Median CEO pay crosses $10 million

[Brain357]

No sense griping about it. The way it is. Those at the top are going to make it big time. Those that make the product that make the money for the top are going to take it on the chin. It has always been that way, always will. But one can find a skill or get a degree to use against one's employer or one can start their own business and have grunts below to produce for the owner. Its our system. Not perfect but the best out there.

No. It is not the best....and it is only in the last 40 years that it has become that way.

Change will come. One way or another. The status quo cannot stand.

Just in 1980 the average ceo pay was 42X the average worker. Yet now do do the same job it is 300X. And people don't believe it is a rigged game?

 

[Againsheila]

CEO pay continues to increase while we have a stagnant economy and wages for the average worker.
Median CEO pay crosses $10 million in latest survey | Las Vegas Review-Journal

Some people refuse to understand just how bad the income gap is for our society.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Where'd they all go?

 

[OnePercenter]

No sense griping about it. The way it is. Those at the top are going to make it big time. Those that make the product that make the money for the top are going to take it on the chin. It has always been that way, always will. But one can find a skill or get a degree to use against one's employer or one can start their own business and have grunts below to produce for the owner. Its our system. Not perfect but the best out there.

No. It is not the best....and it is only in the last 40 years that it has become that way.

Change will come. One way or another. The status quo cannot stand.

Just in 1980 the average ceo pay was 42X the average worker. Yet now do do the same job it is 300X. And people don't believe it is a rigged game?

Isn't conservatism grand?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Tell me do more people work for small companies without CEOs that get paid millions than work for them?

The answer is yes.

So once again we see the focus on the minority so as to make it seem it is more important than it really is.

If you want pay to go up the free up small businesses from stifling regulation and taxes.

Which stifling regulations are those? Exactly.

You do know that it is more costly for a small business to comply with government regulations than it is a large one don't you?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm still waiting to hear why you sheep think a decrease in some people's pay will result in an increase in pay for someone else.

 

[Brain357]

I'm still waiting to hear why you sheep think a decrease in some people's pay will result in an increase in pay for someone else.

Well if an increase in minimum wages means less jobs and increased prices, then lower ceo pay must mean more jobs and lower prices.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I'm still waiting to hear why you sheep think a decrease in some people's pay will result in an increase in pay for someone else.

Well if an increase in minimum wages means less jobs and increased prices, then lower ceo pay must mean more jobs and lower prices.

Not true at all.

 

[healthmyths]

"Compensation" is something exchanged. In the case of a CEO actually monies changing hand, i.e. salary, bonus, etc., any cash /checks goods
given to the CEO in exchange for the CEO time given to the company.

NO where in that cost i.e. operating expenses, i.e. salaries was there ever any payment to the CEO for "stock gains"!
#1 on Forbes list: #1 John H Hammergren - Forbes.com
John H. Hammergren CEO of McKesson is
Salary $1.66 mil
Bonus $4.65 mil
Other $12.76 mil
Stock Gains $112.12 mil
Total Compensation $131.19 mil

"Stock gains" i.e. increase in open market value of the company's stock held by the CEO has never been an expense to the company i.e. as a salary, or bonus.
NOT ONE single financial statement of any company shows as an operating expense the "stock gains"... because there is NO CASH outlay by the company.

So why are stock gains considered "compensation"? Did NOT cost the company one dime!
AGAIN for simpletons...
DID the stock gains i.e. appreciation of the CEO's stock in the company he works for COST THE COMPANY anything???
WAS THERE ANY check written out and deducted as an operating expense for Mr. Hammergren from McKesson for $112.1 million?

So why the excitement? Why include it in as a "cost" i.e. compensation to the CEO???

 

[Brain357]

I'm still waiting to hear why you sheep think a decrease in some people's pay will result in an increase in pay for someone else.

Well if an increase in minimum wages means less jobs and increased prices, then lower ceo pay must mean more jobs and lower prices.

Not true at all.

That a minimum wage increase means less jobs and increased prices? I think you might be right.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Well if an increase in minimum wages means less jobs and increased prices, then lower ceo pay must mean more jobs and lower prices.

Not true at all.

That a minimum wage increase means less jobs and increased prices? I think you might be right.

Don't ignore the other false assumption you made

As for the first point it all depends on how much of a raise in MW you are talking about.

Nothing in the real world is as black and white as you like to think

 

[Brain357]

"Compensation" is something exchanged. In the case of a CEO actually monies changing hand, i.e. salary, bonus, etc., any cash /checks goods
given to the CEO in exchange for the CEO time given to the company.

NO where in that cost i.e. operating expenses, i.e. salaries was there ever any payment to the CEO for "stock gains"!
#1 on Forbes list: #1 John H Hammergren - Forbes.com
John H. Hammergren CEO of McKesson is
Salary $1.66 mil
Bonus $4.65 mil
Other $12.76 mil
Stock Gains $112.12 mil
Total Compensation $131.19 mil

"Stock gains" i.e. increase in open market value of the company's stock held by the CEO has never been an expense to the company i.e. as a salary, or bonus.
NOT ONE single financial statement of any company shows as an operating expense the "stock gains"... because there is NO CASH outlay by the company.

So why are stock gains considered "compensation"? Did NOT cost the company one dime!
AGAIN for simpletons...
DID the stock gains i.e. appreciation of the CEO's stock in the company he works for COST THE COMPANY anything???
WAS THERE ANY check written out and deducted as an operating expense for Mr. Hammergren from McKesson for $112.1 million?

So why the excitement? Why include it in as a "cost" i.e. compensation to the CEO???

So you are saying its a way to pay CEOs a ton and cheat income tax? You want me to be ok with that?