Bobby Kotick to Recieve up to 800% Pay Raise In the Form of Stocks

[Draahl]

I find it funny that people think that just beacuse they have a "hobby mentality" towards gaming that the CEO of a gaming coorporation should have it too? Its a business, deal with it kids. If a CEO can convince the board to raise his paycheck 800%, then obviously the board think he deserves it regardless of what us fans think about it.

[Duronos]

Yes, and I hope that one day the government decides to begin actually enforcing taxes for people of his income bracket.

Why would you want that? If you were in his position, you'd think it unfair if you had a bigger tax % than another class. After all he made that money himself, he's self made whether you like it or not. He hasn't been fired has he (CEO's can get fired by the way), what is with this, "TAX THE RICH MOAR!" ideology? Yeah they get taxed more but why should they have a bigger % than someone from a lower class? That would socialistic and it is because it's basically saying that the harder you work the more your tax % rises and that's not what America is about now is it. The harder you work, the smarter you are, the more opportunities you take when thrown in your face... Well, I guess the more you "make it".

---------- Post added 2013-05-05 at 04:16 AM ----------

I find it funny that people think that just beacuse they have a "hobby mentality" towards gaming that the CEO of a gaming coorporation should have it too? Its a business, deal with it kids. If a CEO can convince the board to raise his paycheck 800%, then obviously the board think he deserves it regardless of what us fans think about it.

Exactly, regardless of any industry, most CEO's are in it for the money. That's just business and it always has been, much of the general pubic doesn't understand this because they aren't involved in business.

[Elegiac]

Why would you want that? If you were in his position, you'd think it unfair if you had a bigger tax % than another class. After all he made that money himself, he's self made whether you like it or not. He hasn't been fired has he (CEO's can get fired by the way), what is with this, "TAX THE RICH MOAR!" ideology? Yeah they get taxed more but why should they have a bigger % than someone from a lower class? That would socialistic and it is because it's basically saying that the harder you work the more your tax % rises and that's not what America is about now is it. The harder you work, the smarter you are, the more opportunities you take when thrown in your face... Well, I guess the more you "make it".

If I were in his position I'd be paying my taxes gladly.

It's quite simple really; the more you make, the greater your social debt. Furthermore, shifting the tax burden upwards is good for the economy.

But I forgot, America is about Miss Ayn Rand's philosophy of "anyone that doesn't make two hundred thousand a year can eat shit and die". Which is exactly why it's doing so well compared to certain other democratic republics, commonwealth realms, and constitutional monarchies, right?

[Duronos]

If I were in his position I'd be paying my taxes gladly.

It's quite simple really; the more you make, the greater your social debt. Furthermore, shifting the tax burden upwards is good for the economy.

But I forgot, America is about Miss Ayn Rand's philosophy of "anyone that doesn't make two hundred thousand a year can eat shit and die". Which is exactly why it's doing so well compared to certain other democratic republics, commonwealth realms, and constitutional monarchies, right?

Those people who make that amount took the opportunities that they saw thrown before them and made something of it. Who says you owe anything to society if you make more? Most of those rich people are self-made, it's a very small percentage that are inheritance and by that I mean like under 1%. I don't understand where all this hate comes from towards the rich... I'm not even rich (only 18) and I understand that people work hard to get there, it's not easy and the fact that "you must pay society back for your own personal acquisitions" is bullshit, utter bullshit.

I'm sorry but it's the person in that position's choice to do so and if they don't want to they don't have too.

[Elegiac]

Those people who make that amount took the opportunities that they saw thrown before them and made something of it. Who says you owe anything to society if you make more? Most of those rich people are self-made, it's a very small percentage that are inheritance and by that I mean like under 1%. I don't understand where all this hate comes from towards the rich... I'm not even rich (only 18) and I understand that people work hard to get there, it's not easy and the fact that "you must pay society back for your own personal acquisitions" is bullshit, utter bullshit.

I'm sorry but it's the person in that position's choice to do so and if they don't want to they don't have too.

The fact that without society to provide the structure within which wealth can be acquired and reproduced, you wouldn't be worth jack. Most of the rich are NOT in fact "self-made"; they had significant initial capital in the form of investment and the wealth of their parents.

The prosperity of the United States; indeed, of all western nations; is built on the back of taxation and public assistance. When taxes are high on the upper classes, it helps stimulate demand and thus economic growth. When spending on infrastructure and education is high, it provides economic and public benefit and maximizes social mobility and opportunity.

Call it "socialist" if you want (ignoring the fact that it isn't actually socialism), the "me, me, me" mindset only benefits the well-off at the expense of everyone else.

[PvPisthelifeforme]

Getting angry over this accomplishes nothing. Many people despise Kotick for his actions, as do I, but the fact he is making even more does not affect me in the slightest. As for the people saying the rich need to be taxed more You get what you work for, and is really modern day survival of the fittest... but with income.

Edit: We will all be dead in the next hundred years anyways! #yoloswag!

[Elegiac]

Getting angry over this accomplishes nothing. Many people despise Kotick for his actions, as do I, but the fact he is making even more does not affect me in the slightest. As for the people saying the rich need to be taxed more, America is not a socialist country. You get what you work for, and is really modern day survival of the fittest... but with income.

Please actually learn the definition of socialism before spouting such garbage.

It also implies that CEO's actually work any harder than their employees. Income is not and has never been proportional to how hard one works.

[Quacko]

If I were in his position I'd be paying my taxes gladly.

It's quite simple really; the more you make, the greater your social debt. Furthermore, shifting the tax burden upwards is good for the economy.

But I forgot, America is about Miss Ayn Rand's philosophy of "anyone that doesn't make two hundred thousand a year can eat shit and die". Which is exactly why it's doing so well compared to certain other democratic republics, commonwealth realms, and constitutional monarchies, right?

Sorry...what????

Why is your social debt greater? So the person who has spent 20 years grinding away long hours and slaving to get to the top has a greater debt to society than the barrista at your local coffee shop? How on earth does that work?

Also, taxing the rich does NOT stimulate anything. The rich are typically the ones handing out the jobs because they're the boss. Tax them more (I'm going more for small business here, rather than big business, but the principle is the same) and they simply can't afford to put that extra person on, thus creating less jobs for people. This doesn't stimulate the economy in the slightest if people are unemployed.

You're right, income has never been proportional to that. It's always been about perceived value, ie. If you are doing a good job, you're worth more. Simple.

[Elegiac]

Sorry...what????

Why is your social debt greater? So the person who has spent 20 years grinding away long hours and slaving to get to the top has a greater debt to society than the barrista at your local coffee shop? How on earth does that work?

I already explained it.

[LilSaihah]

The prosperity of the United States; indeed, of all western nations

China is sad that you ignore it

[Elegiac]

China is sad that you ignore it

I can't use China in a comparison to the US because it's socialist. The word tends to scare off the ignorant.

[Duronos]

The fact that without society to provide the structure within which wealth can be acquired and reproduced, you wouldn't be worth jack. Most of the rich are NOT in fact "self-made"; they had significant initial capital in the form of investment and the wealth of their parents.

The prosperity of the United States; indeed, of all western nations; is built on the back of taxation and public assistance. When taxes are high on the upper classes, it helps stimulate demand and thus economic growth. When spending on infrastructure and education is high, it provides economic and public benefit and maximizes social mobility and opportunity.

Call it "socialist" if you want (ignoring the fact that it isn't actually socialism), the "me, me, me" mindset only benefits the well-off at the expense of everyone else.

*Puts Mountain Dew down, pisses on keyboard*

Excuse I had to take a piss, this keyboard is seeming a bit pissy for some reason.

Ah yes, and shouldn't we be thankful to any company that gives a job, you could be stuck in the shitter without those people giving you a job. Who cares if they make millions/billions, every major CEO was self made just about and you can't deny it, most of them weren't even rich before they started from this "said inheritance". You are clearly misled at the fact they are not supposedly self-made, I just don't understand people like you, get educated on the self-made aspect and then come back to me with a decent argument.

[Deleted]

Did you know that the 1% keeps ketting richer compared to rest of population?

[Raidboss]

They don't work harder, they just make decisions that increase the value of the company... and this POS has done that. How? By turning classic titles into cash cows with his big, fat, greedy fists.

Isn't that his job or the job of anyone in charge of keeping a company afloat...you have to make money in order to employee 1 person let alone the amount that Blizzard/Activision have.

[LilSaihah]

I can't use China in a comparison to the US because it's socialist. The word tends to scare off the ignorant.

Japan? South Korea? Singapore?

[Daerio]

Actually they would answer something to the effect of: "the market dictates what he does" and to shift the blame for making bad games away from the person responsible and to the masses.

When a big release game doesn't have amazing sales; it isn't because the game sucks and customers are tired of it - it's because of piracy. MORE DRM!

[Elegiac]

*Puts Mountain Dew down, pisses on keyboard*

Excuse I had to take a piss, this keyboard is seeming a bit pissy for some reason.

Ah yes, and shouldn't we be thankful to any company that gives a job, you could be stuck in the shitter without those people giving you a job. Who cares if they make millions/billions, every major CEO was self made just about and you can't deny it, most of them weren't even rich before they started from this "said inheritance". You are clearly misled at the fact they are not supposedly self-made, I just don't understand people like you, get educated on the self-made aspect and then come back to me with a decent argument.

And the CEO's should be thankful that people work for them and buy their products. That is the entire point; people do not exist in isolation. Ergo, the "me, me, me" attitude is based on ignorance if not outright stupidity.

Perhaps you missed the use of "initial capital". I am not saying that they all inherited money from their parents; at least not directly. A great, great many of them -did- benefit from their parents' wealth in terms of access to superior education and upbringing. The "rags to riches" thing rarely if ever actually happens; the vast majority of CEOs are from upper and upper middle class backgrounds.

---------- Post added 2013-05-05 at 01:40 AM ----------

Japan? South Korea? Singapore?

Japan, South Korea, and Singapore are all highly developed countries because of infrastructural spending and public assistance. All three nations have taxes; Singapore stands alone in deriving its economic benefit by essentially leeching off the prosperity of the larger developed nations.

[Kaleredar]

Why would you want that? If you were in his position, you'd think it unfair if you had a bigger tax % than another class.

And yet your purchasing power after taxes would still be magnitudes larger than someone with a lower tax rate making less money.

After all he made that money himself, he's self made whether you like it or not. He hasn't been fired has he (CEO's can get fired by the way), what is with this, "TAX THE RICH MOAR!" ideology? Yeah they get taxed more but why should they have a bigger % than someone from a lower class? That would socialistic and it is because it's basically saying that the harder you work the more your tax % rises and that's not what America is about now is it. The harder you work, the smarter you are, the more opportunities you take when thrown in your face... Well, I guess the more you "make it".

People can work hard their entire life and never fall into the opportunities these people have.

Sorry...what????

Why is your social debt greater? So the person who has spent 20 years grinding away long hours and slaving to get to the top has a greater debt to society than the barrista at your local coffee shop? How on earth does that work?

First, CEOs don't always put in 20 years of hard labor to get where they are. Second, they aren't always particularly well skilled, competent, or even ethical at what they do.

Also, taxing the rich does NOT stimulate anything. The rich are typically the ones handing out the jobs because they're the boss. Tax them more (I'm going more for small business here, rather than big business, but the principle is the same) and they simply can't afford to put that extra person on, thus creating less jobs for people. This doesn't stimulate the economy in the slightest if people are unemployed.

You're responding in a topic in which a CEO just took an 800% pay-raise while laying off a bunch of people.

I'll just wait for the Irony of your point to sink in on you...

You're right, income has never been proportional to that. It's always been about perceived value, ie. If you are doing a good job, you're worth more. Simple.

Then why are congress paid so damn much?

[Quacko]

And the CEO's should be thankful that people work for them and buy their products. That is the entire point; people do not exist in isolation. Ergo, the "me, me, me" attitude is based on ignorance if not outright stupidity.

Perhaps you missed the use of "initial capital". I am not saying that they all inherited money from their parents; at least not directly. A great, great many of them -did- benefit from their parents' wealth in terms of access to superior education and upbringing. The "rags to riches" thing rarely if ever actually happens; the vast majority of CEOs are from upper and upper middle class backgrounds.

The "me,me,me" attitude you're spouting sounds like your own to be honest. The rich are making money, they should pay more tax so I get more benefits. Don't try and deny it. It's like the whole occupy movement, they're just as selfish if not more so than anyone else.

Enjoy your job? Make enough to make ends meet? Then shut the fuck up and quit whining how much other people make, because generally it doesn't affect you in the slightest.

Edit: For the person above me.

No, they don't ALWAYS, at what point did I say that? Or are you adding words to what I said to highlight your own point?

You can NOT deny they have worked their arses off to get where they are, very rarely do people just inherit said company.

Yes, i am replying in a topic such as that, but as has ALREADY BEEN EXPLAINED, CEO's do NOT determine their own fucking wage, it's a collective group of people that decide they are worth it.

As for congress? They have the power, whilst they have the amount of power they have, people will pay them a bunch of money to push their own agendas, take away the amount of power they have and you'll soon see that go. That said, they are also paid as much as they are because their IN CHARGE OF A FUCKING COUNTRY!

[Raidboss]

And the CEO's should be thankful that people work for them and buy their products. That is the entire point; people do not exist in isolation. Ergo, the "me, me, me" attitude is based on ignorance if not outright stupidity.

Perhaps you missed the use of "initial capital". I am not saying that they all inherited money from their parents; at least not directly. A great, great many of them -did- benefit from their parents' wealth in terms of access to superior education and upbringing. The "rags to riches" thing rarely if ever actually happens; the vast majority of CEOs are from upper and upper middle class backgrounds.

---------- Post added 2013-05-05 at 01:40 AM ----------



Japan, South Korea, and Singapore are all highly developed countries because of infrastructural spending and public assistance. All three nations have taxes; Singapore stands alone in deriving its economic benefit by essentially leeching off the prosperity of the larger developed nations.

Robert Herjavec ring a bell...first generation immigrant who's dad was a factory worker. The harder you work doesn't mean the harder you should be taxed.