Yeah, reading my comments does paint a picture, but it was unintended. The main point I want to make is that keeping a CEO from making $150k, or $120k because

Yeah, reading my comments does paint a picture, but it was unintended. The main point I want to make is that keeping a CEO from making $150k, or $120k because they should be suffering for some unknown reason is being Penny wise, and Pound foolish. I'm not advocating $200k or $300k in salary or more, I'm just saying that he should make enough where his personal income isn't the thing on his/her mind. Ideally the whole team should be making good enough money where they are not worried about these things. I also wouldn't advocate a system where the CEO was making twice what a CFO or CTO makes or some other crazy hierarchical system. The world assumes there is a strong correlation with people's hunger and their success. In my experience I routinely see the opposite and I believe giving people more helps them perform better. Ultimately if someone is making an investment in a company they want that company to succeed and they should want that CEO to be focused on growing the business. --This entire view point for me has changed over the past 5 years and maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see a good argument for paying a CEO $50,000 a year other than that someone thinks that is a lot of money for some reason.--