Income Inequality

Making Chimichangas said:
@Big Red 40, lots of great information in your post, very well done sir!

:thumbs

I sincerely think there needs to be a national law addressing this.  It can be done very simply: Pass a law that states a CEO can only make 10-15x more than what the lowest paid person in the company makes.

Note this type of law wouldn't prohibit paying a CEO 26 million (or more) a year.  It would just mean that the lowest paid employee would earn 1/10th of 26 million if it is set at 10x the lowest salary.
Click to expand...


Yeah, because if a greeter at Walmart makes $8 an hour, the CEO should be capped at $80 an hour. That seems logical...as does the government dictating wages.  :facepalm:

The people who whine about wage inequality would be a lot better served to spend that time bettering themselves so they can get better jobs. Envy is such a colossal waste of time.

 
Its not about envy or whining.  i honestly do care if they have "theirs", i'm just sick of them telling me my hard days work isn't worth crap while they make billions.  I had an agreement with my company to do x amount of work for x amount of pay/benefits, and i resent them constantly try to whittle my piece of the pie down so they can have more in their pockets. Lots and lots of places are economically oppressed and there is nowhere "better" to go either. Its not that easy.

 
Ric Flair said:
Yeah, because if a greeter at Walmart makes $8 an hour, the CEO should be capped at $80 an hour. That seems logical...as does the government dictating wages.  :facepalm:

The people who whine about wage inequality would be a lot better served to spend that time bettering themselves so they can get better jobs. Envy is such a colossal waste of time.
Click to expand...
if the greeter is only making $8 an hour someone is violating the minimum wage...wouldn't someone be in trouble?  

 
BigRedBuster said:
His point still is valid.  If the greeter makes $10 per hour, the CEO can only make $100 per hour?

No thanks....
Click to expand...
I agree that a wage cap doesn't make sense. But I think that if CEO's have huge salaries and corporations are making profits, then the workers at the bottom need protections like minimum wage increases. We've seen this song and dance throughout the 300 years of capitalism - capitalists will try to squeeze every last penny they can out of the workers. (And to be fair, the workers would also do it in return if they had that power.)

 
RedDenver said:
I agree that a wage cap doesn't make sense. But I think that if CEO's have huge salaries and corporations are making profits, then the workers at the bottom need protections like minimum wage increases. We've seen this song and dance throughout the 300 years of capitalism - capitalists will try to squeeze every last penny they can out of the workers. (And to be fair, the workers would also do it in return if they had that power.)
Click to expand...


I have been caught before in a pickle where people say "CEOs" and they really mean CEOs of publicly traded companies over a certain size.  So, I'm assuming this is what we are talking about here too.

These ideas all sound well and good in discussions.  But, in reality, they don't work.  These laws get talked about with one group of people in mind and in actuality, that group is an extremely small part of the population that really is a meaningless group.  

If you take the CEO of Walmart and split his income up amongst all the employees at Walmart, it really would be an extremely small amount to each one.  Now, yes, those people would appreciate that small amount.  But, in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't accomplish what the main goal is other than make people at the bottom feel like their sticking to the the man.

FYI....the CEO of Walmart earned 22.8 million in 2016 and had 2.2 million employees.  Split his salary up completely and that's $10.36 per person.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
I have been caught before in a pickle where people say "CEOs" and they really mean CEOs of publicly traded companies over a certain size.  So, I'm assuming this is what we are talking about here too.

These ideas all sound well and good in discussions.  But, in reality, they don't work.  These laws get talked about with one group of people in mind and in actuality, that group is an extremely small part of the population that really is a meaningless group.  

If you take the CEO of Walmart and split his income up amongst all the employees at Walmart, it really would be an extremely small amount to each one.  Now, yes, those people would appreciate that small amount.  But, in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't accomplish what the main goal is other than make people at the bottom feel like their sticking to the the man.

FYI....the CEO of Walmart earned 22.8 million in 2016 and had 2.2 million employees.  Split his salary up completely and that's $10.36 per person.
Click to expand...
And then on the other hand:

Walmart is paying $20 billion to shareholders. With that money, it could boost hourly wages to over $15.

I agree it's not just about the CEO pay but rather the equity of the entire system and CEO pay is just part of it. I can't find data on all the Walmart execs, but I'd bet a lot of money that if you took their salaries and bonuses and stocks and what-not, even a fraction of that would be way more than $10 per worker. The tax cuts alone will save Walmart about $2 billion/year, which would be about $1000 per worker, which is a goodly amount if you're making minimum wage.

 
RedDenver said:
And then on the other hand:

Walmart is paying $20 billion to shareholders. With that money, it could boost hourly wages to over $15.

I agree it's not just about the CEO pay but rather the equity of the entire system and CEO pay is just part of it. I can't find data on all the Walmart execs, but I'd bet a lot of money that if you took their salaries and bonuses and stocks and what-not, even a fraction of that would be way more than $10 per worker. The tax cuts alone will save Walmart about $2 billion/year, which would be about $1000 per worker, which is a goodly amount if you're making minimum wage.
Click to expand...


Well, then that's what the discussion needs to be about instead of what was being discussed.

Again, I can understand the principles behind wanting to do something like this.  Problem is that in the real world, it absolutely sucks and always has unintended consequences.

In general, I'm not for regulating pay like this even tough I think some people in upper management of some companies shouldn't make what they are.  My typical problem is when the top management is making huge amounts of money and the company is going broke.

 
BigRedBuster said:
Well, then that's what the discussion needs to be about instead of what was being discussed.

Again, I can understand the principles behind wanting to do something like this.  Problem is that in the real world, it absolutely sucks and always has unintended consequences.

In general, I'm not for regulating pay like this even tough I think some people in upper management of some companies shouldn't make what they are.  My typical problem is when the top management is making huge amounts of money and the company is going broke.
Click to expand...




Just curious what your opinion is.

What would you think of a $15 minimum wage with limitations. Some examples of those could be: start ups by new business owners are not included, businesses with < X employees not included, and it depends on the cost of living. E.g. the minimum wage in L.A. could be $20, in Nebraska $12.

 
RedDenver said:
And then on the other hand:

Walmart is paying $20 billion to shareholders. With that money, it could boost hourly wages to over $15.

I agree it's not just about the CEO pay but rather the equity of the entire system and CEO pay is just part of it. I can't find data on all the Walmart execs, but I'd bet a lot of money that if you took their salaries and bonuses and stocks and what-not, even a fraction of that would be way more than $10 per worker. The tax cuts alone will save Walmart about $2 billion/year, which would be about $1000 per worker, which is a goodly amount if you're making minimum wage.
Click to expand...


The profits belong to the shareholders, not the employees. If they want to pay the CEO millions and greeters $10 an hour, they’re free to do so.

if the greeter is unhappy with making $10 an hour, he doesn’t have to work there.

 
Ric Flair said:
The profits belong to the shareholders, not the employees. If they want to pay the CEO millions and greeters $10 an hour, they’re free to do so.

if the greeter is unhappy with making $10 an hour, he doesn’t have to work there.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's the entire point of what's wrong with this system. A few people who do little to no actual work somehow get much, much more of the profits than the people who actually work there. And the only option is to quit and hope the other corporations who are all part of that same system will treat you better.

 
Back
Top