CEO’s are paid a lot in absolute terms. (Typically 5mm in cash). But the majority of their compensation is in stock and operating performance based incentives.
Busting the “Paid What You’re Worth” Myth
- Thread starter Frederick Foresight
- Start date
CEO’s are paid a lot in absolute terms. (Typically 5mm in cash). But the majority of their compensation is in stock and operating performance based incentives.
Typical populist rhetoric. This is a trading site. Make some money, you failure.
I think he’s only real argument is that worker wages are kept down by regulation and collusion. This is garbage.
what company has a monopsony on wages?
What regulations lower the free market wage?
He just says stuff without any evidence.
it’s totally unfair that Tom Brady is paid 20mm/year and the water boy was paid 10k.
You don't think it's overdone, compared to historical standards?
Operating performance based incentives. Such as curbing wages?
You don't think it's overdone, compared to historical standards?
Operating performance based incentives. Such as curbing wages?
Which historical standard? Pre-ww2? Post-ww2? Revolutionary times? Civil War times?
Wages are a cost. CEO's work for the shareholders. If they create value for the shareholders then that's what it is. What about curbing material costs (those are someone else's wages)?
https://www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2021/
Yeah, I know, and that's all well and good.
But the wealth and income gap continues to increase. Why do you think that is?
Last edited:
I haven't watched the video, so there is that caveat, but I have thought about these discussions and arguments for a very long time. I do think that the delta between worker and CEO pay is extreme, but I do also believe in the free market's ability to price everything.
But what is happening is the classic case of "privatize gains and socialize losses". How profitable would most companies be if interest rates were set by the market and had not been set at zero for 15 years? We wouldn't have nearly as many CEO's to argue about since most companies would have gone bust. We also wouldn't have the size of the government that we do, able to award contracts to a ton of companies, spending printed up dollars.
Those stock options wouldn't seem as attractive to a CEO if he knew that he couldn't borrow billions for free, and buy back stock in order to pump up share price.
What every worked should actually be fighting for is a hard money standard, yes, like bitcoin. It would mean the guys at the top have the play by the same rules. But what we have today is two different sets of rules. The little guy thinks socialism is going to help him, and that government and union policies are designed to protect him, but all these do is keep him above the poverty level while those at the top get the other 99%. If the little guy wants a dollar, he has to agree to give the CEO 100 dollars, or else there is no deal. This is how the current system works and there is no way off this train until you switch monetary systems and bring in true free market capitalism.
But what is happening is the classic case of "privatize gains and socialize losses". How profitable would most companies be if interest rates were set by the market and had not been set at zero for 15 years? We wouldn't have nearly as many CEO's to argue about since most companies would have gone bust. We also wouldn't have the size of the government that we do, able to award contracts to a ton of companies, spending printed up dollars.
Those stock options wouldn't seem as attractive to a CEO if he knew that he couldn't borrow billions for free, and buy back stock in order to pump up share price.
What every worked should actually be fighting for is a hard money standard, yes, like bitcoin. It would mean the guys at the top have the play by the same rules. But what we have today is two different sets of rules. The little guy thinks socialism is going to help him, and that government and union policies are designed to protect him, but all these do is keep him above the poverty level while those at the top get the other 99%. If the little guy wants a dollar, he has to agree to give the CEO 100 dollars, or else there is no deal. This is how the current system works and there is no way off this train until you switch monetary systems and bring in true free market capitalism.
I think that’s the natural state of things. Throughout history every society has been more unequal than we are today.
Post ww2 america was the anomaly and current Western Europe won’t be sustainable.
those who are good at making money will continue to earnings . And it’s easier to make money when you already have it. (Not the McDonald’s ceo example, but Fortune 500 ceos are only 500 people of the wealth disparity).
what’s different today is that almost anyone has a chance to become the McDonald’s CEO. Starting a business has never been easier. Your last name isn’t as important as it was in the past (though being born rich doesn’t hurt).
So companies that get bailed out and have their CEOs receive large compensations should not happen right? a bailout indicates performance was not so good I'm assuming.