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.
Why are people so concerned about how much other people have in their pocketbooks? If you don't like earning a fraction of CEO pay start your own business.
The Capitalism we have today is vastly different than the Capitalism of yesterday.
The capitalism of yesterday consisted mostly of mom and pop business and family run farms.
The mom and pops started the business and were entitled to all the rewards that go with it.
The Mels Diner, Carries Hardware and Farmer Joe have been replaced by McDonald's, Menard's, Walmarts and Corporate Run Farms.
Unlike McDonald's and Corporate Farms, there was no wall street middle man to suck off consumers since Mom and Pops were not traded on Wall Street.
Mom and Pops competed with each other to bring the best quality goods (American Made) to the consumer.
Corporations compete for politicians to create trade pacts with slave labor nations.
Unlike Mel's Diner who started the business, most CEO's did not start the business at big corporations today.
They were already in existence for years.
If business was bad, Mel had a personal risk in the loss unlike the golden parachute CEOs that pass the risk onto the workers by laying off thousands.
I mean where is the personal risks for the CEO compared to Joe at Joe's Hardware when business goes bad?
What we have today is CORPORATISM, not Capitalism.
They make no efforts to do that. They don’t have an incentive to. The more they pay him, the more they can push up their own pay.
The business owners are so stupid that they won't make any effort to hire the best talent to run their company. The crappy people they hire would drive their company down to the ground so that the business owners can push up their own pay ... how?
What in the world are you talking about?
The business owners own the company - many even consider their company their own baby. If the people they hire screw up their company, it would be like screwing their own baby.
Did I say they were stupid? In most cases they aren't. In some cases they are bc they inherited the business. Doesn't matter bc that strawman had nothing to do with my point.
Sure. True or false, one businesses objective is to get services at the lowest price point? What services did he bring to his company that could not have been achieved by someone at a lower wage? And what efforts did the board make to find the cheapest option that's qualified to do that?
That's the difference between a pro sports organization paying players and a F500 company paying CEOs. The pro athletes are actually getting paid the minimum it would take for that position to be filled. Meanwhile, you could cut practically any CEOs salary by a 30% and find a qualified replacement by the end of the week.
Being incompetent has nothing to do with my point, but I guarantee that the Trump Org could have found someone more qualified for cheaper than they're paying Eric and Don Jr.
Yes, you did call all business owners STUPID.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EddieB.Good
First, professional athletes have the employee-employer relationship that every company should have. They are represented by a union, they force the distribution of profits between management and workers. That's what a functioning employee-employer relationship looks like. If professional athletes were treated the same way as everyday workers, they'd be making $80,000 a year while mgmt pocketed the lionshare of increase revenue.
The difference between athletes and CEOs, is that athletes get paid can run cir to Valley they bring to organization. A CEO that crapped the bed at one company, would just get another job as a another highly paid executive somewhere else. That's the complete opposite of being paid commensurate to your value.
Why would a crappy CEO get hired as another highly paid executive again unless the business owners are utterly stupid?
The Capitalism we have today is vastly different than the Capitalism of yesterday.
The capitalism of yesterday consisted mostly of mom and pop business and family run farms.
The mom and pops started the business and were entitled to all the rewards that go with it.
The Mels Diner, Carries Hardware and Farmer Joe have been replaced by McDonald's, Menard's, Walmarts and Corporate Run Farms.
Unlike McDonald's and Corporate Farms, there was no wall street middle man to suck off consumers since Mom and Pops were not traded on Wall Street.
Mom and Pops competed with each other to bring the best quality goods (American Made) to the consumer.
Corporations compete for politicians to create trade pacts with slave labor nations.
Unlike Mel's Diner who started the business, most CEO's did not start the business at big corporations today.
They were already in existence for years.
If business was bad, Mel had a personal risk in the loss unlike the golden parachute CEOs that pass the risk onto the workers by laying off thousands.
I mean where is the personal risks for the CEO compared to Joe at Joe's Hardware when business goes bad?
What we have today is CORPORATISM, not Capitalism.
Sure. True or false, one businesses objective is to get services at the lowest price point? What services did he bring to his company that could not have been achieved by someone at a lower wage? And what efforts did the board make to find the cheapest option that's qualified to do that?
You just 100% changed your narrative when challenged over your assertion that they're not CEO's on merit but on having "connections".
You have no substance to your argument if when pushed on it you try to completely start over with a new one like abandoning a pair of underwear after a bad experience at a Mexican restaurant.
Can we have a study that informs us how many hours of Keith Ellison's time went to this? We are actually paying his salary, so I think we ought to know.
Can we have a study that informs us how many hours of Keith Ellison's time went to this? We are actually paying his salary, so I think we ought to know.
oh I dunno but I bet it was less than 5% of the time that Trey Gowdy spent on his "Benghazi witch hunt", were you worried about that waste of money too?
I was merely pointing out that there's a subset of workers who could better distribute wealth within a company that would close the wage gap and give us back the middle class in this country. And, CEOs would not exactly have to go begging afterward or sign up for any social programs.
I'm not saying it SHOULD happen. I understand how companies work.
LOL.
" there's a subset of workers who could better distribute wealth within a company..."
So, you want companies to pay people MORE then what their work deserves.
You might want to check out who OWNS your source of the article you want us to give so much credibility to.
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.
