Jump to content

CEO Pay Up 940.3% Over Last Four Decades


Recommended Posts

CEO pay up 940.3% over last four decades
Over the same time period, the pay of an average worker has increased 11.9%. 

The study’s authors tracked CEO pay beginning in 1978. They found compensation took off in the 1990s, peaked in 2000 and has fluctuated since, most notably around the burst of the dot-com bubble in the early 2000s and around the recession of 2008 and 2009.

CEO-worker pay disparity grows

Average worker pay rose just 12 percent since 1978, but the pay of bosses at the largest public companies grew 940 percent.

 
Year CEO annual compensation* Private-sector worker pay CEO/worker pay ratio
1978
$1.7m
 
$50.3k
 
33
1989
$3.1m
 
$47.9k
 
64
1995
$6m
 
$47.9k
 
125
2000
$21.5m
 
$50.6k
 
426
2007
$20m
 
$52.7k
 
380
2009
$11.3m
 
$54.7k
 
206
2016
$16m
 
$55.8k
 
288
2017
$17.3m
 
$56k
 
308
2018
$17.2m
 
$56.2k
 
306
 
Maybe they can take some of that money they hoarded to help the Dorian victims.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 299
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Happy Labor Day!

I kind of suck, but I try.  The maple slab was 8/4 curly, ripped and then I matched the figure best I could.  It's not bookmatched.  The finish is sprayed Behlen Stringed Instrument lacquer, the nitro

Why bother?  No one here said that CEO's aren't valuable... except HIM.  He's arguing with himself again.  He constantly makes up shit.

Posted Images

It's capitalist GREED , A wonderful thing , Any Lie to make money,

Probably a good Christain , What would christ think of all this GREED, 

Interesting Jesus was probably a socialist: 

Thou shalt not kill , guess the Greedy NRA, Trump , and all our congress  did get that message , 

Christ Healed the sick , Medicare

Christ feed the hungry with loaf of bread , and fish , Food stamps

Thou shalt not steal, 

Didn't Christ kick all the Bankers and stock brokers out the temples

But I guess all these things are forgotten as long as your a billionaire

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much is talk show host pay up?

In our economy, there are only two non-criminal ways to make money.  First is to get people to voluntarily give it to you.  The other is to bribe the government for favors.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

How much is talk show host pay up?

In our economy, there are only two non-criminal ways to make money.  First is to get people to voluntarily give it to you.  The other is to bribe the government for favors.  

Yes indeed

Which group pays more in lobbying, CEOs (and their elk) or workers?

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Yes indeed

Which group pays more in lobbying, CEOs (and their elk) or workers?

- DSK

Which group do you think spends more on lobbying for their own interests?  It seems that labor spent $1.7 billion on lobbying and politics in 2016.  How much did CEOs spend lobbying for their own benefits?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya'll forgot to include your sports heroes, baseball, football, basketball, ice hockey, F1 and Nascar,  entertainers, musicians, news personalities, hyping media people, movie stars and on and on and on...........

ill bet their all up, substantially.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Keith said:

Ya'll forgot to include your sports heroes, baseball, football, basketball, ice hockey, F1 and Nascar,  entertainers, musicians, news personalities, hyping media people, movie stars and on and on and on...........

ill bet their all up, substantially.    

It is not fair that LeBron makes so much while concession stand vendors make bupkis.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, jzk said:
47 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Which group pays more in lobbying, CEOs (and their elk) or workers?

 

Which group do you think spends more on lobbying for their own interests?  It seems that labor spent $1.7 billion on lobbying and politics in 2016.  How much did CEOs spend lobbying for their own benefits?

 

Well let's see.....

Pharmaceutical CEOs spent $4.2 billion, insurance CEOs spent $2.9 billion, Elecric utility CEOs spent $2.5 billion, Electronic mfg'r CEOs spent 2.4 billion, Oil & gas CEOs spent $2.2 billion, Securities & investment CEOs spent $1.6 billion..... there's a long list adding up to over $32 billion.

So the answer to your question is..... more. A LOT more.

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jerseyguy said:

How to become wealthy: marry into wealth, inherit it, steal it.

For god's sake don't try to work hard, live with-in your means, and save, because that doesn't work after about 1970.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

 

Well let's see.....

Pharmaceutical CEOs spent $4.2 billion, insurance CEOs spent $2.9 billion, Elecric utility CEOs spent $2.5 billion, Electronic mfg'r CEOs spent 2.4 billion, Oil & gas CEOs spent $2.2 billion, Securities & investment CEOs spent $1.6 billion..... there's a long list adding up to over $32 billion.

So the answer to your question is..... more. A LOT more.

- DSK

Those CEOs spent money lobbying for the government to fix CEO pay?  Interesting theory, but you haven't made any case for such.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

jerk-z - the forums most ardent "capitalist" who makes money off of a corrupt, croney, authoritarian anti-freedom regime. he's literally fucking over people via big government. and that allows him to spew this stupid shit here.

aka he's just another hypocritical libertarian piece of shit. Liberty is only for rich fuck like him, fuck everyone else.

He's just another dimwit who thinks that Ayn Rand is profound philosophy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

How to become wealthy: marry into wealth, inherit it, steal it.

Marrying Money is the hardest way to earn it.

Inheriting it has its pitfalls especially if you have gone with out for a bit.

Stealing it, its what bankers do:D

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

jerk-z - the forums most ardent "capitalist" who makes money off of a corrupt, croney, authoritarian anti-freedom regime. he's literally fucking over people via big government. and that allows him to spew this stupid shit here.

aka he's just another hypocritical libertarian piece of shit. Liberty is only for rich fuck like him, fuck everyone else.

You are blaming your lack of success on the Trump administration?  That is kind of pathetic, now isn't it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what about the Entertainers?  Ellen makes $75 mil per year.  Isn't that offensive?  Or are the entertainers part of your chosen elite leaders?

We wouldn't want CEOs to make money.  After all, they just run the companies that bring you everything you consume in your life.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

Marrying Money is the hardest way to earn it.

Inheriting it has its pitfalls especially if you have gone with out for a bit.

Stealing it, its what banksters do:D

FIFA

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

We wouldn't want CEOs to make money.  After all, they just run the companies that bring you everything you consume in your life.  

And keep wages down, deny health care to their employees, fail to create a healthy working environment, fire anyone who challenges them, layoff thousands in favor of slave wage labor overseas, bribe politicians so they and their companies profit, pollute the environment..... (this is exhausting!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jzk said:

Which group do you think spends more on lobbying for their own interests?  It seems that labor spent $1.7 billion on lobbying and politics in 2016.  How much did CEOs spend lobbying for their own benefits?

If you include boards?  Shareholders?  You’re mixing up where and whose money and influence are being used.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

So what about the Entertainers?  Ellen makes $75 mil per year.  Isn't that offensive?  Or are the entertainers part of your chosen elite leaders?

We wouldn't want CEOs to make money.  After all, they just run the companies that bring you everything you consume in your life.  

CEO’s in public corporations are not the owners.  They are fungible.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

So what about the Entertainers?  Ellen makes $75 mil per year.  Isn't that offensive?  Or are the entertainers part of your chosen elite leaders?

We wouldn't want CEOs to make money.  After all, they just run the companies that bring you everything you consume in your life.  

You are conflating supply and demand with manipulation, which makes me even more suspicious of your motives, or your experience.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Amati said:

Keeping it is the hard part.

There is a line that goes something like I spent my fortune on fast women, fast cars, boats and booze.  The rest I just wasted.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Amati said:
4 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

b4336e6cd694a869b55b795bc4a9b0fcf6c0a218619c8b508bf7527cf741b8e6.jpg

And this dude's not even a CEO !!

Or start your very own business, and bypass some of the assholes.

Yeah, but the problem with that is multi-fold:

The corporate interests that hate-hate-HATE "intrusive gov't regulation" when it forces them to not pollute our air and water, or provide workplace safety, LOVE gov't intrusion when it hampers competition from smaller more efficient companies.

Even a one-person business depends on contract law being enforced, and courts often side with the rich... and Republicans want to tilt this even more...

Patents? Access to public resources? fuggeddabbouttit

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Jules said:

And keep wages down, deny health care to their employees, fail to create a healthy working environment, fire anyone who challenges them, layoff thousands in favor of slave wage labor overseas, bribe politicians so they and their companies profit, pollute the environment..... (this is exhausting!)

All that is simply because of all the regulations they have to deal with.

If capitalism was free of all those intrusions we would live in an earthly paradise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

All that is simply because of all the regulations they have to deal with.

If capitalism was free of all those intrusions we would live in an earthly paradise.

Purple font please

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jules said:

And keep wages down, deny health care to their employees, fail to create a healthy working environment, fire anyone who challenges them, layoff thousands in favor of slave wage labor overseas, bribe politicians so they and their companies profit, pollute the environment..... (this is exhausting!)

No one can deny health care to anyone.  There are all sorts of choices out there for you to purchase.  If you don't like your wages, equip yourself with better skills that are in demand and demand more compensation.  The ball is in your court.  No one is responsible for your failures.  It is all on you.  It is not your boss or your CEO or someone that doesn't like you.  It is your deal.  Empower yourself to go out and succeed.  Anyone can do it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rat's ass said:

Bullshit, you are confused and have mixed up capitalism with corporatism. Educate yourself! 

enlighten me , you seem to be an self proclaimed expert, There both GREEDY in my book. and thieves that steal from the working man,

Yes we need corporations , but they need to share with the working people that make there company .

Pure capitalism and pure socialism don't work,  How about some place in the middle!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

If you don't like the CEO of your company, hire a different one.  

Isn't that how many boards think they exist?  Only to the/fire the CEO?  Problems do exist when that CEO has a contract.  If the contract is for a significant amount of money, it is a significant amount to break it.  Usually this fire/hire brings with it a fair amount of emotional baggage also.  It sounds like you have never

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

If you don't like the CEO of your company, hire a different one.  

Private or public?

Private, no. (Well usually, but if the CEO isn’t the owner, all bets are off...)

Public, buy stock, find an activist shareholder, and then maybe.  

Honestly, you don’t seem to know the difference.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Laker said:

Isn't that how many boards think they exist?  Only to the/fire the CEO?  Problems do exist when that CEO has a contract.  If the contract is for a significant amount of money, it is a significant amount to break it.  Usually this fire/hire brings with it a fair amount of emotional baggage also.  It sounds like you have never

CEO’s do like to pack boards with folks who profess to love that CEO, but even then the fear level can be really high on management’s side.  Boards change. Depends on the contract too, and that’s where it gets into the scarcity model, whether contrived or real.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Laker said:

Isn't that how many boards think they exist?  Only to the/fire the CEO?  Problems do exist when that CEO has a contract.  If the contract is for a significant amount of money, it is a significant amount to break it.  Usually this fire/hire brings with it a fair amount of emotional baggage also.  It sounds like you have never

Choose carefully before you enter into a contract with a CEO.  But that is how it goes sometimes.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Amati said:

CEO’s do like to pack boards with folks who profess to love that CEO, but even then the fear level can be really high on management’s side.  Boards change. Depends on the contract too, and that’s where it gets into the scarcity model, whether contrived or real.

 

Who chooses the board?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, jzk said:

Those CEOs spent money lobbying for the government to fix CEO pay?  Interesting theory, but you haven't made any case for such.

You literally are making shit up.  NO ONE said "to fix CEO  pay".  Your question was who lobbies more for their own interests.  An answer was given that you didn't like so you moved the goal posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Grrr... said:

You literally are making shit.  NO ONE said "to fix CEO  pay".  Your question was who lobbies more for their own interests.  An answer was given that you didn't like so you moved the goal posts.

The topic here is CEO pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jzk said:

The topic here is CEO pay.

That was not the question you asked.  And now you're asking a question that makes no sense.  CEOs don't lobby for their pay because they Set their own pay, usually with approval of the board.

So which is it? Did you ask a pointless and stupid question trying to redirect the discussion into unions that makes no sense, or are you dishonestly trying to move the goal posts?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Grrr... said:

Jzk has no idea what that word means.

Are you even following the topic here?  I said you can only make money by getting people to voluntarily give it to you or bribe the government for favors.  Steam said who lobbies more, CEOs or workers?  I said labor lobbies to get benefits.  Steam said CEOs lobby.  But do they lobby for their pay and benefits?  Or just to benefit their respective corporations?  That is the thread, try to keep up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, jzk said:

Are you even following the topic here?  I said you can only make money by getting people to voluntarily give it to you or bribe the government for favors.  Steam said who lobbies more, CEOs or workers?  I said labor lobbies to get benefits.  Steam said CEOs lobby.  But do they lobby for their pay and benefits?  Or just to benefit their respective corporations?  That is the thread, try to keep up.

You can't conduct a logical conversation to save your life. I've said it before, do you ever wonder why every time you post it goes to shit?

If you could make logical rational evidence based points you might make sense.  But you can't.

You tried to suggest that labor unions lobby more.  And that idiotic concept was flattened.  So you just jumped to something else entirely.  Now it's "why" they lobby.

No wonder everyone hates trying to talk with you.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

You can't conduct a logical conversation to save your life. I've said it before, do you ever wonder why every time you post it goes to shit?

Jerkz works for a company that provides social media and online services.  Everything he posts is deliberate to protect the interests of the customer.

That's how it works these days sadly.

769741137_JZKshillalert.jpg.cf3a851af2c9f1d7c8cf253ac85bb273.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.explainingcapitalism.org/truth-about-inequality/

CEO Pay is up because we want it up.  We juice up the stock market with free money, then whine about how the free money is juicing up the wealth of people who's wealth is tied to the market.  This isn't capitalism.  This isn't about competition.  This is just good ole fashioned greed.  They're doing the same thing in China - as long as ENOUGH people get to share in the pie, no one cares where the filling comes from.

This is known.  This isn't speculation. This isn't random chance.  This isn't supposition.  This isn't a curiosity, or a quirk, or luck.  This is 100% by design.  

The answer is pretty straight forward.  Stop juicing up the stock market and institute a national property tax.  Penalize dead money and make it work to retain it's value. 

Why won't that happen?  Because frankly, our baby boomer retirees would lose massive value on their nest eggs ass wealth finds a new equilibrium.  Far FAR FAR better to kick it off to the next generation and whine about the collateral impact.  There will be no change for 20+ years, regardless of party.  Both parties have BEEN in charge.  They've tipped their hand.  Eventually, the millennials will win out but that's going to be a long time.

 

 

U.S.-Household-Net-Worth-As-Percent-Of-Disposable-Income.png.5e82b39e64ed8f1f7a92fd6af9b02e09.png

 

CEOToWorkerPayRatio.png.b23e33ee4a1643d8776a101287b55bbc.png

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grrr... said:

You can't conduct a logical conversation to save your life. I've said it before, do you ever wonder why every time you post it goes to shit?

If you could make logical rational evidence based points you might make sense.  But you can't.

You tried to suggest that labor unions lobby more.  And that idiotic concept was flattened.  So you just jumped to something else entirely.  Now it's "why" they lobby.

No wonder everyone hates trying to talk with you.

 

 

Where did you flatten the concept that labor unions lobby more for laws that benefit unions than CEOs lobby for laws that benefit CEOs? 

The consensus around here is that CEOs aren't valuable in the marketplace, and that anyone can run a big company.  Here is news for you.  The reason that you aren't running a major corporation is not due to luck, race or your daddy's lack of connections.  It is because you lack the skills.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jzk said:

Where did you flatten the concept that labor unions lobby more for laws that benefit unions than CEOs lobby for laws that benefit CEOs? 

The consensus around here is that CEOs aren't valuable in the marketplace, and that anyone can run a big company.  Here is news for you.  The reason that you aren't running a major corporation is not due to luck, race or your daddy's lack of connections.  It is because you lack the skills.  

As I said, every CEO is a Tom Brady.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair to all those millionaire CEOs, the reason they are paid so much is because they are the employees of the billionaire board of directors.

Assuming a typical board member is just a regular old plain vanilla billionaire, with say just an average of $1 billion in assets, and they see an average of 5% salary on their assets per year, (plus another 5% to taxes and 5% to reinvestment), they're looking at a salary of about $50 million per year, in part based on the performance of their holdings. They'll correctively toss their millionaire CEO an equivalent sized bone if they do a reasonable job of protecting their assets, even a little more for growing their assets.

But really, instead of complaining about the employees, why are we mum on the employee's employers?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my favourite Druker quotes is "Culture eats Strategy for breakfast".  Culture takes a heck of a lot longer to institute than the work span of the average CEO.  I hold CEOs in some regard, but not high enough to support the salary differences in the average company.  Strategy does count for something, but things like culture and luck matter more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laker said:

One of my favourite Druker quotes is "Culture eats Strategy for breakfast".

Particularly when the culture is evil and or corrupt.  I have seen it happen a few times.

I saw one CEO lead payroll system fail dramatically when the corrupt culture claimed that the new system could not calculate the correct wages.  Reality was that the new system did calculate the correct wages. It was the old the old system that was wrong, complete with over-payments and zombie accounts for people who did not exist.

That culture almost shut down the new payroll system ... almost.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My pet peeve is the arbitrary cut off of Social Security tax.  Most of us poorer schmucks pay the tax on all of our earnings for the full year.  Those in upper middle management and up and I'll add in the athletes and movie stars are done at various times in the year, some by the end of January.  This sure would go along way to solve the long term Social Security deficit.  I don't want to change the benefit. just the rate.  Poorer schmucks like me would get a few more dollars in our paycheck and the others would never miss the few extra dollars in theirs.

And then there are the stock giveaways.  I'll use my 6 shares of Nisource that they gave me for perfect attendance after I got laid off.  The writing was on the wall, I showed up every day to pad the savings account for the eventual.  I keep them just to fuck with the girls when I'm dead.  The CEO got his shares as a result of his employment, he did not buy them on the open market.  I just got the dividend check, 6 x $.20 = $1.20.  Per his latest SEC filing he got 975,096 x $.20 = $195,019.20.  As these dividends are from his employment, these should also be subject to the Social Security tax.

These ideas would go a long way to curing thee Social Security deficit. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that self proclaimed billionaires made there $$$$$$$,  they 2 things in common:

1- they all got all there money from daddy 

2-There hire illegals to keep profiles high and they don't follow OSHA regs

2 come to mind Donnie "golden hair , and the bad Koch Brothers 

 Koch Foods, one of the country’s largest poultry processors with more than $3 billion in annual sales and with plants around the country, employs more than 10,000 people. The company was subjected to immigration enforcement action in 2007 and 2019.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, garuda3 said:

Interesting that self proclaimed billionaires made there $$$$$$$,  they 2 things in common:

1- they all got all there money from daddy 

2-There hire illegals to keep profiles high and they don't follow OSHA regs

2 come to mind Donnie "golden hair , and the bad Koch Brothers 

 Koch Foods, one of the country’s largest poultry processors with more than $3 billion in annual sales and with plants around the country, employs more than 10,000 people. The company was subjected to immigration enforcement action in 2007 and 2019.

Yep, no one makes their money "fairly."  It is all rigged.  That is the excuse you can tell yourself about why you aren't making it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if your referring to your high standards of $$$$$ I probably didn't make it,

but I retired 12 years ago, early and been living the dream, with  good sailing and friends........

To quote: Avicii, "when I die , I want to be remembered for  the life I lived , not for the money I made!,

Never seen a rich person that's happy, Their too worried about chasing the dollar, 

and wake up it's all rigged, wait till the next market crash and see who made it,

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, garuda3 said:

if your referring to your high standards of $$$$$ I probably didn't make it,

but I retired 12 years ago, early and been living the dream, with  good sailing and friends........

To quote: Avicii, "when I die , I want to be remembered for  the life I lived , not for the money I made!,

Never seen a rich person that's happy, Their too worried about chasing the dollar, 

and wake up it's all rigged

 

If being rich is not to be desired, why do you care about CEO pay?  Why is it any of your business what shareholders pay their CEO?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, shubrook said:

Frame this the other way.

Keep the CEO pay constant, get the factors and apply them to normal people's jobs.

Normal jobs are down 800% in 40 years.

800%?  Wow, that sounds like quite a bit.  Any evidence to support that position?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jzk said:

800%?  Wow, that sounds like quite a bit.  Any evidence to support that position?

It's the same statement in reverse. 

There's no single way to track the value of money over time. You always have to keep one thing constant and measure the other thing in relation to it. The CPI is one example, but you can also compare income to the price of gold, hamburgers or cars.

In this case, you could compare income to CEO pay, and show that incomes have radically shrunk for 40 years.

Then you get to ask why.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Nixon's_1972_visit_to_China

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, jzk said:

Broward Sheriff just evacuated Dania Beach.  Not sure why.

12 Broward County Sheriff units are making sure a small section of Dania Beach stays closed.  They are just hanging out shooting the shit under Quarterdeck by the pier.   The government likes to waste huge amounts of money on stupid shit. 

Dania Beach would do well to hire a real CEO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jzk said:

Where did you flatten the concept that labor unions lobby more for laws that benefit unions than CEOs lobby for laws that benefit CEOs? 

The consensus around here is that CEOs aren't valuable in the marketplace, and that anyone can run a big company.  Here is news for you.  The reason that you aren't running a major corporation is not due to luck, race or your daddy's lack of connections.  It is because you lack the skills.  

That's actually not the consensus.  The consensus isn't that CEO's are not valuable.  The consensus is that they are not 900% more valuable than the rank and file.  This isn't hard.  And by the way, Ellen is into women, just one woman actually.  So your fascination with her is borderline creepy.  You should seek help.  They don't like stalkers too much in Hollywood.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jzk said:

If being rich is not to be desired, why do you care about CEO pay?  Why is it any of your business what shareholders pay their CEO?

Why is it any of his business what goes on economically in his country.  Gee.... I wonder.

Got any more strawmans?

I don't think I need to repeat Steam Flyer's post debunking your bullshit.  You'll only try to wave your arms and double-speak it away.

You're like a textbook for every bad debate method known to man.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Swimsailor said:

That's actually not the consensus.  The consensus isn't that CEO's are not valuable.  The consensus is that they are not 900% more valuable than the rank and file.  This isn't hard.  And by the way, Ellen is into women, just one woman actually.  So your fascination with her is borderline creepy.  You should seek help.  They don't like stalkers too much in Hollywood.

Why bother?  No one here said that CEO's aren't valuable... except HIM.  He's arguing with himself again.  He constantly makes up shit.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think what everyone is missing about today's CEOs making ten times more than what they did in 1978 is today's CEOs work 10 times harder and longer.  In 1978 the average CEO worked about 50 hours a week.  Today, the average CEO works almost 500 hours a week!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Swimsailor said:

That's actually not the consensus.  The consensus isn't that CEO's are not valuable.  The consensus is that they are not 900% more valuable than the rank and file.  This isn't hard.  And by the way, Ellen is into women, just one woman actually.  So your fascination with her is borderline creepy.  You should seek help.  They don't like stalkers too much in Hollywood.

I had the pleasure of meeting Ellen once.   I like her.   Ann Heche also.  I didn't like her as much.   If you are a shareholder in a company, then vote however you like.  But what right do you have to force other sharholders to pay CEOs what you think is appropriate?

Are you some kind of a control freak?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Grrr... said:

Why bother?  No one here said that CEO's aren't valuable... except HIM.  He's arguing with himself again.  He constantly makes up shit.

Are you lying?  People here have said exactly that.  That they just work on their golf game.  Sounds like you are the one making up shit.

Regardless, the whole point of this thread is your envious position that CEOs are not "as valuable" as their pay.  So don't pay them.  But why are you wanting to interfere with other people that want to pay them?

Are you some kind of a control freak?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that this debate over CEO compensation is looking at the wrong thing.

CEOs with major corporations make a lot of money because they work for people who are a lot wealthier than they are. Are they worth it? Are they paid too much? Those questions don't matter.

Abigail Disney nailed it when she told the CEO of Disney that it's abhorrent that he makes tens of millions per year while his employees struggle on near starvation salaries.

That these CEOs make tens of millions is a canary in the coal mine. They make tens of millions because their employers have tens of billions. Their salaries are indicative of a major and growing problem in the USA, mainly. And it doesn't matter our politics; left, right, Donald Trump, Abigail Disney, it doesn't matter when some terrifying indicators are right in front of us that can potentially spell the end of what we have built in the USA.

The birthrate in the USA is plummeting, our economic growth rate is even behind Canada, the engines of our economy can't afford healthcare, can't afford to have babies, can't afford housing.

Meanwhile, the billionaires who pay those millionaires to pay the workers minimum wage, are essentially, no longer adding to the strength of the U.S. economy, because they've convinced us that they can't afford to invest their wealth in the USA. And we let them get away with sending their money and inheritance offshore to places that have healthcare, and quality of life,  like Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Andorra, Australia, and Curacao.

The billionaires of the USA are often generous and loving people, but we've allowed them to unwittingly hijack the engines of our economy. They rarely pay for infrastructure upgrades because they pay miniscule taxes. And corporations now pay something around 10% of their revenue in taxes.

So in an obscene turn of events, the main infrastructure investment in the USA is now coming from half-broke 30% taxed schmucks like us , who mean well enough, but realistically, can't afford much.

If we can't fix this, the USA marches down the same tired path that Britain found itself after WWII. The once-great economic power of Britain is now a reduced to a stray dog, begging for scraps and licking the hand of The Queen hoping for some tidbits from the British Petroleum cookie jar.

Meanwhile, Germany and China ship their Fentanyl to the USA in bulk to turn on a nation of addicts who can't work, can't dream, can't invent, and can't fix what's broken.

If a CEO is worth $50 million a year because her $1 billion a year employers and her $6 billion year corporation say that she's worth it, then fine, she's worth it.

But it's obscene that collectively, that CEO, the CEO's employers and that CEO's corporation have become fabulously wealthy from the country that they barely support any longer.

The millionaires and billionaires need to shake in their boots at this moment that they've so sufficiently neglected the engines of their wealth,  that they may have little to nothing to leave to their grandchildren. We need infrastructure investment and human investment in the USA that half-broke schmucks like us can no longer afford.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, mikewof said:

And we let them get away with sending their money and inheritance offshore to places that have healthcare, and quality of life,  like Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, Andorra, Australia, and Curacao.

When someone "offshores" a billion dollars, what actually happens to the US dollars?

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, mikewof said:

If a CEO is worth $50 million a year because her $1 billion a year employers and her $6 billion year corporation say that she's worth it, then fine, she's worth it.

Do $1 billion employers like wasting money?  Do they like getting good deals?  If equivalent $1 million dollar CEOs were available, wouldn't they like to save $49 million?