4 ms·

Wealth inequality is real and I think it's good to have some sort of pushback on it, pay ratio caps or otherwise. At the same time California is so stupidly dys

Wealth inequality is real and I think it's good to have some sort of pushback on it, pay ratio caps or otherwise. At the same time California is so stupidly dysfunctional that I don't think they deserve any more tax revenue - San Francisco alone had a higher budget in 2019 ($12 billion) than 13 entire states, yet absolutely nothing gets done.

jophde 7y ago
They cannot even manage shutting down a blatant stolen goods market / fence on 15th and Mission.
- olliej 7y ago
  which one? a street one or something else?
  - jophde 7y ago
    Its pseudo sanctioned by the city. Its on 15th and Mission every weekend can’t miss it. It will probably end after someone gets stabbed sadly.
labster 7y ago
This is objectively false, of course. Governments do get things done all the time, even if policy changes you want are not happening. Even as hyperbole, your statement serves to fray the social fabric. People seem to think that governments should be solving all the problems on their own. But a democracy is a government of the people. If people don’t participate beyond just voting, they deserve what they get.
- ravenstine 7y ago
  I dunno. When my state ends up with more homelessness and sanitation problems and police ignore low-level crimes, I'm not inclined to give it more money.
  - labster 7y ago
    Were you trying to reply to a different comment? It seems unrelated to mine.
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  When the government takes your money, they have the obligation to do everything they are supposed to do; if you don't do your part of the deal (paying taxes) you go to prison, if they don't do theirs, they should go to prison. Equal treatment, right? When you pay your taxes there is no disclaimer: "people have to participate beyond just voting". Your taxes is your participation by the social contract, the government needs to either deliver or stop collecting taxes and everyone will have to get their services from private entities (of course this is not possible).
  - labster 7y ago
    Paying taxes for a working government is simply not the social contract we made in the United States. You may be thinking of other forms of government. The US Constitution says that you, as one of the people, are the ultimate authority of the government. In a representative democracy, this means not only electing representatives but advising them and holding them to account. The transactional nature you are suggesting simply doesn’t exist. Good governance is not an entitlement program, it’s part of your duty as a citizen.
hn_throwaway_99 7y ago
> San Francisco alone had a higher budget in 2019 ($12 billion) than 13 entire states While I agree that I definitely wonder where a lot of the money in SF goes, this "bigger than 13 states" isn't a particularly impressive statistic IMO. First, SF has a bigger population than 5 of those states. In many states depending on how they split responsibilities, per-capita budgets can be significantly higher at the municipal level than the state. Finally, SF is obviously a very expensive city, so getting things done (hiring people, works projects, acquiring land, etc.) is much more expensive than most states.
- raldi 7y ago
  Also, SF is both a city and a county; if you compare it to the sum of other cities' budgets plus their prorated share of the county budget, it's a lot more in line. Still, SF does have to pay a lot more for workers these days thanks to its self-inflicted housing shortage.
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  Cities become expensive when people there spend a lot of money. Similar cities in different parts of the world have different prices for goods, services and rent. This is why Silicon Valley is so expensive, there are too much money there.
cgy1 7y ago
I believe the city budget also includes the budget to operate SFO.
adventured 7y ago
The biggest pay imbalance ratios in the US are in professional sports. The top 30 NBA players are earning a combined $1 billion per year in salary. 122 players in Major League Baseball are presently earning $10 million per year or more. The NBA + MLB + NFL is around $14 billion per year in salary for the top 2,000 active players. Probably $200 billion in salary over the next ten years. It's more than what the top 2,000 executives are extracting from corporations in the US. I can't wait to see what the Lakers, Clippers, Kings, Warriors, Rams, Chargers, 49ers, Dodgers, Giants, Athletics and Angels look like after California makes things right. Lebron James should only be allowed to earn a maximum of ten times what a janitor in the stadium earns or a secretary in the front office, were California to be consistent. Oh wait, they won't do anything about that extreme inequality because no professional athlete would want to play for a California team ever again?
- claudeganon 7y ago
  > The top 30 NBA players are earning a combined $1 billion per year in salary. Saving this one for the next time I hear some canard about unions preventing top performers from their deserved compensation.
  - majos 7y ago
    That still happens. The top 5 players make $30m-$40m, but they’d probably make closer to $50m+ in an open market. After all, the best players still get multiple teams trying to get them on max contracts. The current effect of the cap is mostly to redistribute some of that money to top 10-30 players who also get max contracts even as everyone knows they are not quite as good. There are also competitiveness reasons to avoid true maxes like parity between the teams of relatively rich and poor/thrifty owners. But yeah the union does depress the salaries of the very best.
  - pmiller2 7y ago
    The Screen Actors' Guild might be a better example here.
- Zenbit_UX 7y ago
brett-jackson 7y ago
What's the point in capping CEO pay? It won't lift anyone out of poverty.
- lowercased 7y ago
  are we sure it won't? and whether the goal is to lift anyone from poverty (not sure that's a stated goal), perhaps it may force companies to look for other ways to spend their money. Perhaps more will find its way in to company/equipment reinvestment, more hiring, etc, or... uh-oh - might just end up getting taxed and make its way back to society via govt confiscation(!)
- newguy1234 7y ago
  It is purely ideological. Truth be told, there are major differences between a good CEO and a bad one.
  - citrablue 7y ago
    What are the differences between good and bad CEOs? From my vantage, companies sure seem to be awful at identifying these before hiring someone...
- AdrianB1 7y ago
  It will signal virtue. Politics 101% (adding the bad politics makes the sum go over 100).

jophde 7y ago

They cannot even manage shutting down a blatant stolen goods market / fence on 15th and Mission.

olliej 7y ago
which one? a street one or something else?
- jophde 7y ago
  Its pseudo sanctioned by the city. Its on 15th and Mission every weekend can’t miss it. It will probably end after someone gets stabbed sadly.

labster 7y ago

This is objectively false, of course. Governments do get things done all the time, even if policy changes you want are not happening. Even as hyperbole, your statement serves to fray the social fabric. People seem to think that governments should be solving all the problems on their own. But a democracy is a government of the people. If people don’t participate beyond just voting, they deserve what they get.

ravenstine 7y ago
I dunno. When my state ends up with more homelessness and sanitation problems and police ignore low-level crimes, I'm not inclined to give it more money.
- labster 7y ago
  Were you trying to reply to a different comment? It seems unrelated to mine.
AdrianB1 7y ago
When the government takes your money, they have the obligation to do everything they are supposed to do; if you don't do your part of the deal (paying taxes) you go to prison, if they don't do theirs, they should go to prison. Equal treatment, right? When you pay your taxes there is no disclaimer: "people have to participate beyond just voting". Your taxes is your participation by the social contract, the government needs to either deliver or stop collecting taxes and everyone will have to get their services from private entities (of course this is not possible).
- labster 7y ago
  Paying taxes for a working government is simply not the social contract we made in the United States. You may be thinking of other forms of government. The US Constitution says that you, as one of the people, are the ultimate authority of the government. In a representative democracy, this means not only electing representatives but advising them and holding them to account. The transactional nature you are suggesting simply doesn’t exist. Good governance is not an entitlement program, it’s part of your duty as a citizen.

hn_throwaway_99 7y ago

> San Francisco alone had a higher budget in 2019 ($12 billion) than 13 entire states While I agree that I definitely wonder where a lot of the money in SF goes, this "bigger than 13 states" isn't a particularly impressive statistic IMO. First, SF has a bigger population than 5 of those states. In many states depending on how they split responsibilities, per-capita budgets can be significantly higher at the municipal level than the state. Finally, SF is obviously a very expensive city, so getting things done (hiring people, works projects, acquiring land, etc.) is much more expensive than most states.

raldi 7y ago
Also, SF is both a city and a county; if you compare it to the sum of other cities' budgets plus their prorated share of the county budget, it's a lot more in line. Still, SF does have to pay a lot more for workers these days thanks to its self-inflicted housing shortage.
AdrianB1 7y ago
Cities become expensive when people there spend a lot of money. Similar cities in different parts of the world have different prices for goods, services and rent. This is why Silicon Valley is so expensive, there are too much money there.

cgy1 7y ago

I believe the city budget also includes the budget to operate SFO.

adventured 7y ago

The biggest pay imbalance ratios in the US are in professional sports. The top 30 NBA players are earning a combined $1 billion per year in salary. 122 players in Major League Baseball are presently earning $10 million per year or more. The NBA + MLB + NFL is around $14 billion per year in salary for the top 2,000 active players. Probably $200 billion in salary over the next ten years. It's more than what the top 2,000 executives are extracting from corporations in the US. I can't wait to see what the Lakers, Clippers, Kings, Warriors, Rams, Chargers, 49ers, Dodgers, Giants, Athletics and Angels look like after California makes things right. Lebron James should only be allowed to earn a maximum of ten times what a janitor in the stadium earns or a secretary in the front office, were California to be consistent. Oh wait, they won't do anything about that extreme inequality because no professional athlete would want to play for a California team ever again?

claudeganon 7y ago
> The top 30 NBA players are earning a combined $1 billion per year in salary. Saving this one for the next time I hear some canard about unions preventing top performers from their deserved compensation.
- majos 7y ago
  That still happens. The top 5 players make $30m-$40m, but they’d probably make closer to $50m+ in an open market. After all, the best players still get multiple teams trying to get them on max contracts. The current effect of the cap is mostly to redistribute some of that money to top 10-30 players who also get max contracts even as everyone knows they are not quite as good. There are also competitiveness reasons to avoid true maxes like parity between the teams of relatively rich and poor/thrifty owners. But yeah the union does depress the salaries of the very best.
- pmiller2 7y ago
  The Screen Actors' Guild might be a better example here.
Zenbit_UX 7y ago

brett-jackson 7y ago

What's the point in capping CEO pay? It won't lift anyone out of poverty.

lowercased 7y ago
are we sure it won't? and whether the goal is to lift anyone from poverty (not sure that's a stated goal), perhaps it may force companies to look for other ways to spend their money. Perhaps more will find its way in to company/equipment reinvestment, more hiring, etc, or... uh-oh - might just end up getting taxed and make its way back to society via govt confiscation(!)
newguy1234 7y ago
It is purely ideological. Truth be told, there are major differences between a good CEO and a bad one.
- citrablue 7y ago
  What are the differences between good and bad CEOs? From my vantage, companies sure seem to be awful at identifying these before hiring someone...
AdrianB1 7y ago
It will signal virtue. Politics 101% (adding the bad politics makes the sum go over 100).