9 Out Of 10 Americans Are Completely Wrong About This Mind-Blowing Fact

Sycamore said:
And you think an executive is more valuable than the employees their company company couldn't function without?
Click to expand...

You are now comparing one man to an entire body of people. Which is pretty stupid, because I bet the entire body of people you just brought up ARE paid more, collectively, than the CEO. So yes, the entire body of masses that make up a company are more valuable than an individual CEO, and thus they collectively, as said body, are paid more than the CEO.
 
Dr. Krieger said:
You are now comparing one man to an entire body of people. Which is pretty stupid, because I bet the entire body of people you just brought up ARE paid more, collectively, than the CEO. So yes, the entire body of masses that make up a company are more valuable than an individual CEO, and thus they collectively, as said body, are paid more than the CEO.
Click to expand...

See post #77.
 
Thing1 said:
We've got some common ground there. I don't like the "woe" argument either, though a more equitable compensation system would alleviate a lot of that as well. I was just at Wal-Mart, and it is kind of screwed up that most of the people that work at a successful enterprise such as that can't really get by at even the most minimal level.

If that chart that Tom just posted is correct, it's a real eye-opener. There is just something wrong there. To me, it smacks more of a system that people who understand it can exploit to their personal advantage, rather than one which is set up with just a basic fairness in mind.
Click to expand...

I dont believe you should be making a living from being a walmart greeter. Minimum wage jobs are for 14 year olds. Not 40 year old men. No one should expect to be able to have a nice house/apartment, car, and all the luxuries of middle classness by being a stockboy.
 
Sycamore said:
We know businesses can function without management, and that it's better for the economy if they do. CEOs are parasites.
Click to expand...

Thats about the stupidest comment I've heard in awhile....does this fool think we just throw "business seeds" out in the soil and successful corporations grow ?

Anyway.....the US has one of the biggest economies in the world, if not the biggest, with only 5% of the worlds population.....
that didn't happen by accident.....
 
Dr. Krieger said:
I dont believe you should be making a living from being a walmart greeter. Minimum wage jobs are for 14 year olds. Not 40 year old men. No one should expect to be able to have a nice house/apartment, car, and all the luxuries of middle classness by being a stockboy.
Click to expand...

Pretty soon all wages are going to be Walmart quality if this trend continues.
 
Dr. Krieger said:
YOU may have an end number, but you dont see the long term game. The next generation wont just abide by the standard you set. They will want more. They are takers and they will take.
Click to expand...

But stealing from thieves isn't really stealing, no? I guess you were one of those kids who threw a fit after reading Robin Hood.
 
Dr. Krieger said:
your post addresses nothing I said.
Click to expand...

In which case you said nothing. Are you going to tell me that American CEOs are so much more deserving of their massive stipends compared to the rest of the world? I can undertsand Dixie because he is a few sandwiches short of a picnic anyway but how do you justify it?
 
Dixie said:
When you stated that you believe CEOs earn more than they deserve, that is resentment toward their success, you idiot. I don't know how that could be any plainer or easier to comprehend. Now you can fucking bow up and just deny the obvious here, but that just shows you are unwilling to admit you are jealous, which is a very common symptom of those who are jealous.

Learn to read the fucking definitions so you won't be totally ignorant. The one I posted doesn't say it has to be against a "rival" for it to be jealousy. You see the little comma following rival, it means there is more to the sentence, it's not complete. If you continue to read the sentence, you see that jealousy can also be over an advantage or success of another, it doesn't have to be a rival. I shouldn't have to break down basic definitions of words for you, I assume you are educated enough to read and comprehend basic English. Resenting people because of what they earn, IS JEALOUSY!
Click to expand...
Dizie, are you saying one cannot believe that CEO's earn more than they deserve without being jealous of them? I personally am not jealous of a person who earns more than they deserve, I have pitty on them because Ive seen what that type of situation can do to a person.
 
Dr. Krieger said:
I dont believe you should be making a living from being a walmart greeter. Minimum wage jobs are for 14 year olds. Not 40 year old men. No one should expect to be able to have a nice house/apartment, car, and all the luxuries of middle classness by being a stockboy.
Click to expand...

Maybe not making a living in the "nice house" sense, but they should be able to get by. And if you walk through any given Walmart, very few of the employees are teenagers.

It's a basic problem I have with the minimum wage as well, which is a separate conversation. Why it isn't adjusted for region is beyond me.
 
Sycamore said:
But stealing from thieves isn't really stealing, no? I guess you were one of those kids who threw a fit after reading Robin Hood.
Click to expand...

how are they thieves? They own a company, or work for a company, produce a product, and people voluntarily give them money for said products. Go back to your drum circle, idiot.
 
Last edited:
Aoxomoxoa said:
In which case you said nothing. Are you going to tell me that American CEOs are so much more deserving of their massive stipends compared to the rest of the world? I can undertsand Dixie because he is a few sandwiches short of a picnic anyway but how do you justify it?
Click to expand...

Why not? Present an actual argument please. Who is to say if they are deserving or not?

Secondly, America has by far some of the biggest companies in the entire world. I would like to see the median instead of the average, because warren buffet and bill gates are probably single handily distorting the average. For the vast majority of companies, that 475:1 number probably isn't the case.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
In which case you said nothing. Are you going to tell me that American CEOs are so much more deserving of their massive stipends compared to the rest of the world? I can undertsand Dixie because he is a few sandwiches short of a picnic anyway but how do you justify it?
Click to expand...

Lastly, your #77 post had almost nothing to do with my aside to sycamore. He was asking me if I thought CEOs are more valuable than the entire body of people that work for a company, I said no, and pointed out that the entire mass of a company is almost surely paid more than the CEO. Making his point irrelevant.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
If you look at Germany, a massively successful country by anyone's standards, the ratio between directors and workers pay is far less than in Anglo-American companies.

pay.jpg
Click to expand...
They are way below the us! Child please
 
I Love America said:
So what is the appropriate gap in your view?

How much more should a CEO be allowed to make?

What are these negative ramifications an why haven't they happened?

Is it OK for Barabra Streisand to make 1000 times more than the guys who put up her stage?
Click to expand...


His view or anyone else's as to the ratio between worker and CEO pay ( including the Government) is completely irrelevant.

Only the shareholders should set CEO pay but if a law needs to be written for that to happen, so be it.
 
Liberty said:
I couldn't watch all of this. Just a tool for marxists. Funny how lazy people think they should have something coming to them other than the lack of fruits, for their lack of labor.

Taxpayers spent $1.4 billion dollars on everything from staffing, housing, flying and entertaining President Obama and his family last year, according to the author of a new book on taxpayer-funded presidential perks.

In comparison, British taxpayers spent just $57.8 million on the royal family.

Author Robert Keith Gray writes in “Presidential Perks Gone Royal” that Obama isn’t the only president to have taken advantage of the expensive trappings of his office. But the amount of money spent on the first family, he argues, has risen tremendously under the Obama administration and needs to be reined in.

Gray told The Daily Caller that the $1.4 billion spent on the Obama family last year is the “total cost of the presidency,” factoring the cost of the “biggest staff in history at the highest wages ever,” a 50 percent increase in the numbers of appointed czars and an Air Force One “running with the frequency of a scheduled air line.”

Perspective: $1.4 billion is equal to spending seven times Mitt Romney’s entire net-worth every year. If Romney had to pay for Barack and Michelle’s lifestyle this year, he would have been bankrupted by the third week in February.

Now, can we please get back to talking about the evil, freeloading rich people, who didn’t build anything and who need to "pay a little bit more."
Click to expand...


Are you kidding me? Want to buy some nice waterfront property?
 
Dr. Krieger said:
"ridiculously out of line" is subjective. if we cut it down to 50x more than the average worker - the next generation will be trying to get it down to 10x more. There is never an end point for your kind. You are takers, you will never stop taking. If we give you an inch, you'll take a mile.
Click to expand...

This is why the shareholders should have reigned this in long ago. It is their money being wasted. Perfect example of greed as a mental illness.
 
Rune said:
His view or anyone else's as to the ratio between worker and CEO pay ( including the Government) is completely irrelevant.

Only the shareholders should set CEO pay but if a law needs to be written for that to happen, so be it.
Click to expand...

Good idea
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top