ceo payouts are an outrage?

[Deleted]

You say they turn out evil, but the number of "evil" companies you can name isn't even half of one percent of all the companies on the NYSE much less in existence.

For every Bank of America there's a Johnson & Johnson. No one likes to remember the good guy companies, though. Too inconvenient for their anti-corporate screeds.

If it wasn't for strict governmental control we would still be in an age where people get worked to death like slaves in companies.
The only reason companies aren't corrupted is thanks to that.Strict economical laws.Alone they don't have a shred of goodness in them.
Companies have proven to be malicious again and again,still to this day.
We need the government to make decisions for them.CEO payouts are an outrage and a major disrespect to the middle class.
Shamelessly firing people but giving the CEO phat bonus checks need to stop for one.

[Laize]

It also goes beyond that because there's more stakeholder in a business than just the shareholders. If someone you work with gets paid 8,000 times more than you for doing a truly shitty job, do you think that you would be wrong to complain? Major corporations have significant impact on the economy they operate in, if a CEO who's paid 10,000 times more than you ran their company into the ground taking the economy with them while landing with a golden parachute, do you really think it's wrong to complain about it?

I didn't bring those up since given that I was responding to Laize, I knew it would be a massive waste of time.

If you work for a company and the CEO is shitty, sure you have a right to complain. Just not a right to DO anything about it. Not unless you're also a shareholder.

The CEO has to answer to his boss just like you have to answer to yours. Except he has an entire panel of bosses.

---------- Post added 2013-03-12 at 03:26 AM ----------

If it wasn't for strict governmental control we would still be in an age where people get worked to death like slaves in companies.
The only reason companies aren't corrupted is thanks to that.Strict economical laws.Alone they don't have a shred of goodness in them.
Companies have proven to be malicious again and again,still to this day.
We need the government to make decisions for them.CEO payouts are an outrage and a major disrespect to the middle class.
Shamelessly firing people but giving the CEO phat bonus checks need to stop for one.

I'll bet that for every "evil" company (and what they did that was so evil) you can name I can name 1 "angelic" company.

[Stir]

I'm curious to know what any business any of you think you have telling a company that they can only pay anyone a certain amount and not more. How fucking arrogant and self-centered do you have to be to think you deserve input in such a matter? The CEO of a salary is between the CEO and the company.

Human, that's what. Screw freedom. Seriously. By your argument, me murdering someone is between me and my victim, and who the hell are you to interfere?

Human. That's who.

[Felya]

No, they're not.

They are well educated and generally VERY experienced at running a business, however.

Than how do small business pop up? How can we even encourage a common person to start a business, when they are just not educated enough? I do not believe that the combined ability of an entire work force, is unable to match the acumen of a single CEO. Nor does a collective hold individual growth, ahead of the company.

Tell you what, you make a company and run it exactly the way you suggested. Tell me how that works out.

I already have and it makes guzzilions.......

[Spectral]

Shamelessly firing people but giving the CEO phat bonus checks need to stop for one.

Do you think companies regularly fire employees that are productive and profitable?

[semaphore]

I'm curious to know what any business any of you think you have telling a company that they can only pay anyone a certain amount and not more. How fucking arrogant and self-centered do you have to be to think you deserve input in such a matter? The CEO of a salary is between the CEO and the company.

About as arrogant as you going:

I hope they permaban everyone who clearly exploited this bug.

"What business do you think you have telling a company that they should permaban a player? How fucking arrogant and self-centered do you have to be to think you deserve input in such a matter? The banning of a player is between the game's managers and the player".

[Bathory]

I don't think it's the money that bothers people, it's the means in which they acquire it. I've got no problem if you make all that money, but if you're making it by robbing others, then yes, that's where I take issue.

[Magpai]

Human, that's what. Screw freedom. Seriously. By your argument, me murdering someone is between me and my victim, and who the hell are you to interfere?

Human. That's who.

Are you fucking kidding me? You murdering someone is not a mutually voluntary occurrence. A salary agreement is. This has got the be the most moronic analogy I've ever heard on this forum and that is really saying something.

[Deleted]

A military general is, at his core, a civil servant. His pay is dictated (indirectly) by the taxpayers.

A CEO is a businessman. His pay is dictated by negotiation with the board of directors. As to why a company would pay a CEO millions? The most likely reason is that $5 million is a laughably small sum of money. Consider a company that earns $5 billion in operating income. $5 million is .1% of the company's operating income.

To a board member, that sum of money is about the same as 50 cents is to you.

That's the reason?Because they can?
''They can pay a ceo thousand times more then the average worker because they can.''
We're talking about effort/skill money here= if they can pay the CEO millions why don't they also pay the workforce in milllions?
Not sustainable?Then divide the ''50 cents'' between the ceo and the workforce.Why should the ceo get everything again?

[Spectral]

I don't think it's the money that bothers people, it's the means in which they acquire it. I've got no problem if you make all that money, but if you're making it by robbing others, then yes, that's where I take issue.

Do you think a lot of CEOs are robbing others?

[dantian]

I'm curious to know what any business any of you think you have telling a company that they can only pay anyone a certain amount and not more. How fucking arrogant and self-centered do you have to be to think you deserve input in such a matter? The CEO of a salary is between the CEO and the company.

I don't think their salary is my business or the business of society. That said, I don't see why anyone should give a rat's ass if poor Mr. CEO making millions a year pays a higher tax rate.

[Laize]

That's the reason?Because they can?
''They can pay a ceo thousand times more then the average worker because they can.''
We're talking about effort/skill money here= if they can pay the CEO millions why don't they also pay the workforce in milllions?
Not sustainable?Then divide the ''50 cents'' between the ceo and the workforce.Why should the ceo get everything again?

Because it's not your money and, in order to get a good CEO, you have to pay that much.

When you own a company, you get a say in how much they make. Until then, you don't get to decide how someone else spends their money.

[Twotonsteak]

Jeez... that's a misunderstanding of what they do... to say the absolute least.

CEOs determine corporate direction and strategy. They identify untapped markets and how to access them, the best ways to take market share from competitors and the best way to expand revenues. It's easiest to imagine a corporation like a military (That is, in effect, what it is... of a sort). If each individual worker is a soldier, their supervisor would be the Seargeant. Their job is to do their group's task as the orders come down from above.

A VP would then delegate orders to all the sergeants depending on what needed to be done.

A CEO is the general. He determines the huge, overarching corporate strategy. He identifies competitor weak points (as well as his company's own) and exploits (or fortifies) them. It really can't be put any simpler than that. His job is macro-strategy. Big picture stuff. And because he's the "general" and a corporation (and its competitors) never sleeps, he's on call 24/7 even on vacation.

The inherent problem we have here is that people have been trained, whether by the media or Liberal politics or what ever, to judge CEO pay solely in the concept of one person. That is to say that we look at a CEO, look at what he makes, and say, "my God that's too much for one person." We really need to start looking beyond this overly simplistic idea and realize the pay received by a CEO should be directly proportionate to how well they perform their job. An effective CEO can help a company flourish. A company that flourish's and grows employ's more people.

Yes a good CEO might make millions of dollars. But how many millions more in jobs is their company creating because of that CEO's guidance?

By contrast you have many professional athletes who make far more than most CEO's. Yet, no matter how well they do, their performance will not result in the employment of more people. Likewise many movie stars make a million or more per movie. Their performance also does little to assist in job creation.

Personally I think most baseball players are overpaid. I'm sorry. I don't care how good you are. No one deserves millions of dollars a year to scratch their groin half the game and spend the other half standing in the outfield. (The exception to this might be pitchers and catchers who, you know, actually work.)

In the end a good CEO SHOULD make a lot of money. A bad CEO should not.

ADDENDUM:
Not all CEO's make millions. You will find that the heads of small companies and even most franchise owners rarely make a million per year. Most of their money is tied up in the company. Likewise you will find that most CEO's and small business owners don't restrict themselves to administrative duties and 40-hour work weeks. You don't get ahead like that. And the reality is that most "CEO's" in this country are small business owners.

[Magpai]

I don't think their salary is my business or the business of society. That said, I don't see why anyone should give a rat's ass if poor Mr. CEO making millions a year pays a higher tax rate.

The bolded part doesn't surprise me, as much as I wish it did. It's one thing if you are willing to tax the rich higher, but the fact that you cannot even conceive how person A would speak up for person B's property rights speaks volumes about your values.

[Annapolis]

I don't understand why once you gain the title of CEO in the United States people start saying you steal your income.

[Felya]

Because it's not your money and, in order to get a good CEO, you have to pay that much.

When you own a company, you get a say in how much they make. Until then, you don't get to decide how someone else spends their money.

Neither do you. If we had the power, we wouldn't be here discussing this. Saying 'start your own company and do it' or 'when you own one you do it' is pointless. Only the small percentage that do own these businesses are permitted to talk about it? Is it like fight club?

[Deleted]

Do you think companies regularly fire employees that are productive and profitable?

So keeping a wave of jobs is not productive and profitable,but paying the ceo millions,now that's a deal?

[Spectral]

Personally I think most baseball players are overpaid. I'm sorry. I don't care how good you are. No one deserves millions of dollars a year to scratch their groin half the game and spend the other half standing in the outfield. (The exception to this might be pitchers and catchers who, you know, actually work.)

I think you greatly underestimate the work that goes into being a major league baseball player. It's not just showing up to the park 10 minutes before the game, scratching your nuts, and swinging a few times.

[Magpai]

I don't think it's the money that bothers people, it's the means in which they acquire it. I've got no problem if you make all that money, but if you're making it by robbing others, then yes, that's where I take issue.

And your solution? If it's anything but "prosecute and prove it in court", then you're wrong.

[Kraenen]

Human, that's what. Screw freedom. Seriously. By your argument, me murdering someone is between me and my victim, and who the hell are you to interfere?

Human. That's who.

then the liberals have won. they've convinced us that we can't make decisions on our own. what happened to the days of personal responsibility when you could do whatever you wanted with another person as long as you were strong enough?