4 ms·
Nobody deserves anything. CEOs get paid because they negotiated the pay and people are willing to pay them that. That’s a fact not an economic theory.
by simplecomplex 7y ago
Nobody deserves anything. CEOs get paid because they negotiated the pay and people are willing to pay them that. That’s a fact not an economic theory.
- devoply 7y agoBorn with a golden spoon into a community willing to pay for their status.
- charlesdm 7y agoClearly not someone who thinks in terms of value creation. If I can add $20m of profit to the bottom line of an organisation, then there is nothing wrong with capturing some of that value, no? Call it CEO or entrepreneur, at the end of the day, it's the same job, with the same end result.
- Catsandkites 7y agoOver my total career I have probably helped safe guard millions upon millions of dollars. How much value did that create or protect? How much of that was I allowed to capture compared to the CEO? A fraction.
- dv_dt 7y agoSort of like if the serfs consent by not revolting, then the aristocrats must have a mandate to rule?
- doubleunplussed 7y agoSort of. I forget where I read it, but some rich guy wrote an article along the lines of "hey other rich guys, we gotta deal with this inequality thing, otherwise the pitchforks are coming for us"
- dv_dt 7y agoI think certain pragmatic rich people do say that including Warren Buffet and Ray Dalio to name a couple. Those two have their faults, but IMHO are more directly connected and thoughtful about how actual value is made a little more deeply than your average making money via financial engineering.
- simplecomplex 7y agoNope. Not really. CEOs don’t rule anyone. We elect representatives who vote and make laws. But you know all this, so the feudal comparison is pretty melodramatic and ridiculous. You can be a CEO if you want. Give it a try!
- dv_dt 7y agoAnd studies have show that the laws that are made in the US correlate to the desires of the economic aristocracy not the broad electorate... this is why I say the representation of the current order as "fact", or a meritocratic, looks a lot like historical justification of aristocratic order as "divine right".
- simplecomplex 7y agoWhich study would that be? This one [1] concludes “both the “ideological sorting” and “vote-buying” hypotheses are able to explain the positive correlations observed between PAC contributions and voting behavior.” In other words, vote buying is not necessarily why votes correlate with contributions along policy lines. Fact: You can be a CEO. Fact: You can be elected to vote on laws. Fact: There is no financial or divine right requirement to run for office or be a CEO. [1] https://www.ifs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Bronars-1997-Money-And-Votes.pdf https://www.ifs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Bronars-1997-...
- dv_dt 7y agohttps://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746 "Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organised groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence." And have you seen any discussion of who exactly ends up as CEO of say fortune 500 companies. There is a distinct lack of women, and of the women who are represented there is a slant to those with wealthy family backgrounds.
- 7y ago