6 ms·
Yeah, but these are systematic problems. None of the super-rich CEOs deserve their pay, period. But the problem is a comparison. A CEO who feels like they are u
by quadrangle 11y ago
Yeah, but these are systematic problems. None of the super-rich CEOs deserve their pay, period. But the problem is a comparison. A CEO who feels like they are underpaid relative to other companies may feel undervalued merely by that comparison, regardless of being super wealthy.
The rise in CEO pay actually correlates partly with transparency. People thought reporting the pay would shame the waste, but it resulted in CEOs paid more reasonably feeling undervalued, and that drove their pay up.
There needs to be systematic rejection of this nonsense, like all companies agreeing together to pay more reasonably and otherwise pay employees reasonably.
The real best answer is probably a more progressive income tax (ideally with a Universal Basic Income funded by a negative income tax). Then CEOs can brag about how much more taxes they pay than others given how much higher their salary is, but we don't have to have so much waste and inequity.
- brobdingnagian 11y ago> like all companies agreeing together to pay more reasonably I believe that's called wage fixing, and is illegal.
- Retra 11y agoIt doesn't have to be. Not for exceptionally high wages.
- olefoo 11y agoOr government regulation; in which case it is not illegal by definition. As americans we are trained to forget that it is possible to have collective norms that are enforced by law. And indeed there are many who believe that all government regulations are ipso facto immoral; while conveniently forgetting the government granted monopolies and subsidies that make them wealthy. "Ayn Rand fuck yeah, but don't touch my soybean subsidies." 'merica!
- thaumasiotes 11y ago> Or government regulation; in which case it is not illegal by definition. Government regulations can easily be illegal. Happens all the time.
- craigyk 11y agoI don't think you need to do much more than add more tax brackets and increase them. The top bracket really should be approaching like 90% for income in excess of $1M a year... IE. the tax brackets and rates should generate an income return that looks somewhat like a sigmoidal curve... if you've looked at biology this usually results (or is a result of) stable equilibria. Also, capital gains gets taxed as income.
- ransom1538 11y ago"Also, capital gains gets taxed as income." That, is the most heart stopping sentence you can say to an American rich person. The tax structure is setup to tax the poor and middle class the hardest. If you are in a class that can do capital gains, 83b elections, double irish -- no taxes.
- iopq 11y agoIt's also not fair because you lose some of your investment's value to inflation. So that 15% long term rate ends up closer to 30% if you include the fact that your dollar is worth less today than when you bought the stock. I did some rough math on putting money into the stock market vs. inflation: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/38b2u9/once_you_are_in_the_top_1_your_effective_tax_rate/crtxxfu http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/38b2u9/once_you_ar...
- dtech 11y agoThis is utter ballocks. Inflation affects everyone equally, there is no reason why people with enough unneeded income/capital to invest it should get tax breaks. You know who really suffers from inflation? Minimum wage workers who's wages do not go up despite inflation.
- iopq 11y agoAgain, like I showed in my numbers, it's NOT a tax break. It's offsetting inflation. You pay very little inflation on your income this year, but you paid inflation "tax" on those investments from years ago you sold today.
- bobbles 11y agoI'd rather see a system where a CEOs pay could be capped as a multiple of the lowest pay full time worker. ie. CEO payrises must coincide with base pay rates also increasing.
- dagw 11y agoOr you'll end up making the CEO more of a honorary or figurehead position where your only responsibility is to show up for board meetings once a month, and vesting the real decision making power (and big salary) with for example the COO/CFO/CTO or whatever.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- raverbashing 11y agoJust make the lowest pay workers part time or contractors, then you'll be yielded a higher margin
- kubiiii 11y agoThen just base the hourly CEO wage a multiple of the lowest hourly wage a sub sub sub contractor makes when working for the company. Including developping countries workers.
- jedrek 11y agoI'd love to see that too, but instead every department of a company would become an "independent contractor" and the highest-level management would end up a tiny, 100 person company with salaries starting at 300k.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- dagw 11y agoOr perhaps a large company of low wage workers overseen by 100 highly paid independent contractors hired by the board of directors.
- andyjohnson0 11y ago"The rise in CEO pay actually correlates partly with transparency." This seems reasonable, and I don't disbelieve you, but do you have any pointers to studies that back-up this conclusion?
- biehl 11y agoPaul Krugman has a somewhat related theory. http://www.vox.com/2015/5/18/8619687/paul-krugman-ceo-pay http://www.vox.com/2015/5/18/8619687/paul-krugman-ceo-pay
- quadrangle 11y agoWell, see https://www.fastcompany.com/1803069/social-medias-envy-effect https://www.fastcompany.com/1803069/social-medias-envy-effec... Dan Ariely talks about this in his research, how important the comparison issue is. People feel more rewarded being the highest paid and undervalued being the lowest paid. As long as all numbers are above a comfortable base income, this comparative element overwhelms any actual significance of the absolute amount of money.