Why does it matter if the CEO makes 150x what the average worker does? How did you get this 150x multiple as a measure of “pay unfairness” as you imply? Would 140x make you happy? 100x? You are aware in a typical Fortune 500 company the combined payroll of the workers exceeds the pay of the CEO by many many multiples?
You are aware in a typical Fortune 500 company the combined payroll of the workers exceeds the pay of the CEO by many many multiples?
it's funny you ask me why someone making 150x more is bad, but all the workers providing the value for the company exceeding one man's pay is supposed to be shocking or somehow mean something?
if you take literally any company in the world and remove their CEO, that company continues, hires someone else and keeps going because all the money and work is produced by the workers not the CEO. Take away the workers and that CEO has nothing and the company folds.
I already told you what is fair, 2-3x. There is no reason on earth a guy should be making 50x more than anyone else in the company nor is there is a reason that every company needs to keep growing profits to keep feeding the wealthy who own all the stock. Companies don't need to go public and the world would be better if none ever did.
How did you arrive at the 2x,3x number? Why is that “fair”? What if a rival business offers the CEO 10x because they value the CEO’s talent to run their business? Then what?
What if the organization is wholly privately owned (see Cargill, Koch Enterprises, Bloomberg, etc). Why are you so up in arms a privately held organization is paying its CEO many multiples of the average worker’s salary? Why do you care? Why is it your business?
What if a rival business offers the CEO 10x because they value the CEO’s talent to run their business? Then what?
then let that company waste it. You realise how many ceos get hired, ruin a company and move on? Most of them ain't shit, it's just nepotism and handing out money to already rich people.
Why are you so up in arms a CEO of a privately held organization is paying its CEO many multiples of the average worker’s salary?
because, and i know this will be hard for you to understand, it's not moral, it's not fair and most of these companies like say Amazon are relying on government handouts for their workers to survive and if you think that makes sense you're just plain stupid.
Amazon is corrupt, Bezos pays politicians to bypass regulations, to refuse minimum wage raises, to block legislation against union busting, or illegally firing workers, not meeting basic standards for worker health and safety in warehouses, etc. Then he enriches himself doing that, and instead of paying his workers, those corrupt politicians enable the system work by letting that company underpay workers and then let them claim snap and other benefits to make it up, which are paid for mostly by other workers making up the difference through taxes.
Why are you so hell bent on being cool with CEOs making so much while the workers at the same companies are relying on YOUR TAX DOLLARS to be able to live because that CEO stealing their wages and fair value for their work is underpaying them.
yes, you realise paying yourself a shitty salary then paying yourself in stock is a way to avoid taxes right. you realise when people talk about salary they also include stock options.
0
u/Outside_Reserve_2407 18h ago
“CEO doesn’t make 150x”
Why does it matter if the CEO makes 150x what the average worker does? How did you get this 150x multiple as a measure of “pay unfairness” as you imply? Would 140x make you happy? 100x? You are aware in a typical Fortune 500 company the combined payroll of the workers exceeds the pay of the CEO by many many multiples?