4 ms·

Should athletes be so well paid? How about musicians? Construction work is much harder than office work, maybe 2-3x. Should office workers be paid less, or con

Should athletes be so well paid? How about musicians? Construction work is much harder than office work, maybe 2-3x. Should office workers be paid less, or construction workers more? Whether something is "harder" has very little to do with compensation in a market-driven economy.

jononor 7y ago
Majority of athletes and musicians are paid extremely little, if anything at all. It is only the top 0.1% that takes home serious money.
- hirako2000 7y ago
  Spot on. And excutives are the 0.1% of the staff. They climbed up to the top levels of responsibility. Whether they bullshited their way through is another story. But I do see some artists who climbed their way to the top selling charts, with little artistic talent. Why people buy the bullshit from imposters, whether them be artists or executives, that is an interesting question.
  - jorvi 7y ago
    > Spot on. And excutives are the 0.1% of the staff. They climbed up to the top levels of responsibility. I think you meant top levels of decision making. Executives rarely deal with the fall-out of bad decisions. Management and normal workers get axed, executives get a golden parachute and a cushy board job at another company from one of their fellow executives. In other words, they carry zero consequences and thus zero responsibility for their actions.
    - tomnipotent 7y ago
      > Executives rarely deal with the fall-out of bad decisions This is a fantasy. Executives come-and-go at the same cadence as regular employees as a % of staff. Look at any exec on LinkedIn and you'll see the same 18-36 month stints as everyone else.
      - Yizahi 7y ago
        Yes, they come and go, by their own decision. For promotions, bigger salaries and other reasons. How many executives were actually fired for underperforming? What is even underperforming for that type of job?
        tomnipotent 7y ago
        > by their own decision Another fantasy. Plenty of execs are fired, it's just handled differently at that level. > How many executives were actually fired for underperforming? A lot. > What is even underperforming for that type of job? Poor performance, just like anyone else that's fired.
  - tomnipotent 7y ago
    They're actually the top 1.5-2%, at least in the US. There are roughly ~170M working folk of which an estimated 2.5-3M are "top executives".
    - AdrianB1 7y ago
      Executives of small companies should not be counted, I really doubt they are paid as much as the rest of the company if the entire company is 200 people. For big companies of over 10,000 people there are not enough companies to have that many top executives.
      - tomnipotent 7y ago
        > as the rest of the company if the entire company is 200 people It's easy to confuse income with capital and earning potential. There are no shortage of well-off restaurant owners or other small-business owners with < 200 employees - I run into no shortage of them in Los Angeles. Thomas Keller, Gordon Ramsey, and their less-known partners make a lot more than their staff. It may not manifest in 1000x annual pay, but it definitely manifests as 1000x quality of life thanks to the magic of compound interest and financial leverage. Being a capitalist puts you in an entirely different game - salaried or hourly employees are not capitalist, they're labor. This makes a big difference to banks and other money lenders, further giving leverage for future earnings potential.
- tomnipotent 7y ago
  > Majority of athletes The average salary/income for any major league sport puts all of them in the top 1-2%. Baseball min is around $500k, NBA is around $480k.
  - mamon 7y ago
    How many basketball players never make it to NBA? Major leagues are elitte, there are thousands of players at lower levels.
    - tomnipotent 7y ago
      If we're comparing executives at top companies vs. not, it's a fair comparison. Most executives don't make it into the "big league", and those that do are paid pretty much like their pro athlete counterparts. In the U.S., the NFL is in the $16-25bn in annual revenues; NBA is ~$3-5bn; MLB ~ $11bn. Think about how well players are paid relative % of revenues. Google is at $110bn. Microsoft $125bn. Apple ~$258bn. There are "pro executives" that pull in big paychecks because, just like their pro athlete counterparts, they make a difference. We just don't get to watch them at work and score their every move with easy-to-track-stats. No one bats an eye when a pro athlete is paid $10m+ (besides other pro athletes).
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  It is not the point of the argument, but the "pay 50x". The top 0.1% of the athletes that take home serious money (50x more than average, let's say) don't work (train) 50 times harder, they are just successful at what they do; they are paid for success, not for the effort.
specialist 7y ago
Wrong analogy. Athletes don't own, shepherd the capital. For sports, that'd be the owners, GMs, etc. Athletes are more akin to superstar sales persons. Many sales persons are pretty good. Some are amazing.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

jononor 7y ago

Majority of athletes and musicians are paid extremely little, if anything at all. It is only the top 0.1% that takes home serious money.

hirako2000 7y ago
Spot on. And excutives are the 0.1% of the staff. They climbed up to the top levels of responsibility. Whether they bullshited their way through is another story. But I do see some artists who climbed their way to the top selling charts, with little artistic talent. Why people buy the bullshit from imposters, whether them be artists or executives, that is an interesting question.
- jorvi 7y ago
  > Spot on. And excutives are the 0.1% of the staff. They climbed up to the top levels of responsibility. I think you meant top levels of decision making. Executives rarely deal with the fall-out of bad decisions. Management and normal workers get axed, executives get a golden parachute and a cushy board job at another company from one of their fellow executives. In other words, they carry zero consequences and thus zero responsibility for their actions.
  - tomnipotent 7y ago
    > Executives rarely deal with the fall-out of bad decisions This is a fantasy. Executives come-and-go at the same cadence as regular employees as a % of staff. Look at any exec on LinkedIn and you'll see the same 18-36 month stints as everyone else.
    - Yizahi 7y ago
      Yes, they come and go, by their own decision. For promotions, bigger salaries and other reasons. How many executives were actually fired for underperforming? What is even underperforming for that type of job?
      - tomnipotent 7y ago
        > by their own decision Another fantasy. Plenty of execs are fired, it's just handled differently at that level. > How many executives were actually fired for underperforming? A lot. > What is even underperforming for that type of job? Poor performance, just like anyone else that's fired.
- tomnipotent 7y ago
  They're actually the top 1.5-2%, at least in the US. There are roughly ~170M working folk of which an estimated 2.5-3M are "top executives".
  - AdrianB1 7y ago
    Executives of small companies should not be counted, I really doubt they are paid as much as the rest of the company if the entire company is 200 people. For big companies of over 10,000 people there are not enough companies to have that many top executives.
    - tomnipotent 7y ago
      > as the rest of the company if the entire company is 200 people It's easy to confuse income with capital and earning potential. There are no shortage of well-off restaurant owners or other small-business owners with < 200 employees - I run into no shortage of them in Los Angeles. Thomas Keller, Gordon Ramsey, and their less-known partners make a lot more than their staff. It may not manifest in 1000x annual pay, but it definitely manifests as 1000x quality of life thanks to the magic of compound interest and financial leverage. Being a capitalist puts you in an entirely different game - salaried or hourly employees are not capitalist, they're labor. This makes a big difference to banks and other money lenders, further giving leverage for future earnings potential.
tomnipotent 7y ago
> Majority of athletes The average salary/income for any major league sport puts all of them in the top 1-2%. Baseball min is around $500k, NBA is around $480k.
- mamon 7y ago
  How many basketball players never make it to NBA? Major leagues are elitte, there are thousands of players at lower levels.
  - tomnipotent 7y ago
    If we're comparing executives at top companies vs. not, it's a fair comparison. Most executives don't make it into the "big league", and those that do are paid pretty much like their pro athlete counterparts. In the U.S., the NFL is in the $16-25bn in annual revenues; NBA is ~$3-5bn; MLB ~ $11bn. Think about how well players are paid relative % of revenues. Google is at $110bn. Microsoft $125bn. Apple ~$258bn. There are "pro executives" that pull in big paychecks because, just like their pro athlete counterparts, they make a difference. We just don't get to watch them at work and score their every move with easy-to-track-stats. No one bats an eye when a pro athlete is paid $10m+ (besides other pro athletes).
AdrianB1 7y ago
It is not the point of the argument, but the "pay 50x". The top 0.1% of the athletes that take home serious money (50x more than average, let's say) don't work (train) 50 times harder, they are just successful at what they do; they are paid for success, not for the effort.

specialist 7y ago

Wrong analogy. Athletes don't own, shepherd the capital. For sports, that'd be the owners, GMs, etc. Athletes are more akin to superstar sales persons. Many sales persons are pretty good. Some are amazing.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]