I don't understand your argument, somehow you are saying the claims are conflating salary and compensation. But the very article we are discussing quotes Singh:

I don't understand your argument, somehow you are saying the claims are conflating salary and compensation. But the very article we are discussing quotes Singh: >"At the very same time, the CEOs of the companies they work for are making more salary, making more compensation than they've ever made before." Moreover to claim that other compensation (you call it unrealised capital gains, how do you know they are unrealised, at least part of them are realised), is not contributing to the" pay gap" seems to me a much bigger lie. And yes the pay gap has largely increased because execs are given much higher stock packages, but it is still an increase in compensation, effectively they are being given more value while normal workers salaries have stagnated. So you argue that the CEO salary depends on stock options so he is interested to drive the company value up. Well lots of exec emails claim that all those workers should be doing their best because they are crucial for the company, but they are never given the same sort of options. Why should regular workers not get stock options amounting to potentially 100s of times their regular salary, just like the CEO?