exploitation.

[littleelvis]

Originally Posted by highlife2

I know its a mystery to me too, I dont understand why multi nationals are making fortunes ..... sweat shops in indonesia fingers in ears LALALALALAL.

Yes we all know you have all these theories and thoughts about how big companies make their money. I don't debate with people who watch conspiracy theory shows. It doesn't matter what you say to people like you, you have your fingers in your ears. LALALALA

[highlife2]

Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE

I mentioned in a former thread that employees should bring in 3 X what they cost the employer. So lets say that you make $25 an hour. You would want to be bringing in $75 an hour. That doesn't mean that it is profit though. Most companies need to pay rent, utilities, phone, office staff, bookkeeper or maybe a payroll company. They have costs just to be in business. I worked for a locksmith company before coming to the Hospital to work. My boss had to make sure we had transportation from the shop to the job sites. Van payments, repair and maintenace cost, gas and insurance cost. He also had to put money back into the business. Training, new tools, other equipment. That all came out of the money we brought back to the shop. He also liked to take money home to his family. They for some unknown reason like to eat and have a roof over their heads. Business owners have all the risks. I think that City_data91 mentioned that in another thread. Sure they have risks. They should also have rewards when things go their way. That is just part of business.

Hmm, this tread seems to be errily avoiding the 300 lb gorilla in the room, MULTINATONALS!!!!! AND WASHINGTON CRONIES no one is faulting the small buisness owner.

[highlife2]

Originally Posted by littleelvis

Yes we all know you have all these theories and thoughts about how big companies make their money. I don't debate with people who watch conspiracy theory shows. It doesn't matter what you say to people like you, you have your fingers in your ears. LALALALA

Sorry I forgot that exploitation of multi national corporations is like UFO's and sasquach, keep beliving that as more and more counties go under and the USA fades into the night.

[littleelvis]

Originally Posted by city_data91

Like I said on an earlier post, a CEO deserves their high salary if they're truly making millions in revenue for the company.

But just because a company makes a lot of money, who's to say the CEO is mainly responsible for their success? If the CEO is the main reason for the success, why does he need so many workers? The workers played a role in making the company successful. The workers are a part of the reason why a successful company is where it is. If an average worker played a significant role in making the company successful, they deserve a piece of the pie.

And I'm well aware that CEO's at smaller companies don't make as much. But small businesses and big corporations operate completely different. There's no way to compare the two.

You remind me of a guy I "used" to work with. He found a way to save the company money by doing something in house rather than sending it out. The company saved anywhere fom 50K to 60k a year. He somehow believed he should have gotten part of that savings in his salary.

As an employee I beleive it is my job to provide the company with ideas that will help them save money. My reward is raises, bonuses and hopefully promotions. Of course if I don't like that I can risk everything I own and go on my own.

[city_data91]

Originally Posted by littleelvis

You remind me of a guy I "used" to work with. He found a way to save the company money by doing something in house rather than sending it out. The company saved anywhere fom 50K to 60k a year. He somehow believed he should have gotten part of that savings in his salary.

As an employee I beleive it is my job to provide the company with ideas that will help them save money. My reward is raises, bonuses and hopefully promotions. Of course if I don't like that I can risk everything I own and go on my own.

So you're saying you would want raises as a reward? But you're saying the guy you used to work with is bad for wanting a raise?

[littleelvis]

Originally Posted by city_data91

So you're saying you would want raises as a reward? But you're saying the guy you used to work with is bad for wanting a raise?

I am saying he was looking at what he saved them and wanting a raise based on that. A very large raise. It doesn't work that way.

[city_data91]

Originally Posted by littleelvis

That is my post. In some cases CEO's do poorly at a company only to go on to another and do really well. Its not due to incompetance. Many factors can play into why a CEO was not able to help the company. I am sure there are a few that are not worthy of CEO title.

And how did those people get the title CEO if they're not worthy? Something fishy went on somewhere along the line. Otherwise they would never become a CEO