Posted by moy23 on 10/27/2014 2:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/27/2014 11:29:00 AM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 10/27/2014 7:39:00 AM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/26/2014 5:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by moy23 on 10/26/2014 4:43:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 10/26/2014 4:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/26/2014 3:53:00 PM (view original):
LOL. Yes, if I choose to invest in Basic Materials and you choose to invest in Healthcare, I should be mad at my CEO because you made twice as much off your investment.
If the CEO of the company you invested in made 4 times what better performing companies' CEOs made, maybe you should. Or at least be mad at the board that hired him.
Seriously? You should be mad at yourself for making a bad investment, and once you get over it you learn from your mistakes and invest smarter next time. No one forced you to invest in the company... That's on you. You could have invested in the company that paid their CEO less and gambled that they'd perform 4x better than the highest paid CEO. Its not like you were blocked from doing so. Heck you could even bet on all the top CEOs and invest in the XLF fund which tracks financials... But you didn't.
If I'm following your argument its like going to the track and betting on a horse. Your horse comes in 4th so you should be mad at the jockey that you lost money?!?!? Or going to the casino and losing a hand at blackjack.... Its the dealers fault you lost when the guy next to you won?!?!?
We're completely off on a tangent. It's not that you should or shouldn't be mad about anything. The point is, high pay doesn't always mean high value. Sometimes people make a ton of money despite their abilities.
You get paid what your employer thinks you're worth. Its that simple. If Downey Jr is paid $75 million then I sure hope his movies aren't a bust for his employers sake. But his employers valued him at $75 million or they wouldn't pay him that. Maybe they could have saved and went with DiCaprio and DiCaprio would have produced 4x the revenue.... We'll never know.
But to make you happy and to prove YOUR point: Jay Cutler has a $100 million+ contract which is ridiculous but the bears valued him at that amount so that's what they paid him. Comparative to other QBs at that price point he provides little value.
Business is different - the CEO is the top of the company hierarchy thus they make the most money. That's how businesses are structured. How much they make is up to how much the board thinks they are worth, right or wrong.
Ok, I don't think any of that goes against my point that higher pay doesn't always mean higher value.
And we're still on tangent. The main point is that massive income inequality is destabilizing and bad for the economy.
And your solution? Let me Guess... Regulate CEO pay.
My take: you want to fix income inequality you need to show people there is income opportunity. I just got a 27% raise because I work hard and I manage my career. I seek advice from fantastic mentors and build social capital w/in the industry. There are success stories everyday about people getting promoted yet libs would rather focus on the 3-4% minimum wage jobs and how increasing minimum wage will help w/ income inequality. Those minimum wage jobs SHOULD be temporary.... Because if you are any good at your job you can get promoted... That's income opportunity. Immigrants realize this and capitalize on it. Too bad so many others don't.
Let me ask you BH.... What's stopping you from making more money?
I don't have a solution. I'm certainly not arguing for fixed income and I'm glad you got a raise.
You're ignoring reality if you think that just being good at your job can get you a promotion, though.
I'm perfectly happy with my career. I make enough that my wife only works part time and we can easily afford the mortgage on our house in coastal southern california. This isn't a dick measuring contest.