Harm's a Troll!

[]LoL[Harm]

Anyone find it odd that CEO’s yearly pay has risen by 442% in the past 20 years, where ours, the basic workers has risen the awesome amount of 1.6%? Both figures are adjusted for inflation. I’m sure they’ve earned it, and I’m sure we’re all lazy…just ask a republican. Mmmmm, article: http://www.fguide.org/Bulletin/ceopay.htm (http://www.fguide.org/Bulletin/ceopay.htm)

Anyone find it odd that a Caucasian firefighter can test better in both practical and written exams than a minority but the minority gets the full time job? Apparently this is a working system…just ask a democrat.

[Roscoes_C&W]

I say we round up all that money the CEO's make and redistribute it amongst the poor so everyone has the same amount of money, lives in the same house, and eats the same bread.

[]LoL[Harm]

Screw that, lets take that 1.6% and redistribute it to the top so it will trickle down! Lets make that 442% a nice 443.6%.

[]LoL[Harm]

The awesome part of this is that the CEO's are getting these pay raises even when they suck at their job, I wish my job was so forgiving. If I sucked half as bad as these CEO's I'd be living in a cardboard box and using Roscoes backyard as my outhouse.

[Roscoes_C&W]

It's not about being good at a job, it's about knowing when and how to bullshit the hell out of people. The world is filled with bullshit and you need to learn how to use it to yoru advantage.

[Post]

The issue isn't about CEO's being good at BS'ing. It's about their yearly pay going up 4x the amount in the past 20 years. I sincerely doubt that any sect of people has gotten 4x better at BS'ing people in the past 20 years.

[Swifty_Johnson]

You missed this part

While most CEOs did better, average CEO pay dropped because the highest paid CEOs could not cash in as much stock option loot in a down market.

It's all fake money right now based a lot in options. I have options in my company which I cannot exercise as I'll loss money. CEO "pay" went up so much becasue the market went up.

That's the way it is though. Better effort would be spent making money for yourself, vs worrying over what someone else is making.

Swifty

[Roscoes_C&W]

Ya well you are comparing a CEO's who have been CEO's for the past 20 years with the rest of the job market. Every year there are millions of new employees in the work force starting at low base salaries which get lumped into the entire base workforce average pay. At the same time not many new CEO's are born but there remains the same old guys from the years before.

[]LoL[Harm]

Read the article linked above and argue with Fortune Magazine and Business Week. I didn't do the reasearch. But when Fortune magazine starts indicating that shitty CEO's are getting paid rediculous amounts of money I tend to listen.

[Post]

So you think CEO's are getting paid 4x as they used to much because of seniority? I'm just trying to get this clear here.

I'm just not seeing how the situation is different from 20 years ago. I mean, your statement is fine on explaining how they're getting paid more on average, but it doesn't explain why there's been an increase four fold.

[Rooster]

I wonder if the bulk of that is made up of CEO's that have been in positions for a decade or two.. and their pay, most likely, can go up 4x - over that period - based on stock benefits & such.

Profit is not a dirty word.

[Allison]

Profit isn't a dirty word. But you have to admit, when a CEO resigns or is forced out amid mass layoffs, plummeting profits, or bankruptcy -- and he still gets his 10 million dollar bonus, most people have a hard time understanding that -- especially the people who lost their jobs or their pension funds in the process.

[Rooster]

Oh yeah, without a doubt - golden parachutes for CEO's that suck, should have their cords cut - let'em wallow in poverty for being a moron.

Hell, when it's that bad, they should be forced to repay the company money they caused the company to lose.

[Post]

"I wonder if the bulk of that is made up of CEO's that have been in positions for a decade or two.. and their pay, most likely, can go up 4x - over that period - based on stock benefits & such."

The article showed years that company revenues, profits, stock value and employment went down and CEO pay still went up. From the article:

"Oracle's Larry Ellison who hauled in $781.4 million (while) shareholder return was negative 61 percent."

If it were things that are dependent upon company profit, such as stocks, were the reason why they were getting paid so much, their pay should drop in severe years such as that.

[Swifty_Johnson]

But you have to admit, when a CEO resigns or is forced out amid mass layoffs, plummeting profits, or bankruptcy -- and he still gets his 10 million dollar bonus, most people have a hard time understanding that --

You are dealing with someone who knows the companies' 5 years plus plan, so it doesn't pay to have them leave on a sour note. What they do know if leaked can really ruin a companies chances to recover. There could also be messy legal battles that can cost the company money. So it's better to pay the money and have them go happy, vs pissing them off and have them run to a rival and tell all for revenge.

Swifty

[Rooster]

You can have them sign legally binding documents when leaving the company to release no information about plans, existing agreements, etc..

I had to sign a document when I left the military to not say anything about any Top Secret (a little bit), Secret (some) or Confidential (a lot) information I had for 7 years.

Course, that doesn't always prevent people from talking - but I'm sure the Military would back it up with extreme force. Perhaps companies should too. :)

[Swifty_Johnson]

You can have them sign legally binding documents when leaving the company to release no information about plans, existing agreements, etc..

That happens in every case, but the odds of them following that document decrease the more pissed off they are when they leave.

Swifty

[]LoL[Harm]

That happens in every case, but the odds of them following that document decrease the more pissed off they are when they leave.If it does happen the company has the right to sue them into the stone age. Classify it as white collar crime, believe me CEO types are not the types that like prison time, ask Martha.

[MickeyFinn]

I don't even understand why the state considers women a minority. In once instance here, a female firefighter was caught smoking weed on department grounds. She was given a desk job that ended up paying her more. I. Hate. Affirmative. Action.

[MickeyFinn]

Let's remember that a lot of the new CEO's are self made men, like the Amazon.com guy. The world is a big enough place that $1 profit from everybody means you're a billionaire.

[]LoL[Harm]

Let's remember that a lot of the new CEO's are self made men, like the Amazon.com guy. The world is a big enough place that $1 profit from everybody means you're a billionaire.Only a few are, not "a lot". In the article linked in the OP look at the names mentioned, I don't believe any of them are a Bill Gates or those guys at Google.

[Jammer]

I submit that any individual who has only seen their wages/salary increase by 1.6% in the last 20 years ought to, just possibly, look for another line of work.

I won't comment on the CEO side of things as I can understand how some folks might struggle with it and I'm not inclined to defend it. I can't say that it bothers me, though. I grew up in a very modest household and my dad always taught us to never be jealous of rich folks. He figured if we ever got lucky and got there ourselves one day, it would be a real pain to have everybody whining and complaining about us all the time. :)

Jammer

[]LoL[Harm]

The 1.6% probably reflects the massive career recycling many people have had to do due to the shifting job market. As blue collar jobs slowly work their way into extinction and many white collar, low-end, support jobs are being shifted to other countries many people have to take on low paying jobs while re-attending college or trade schools. Since minimum wage has not grown with inflation (see my real wage posting made today) I would surmize this would aid in the pitiful growth of the average workers salary increase.

I can't directly relate, as I've always tended to move up by much more that 1.6% yearly, let alone in a 20 year span (though I wasn't working when I was 8 years old).

My household was very modest as well, and I'm not jealous of the rich folk, I have no need for large amounts of money. However I do see a growing disparity between the rich and the poor, we are starting to rival third world nations. This gap will only slow our economy down as people are less able to consume the products that drive our nations success. This is not good for the economy. Division of 80% of the wealth in the top 10% of the people in the country just spells trouble. It's no longer an upside down pyramid; it's more of a toothpick balancing an elephant.

[Jammer]

Well, if there's an worker's uprising, I don't think I'll be mistaken for one of the fat cats and thrown in the fire.

But just in case, I suggest any of you making something close to middle-class wages to join us Republicans and arm yourself. No need to be a statistic. ;)

On a serious note, I really don't mean to make light of the entire topic. I just tend to have an upbeat outlook and believe that those issues tend to work themselves out. I'm a testament to that, because I've been everything from dirt poor trying to subsist on noodles and scrape up enough money for a 99 cent hotdog to solid middle class. Though I'm not sure that adds much to the debate.

Jammer

[Swifty_Johnson]

Division of 80% of the wealth in the top 10% of the people in the country just spells trouble. It's no longer an upside down pyramid; it's more of a toothpick balancing an elephant.

How much of that is hard wealth vs paper wealth? Someone might be worth a lot of money becasue they own X shares of company Y, but not have that much cash on hand becasue all their wealth is stocks. The internet boom in the 90s made a lot of people paper rich, but as the companies went bust, so did their wealth.

Swifty