Current Events > In 1965 CEOs in US earned 20x more than the average worker. In 2015 it was 300x

(+) Yeah! (+)

Before 1995 the poorest half of the population of the United States earned a greater share of national wealth than the richest 1%, But that year the tables turned - the top 1% earned more than the bottom 50%.

And the gap is continuing to rise. In 1965, CEOs in the US earned 20 times more than the average worker but by 2015 it had risen to 300 times

---

Even 20 times is too much.

---

The highest paid worker in a company should only be able to earn a certain percentage more than the lowest paid employee in their company.

We can argue what that percentage is but even 20x is way too high

---

Late stage capitalism, yo.

---

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-51332811

This guy gave up over 1 million in his own salary to put all his employees at $70k

I wish there were more people like him

---

quit being jealous, go take out a loan from daddy and start your own billion dollar corporation

treewojima posted...

quit being jealous, go take out a loan from daddy and start your own billion dollar corporation

That's too much work for most of you, so you'll be poor forever.
---

"Now that's terror"

---

Wow, it's absolutely amazing how much harder CEOs started working in the 80s. Why didn't they work so hard before then?

---

Guys look at this stat I saw on tankie twitter, doesn't it make you MAD? I mean don't think about it too much, just get really MAD.

1. Companies are far bigger than they were in 1965 and running them is a lot more complicated. There is competition for good CEOs like any other worker. They are paid based on that competition.

2. The sudden rise in CEO compensation a couple decades ago is the result of a change in the tax code that Bill Clinton introduced which was meant to limit CEO compensation. Never underestimate the governments ability to accomplish the exact opposite of what they set out to do.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/06/22/622646316/episode-682-when-ceo-pay-exploded

3. CEO compensation might be large compared to a single worker, but it is nothing compared to the companies total wage bill. What would happen if CEO compensation was instead divided among the workers? Disney employees would get about $300 extra a year. Walmart employees... $11. Turns out lower CEO pay wouldn't make your life any better and the entire premise of this topic is pretty dumb!

4. Similarly, a person in 1965 did not have a better life because the CEO pay gap was smaller. In fact I have a far higher standard of living than they did, why would I want to trade places with them?

This is why populism fucking sucks. You have a brain, use it.

BornIn1142 posted...

Wow, it's absolutely amazing how much harder CEOs started working in the 80s. Why didn't they work so hard before then?

funny post

---

And yet the average American would rather blame their financial struggles and lack of opportunities on other Americans complaining about the same things, and will actually defend these corporations just to oppose other Americans who have more in common with them than the wealthy people they admire, lol.

We can complain but change starts with self. Self-awareness and willingness to do something about your observations about oneself instead of trying to encourage others to change first, lol. Gotta let go of fantasies and delusions of grandeur to focus on the problems that exist outside of the imagination. Like trickle down economics.

---

It should be x1000 to be honest.

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Disney employees would get about $300 extra a year. Walmart employees... $11. Turns out lower CEO pay wouldn't make your life any better and the entire premise of this topic is pretty dumb!

Yeah using by far the largest private sector employer in the world (Walmart) by number of employees to make a general point about CEO pay is also pretty dumb!

Broseph Stalin are you trying to show us how smart you are by instead showing the opposite! Wow what grade in school did you slip was it pre K?!

Edit: Oh sorry didn't notice McDonald's sneaking up in there but we are all so familiar with the nonexistent trend of people dying on that hill when it comes to the CEO vs employee pay argument

---

A system working this way will not last

Civil unrest is gonna boil over as the gap widens and its definitely not gonna be a pretty sight
---

MacadamianNut3 posted...

Yeah using by far the largest private sector employer in the world (Walmart) by number of employees to make a general point about CEO pay is also pretty dumb!

wow it's almost like the companies who can afford expensive CEOs are also the ones with a large amount of workers, grats on being the last person to realize this

Broseph_Stalin posted...

wow it's almost like the companies who can afford expensive CEOs are also the ones with a large amount of workers, grats on being the last person to realize this

Almost like you whooshed the point by trying to argue an obvious exception as justification congrats to u too bud

---

yeah man no one would ever talk about walmart or disney when talking about the CEO pay gap i'm just being really dishonest!

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/22/disney-heiress-calls-bob-igers-total-compensation-insane.html
https://money.cnn.com/2018/04/23/news/companies/walmart-ceo-pay/index.html

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Guys look at this stat I saw on tankie twitter, doesn't it make you MAD? I mean don't think about it too much, just get really MAD.

1. Companies are far bigger than they were in 1965 and running them is a lot more complicated. There is competition for good CEOs like any other worker. They are paid based on that competition.

2. The sudden rise in CEO compensation a couple decades ago is the result of a change in the tax code that Bill Clinton introduced which was meant to limit CEO compensation. Never underestimate the governments ability to accomplish the exact opposite of what they set out to do.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/06/22/622646316/episode-682-when-ceo-pay-exploded

3. CEO compensation might be large compared to a single worker, but it is nothing compared to the companies total wage bill. What would happen if CEO compensation was instead divided among the workers? Disney employees would get about $300 extra a year. Walmart employees... $11. Turns out lower CEO pay wouldn't make your life any better and the entire premise of this topic is pretty dumb!

4. Similarly, a person in 1965 did not have a better life because the CEO pay gap was smaller. In fact I have a far higher standard of living than they did, why would I want to trade places with them?

This is why populism fucking sucks. You have a brain, use it.

Rekt

---

Broseph said Amazon didnt exploit labor, so its safe to say anything he says isnt with listening to.

---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Broseph said Amazon didnt exploit labor, so its safe to say anything he says isnt with listening to.

Can confirm that paying above average wages, benefits and automating the most physically demanding jobs is not exploitative.

Stay on topic though!

Quit making them rich then

---

Wow a double whammy of a Disney heiress complaining about CEO pay and a CNN business blog stating the difference while also justifying it in the same article

All of that outrage from one person and a CNN writer stating a fact sure does convince me that the premise of this topic is somehow disingenuous, and not you riding two oddly large companies as much as possible to try to make a point

---

such a cool username shouldn't be taken by someone so incredibly bitter about everything

MacadamianNut3 posted...

Wow a double whammy of a Disney heiress complaining about CEO pay and a CNN business blog stating the difference while also justifying it in the same article

All of that outrage from one person and a CNN writer stating a fact sure does convince me that the premise of this topic is somehow disingenuous, and not you riding two oddly large companies as much as possible to try to make a point

lmao how can one person be this dishonest?

Everyone knows these are the guys people bring up when they want to cry about the CEO pay gap. But as soon as I actually do the math and show everyone it doesn't matter? "Nooooo not those guys!"

No fucking company spends more on CEO compensation than it does its wage bill. Sit down.

There's also much bigger global companies and brands today though.

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

But as soon as I actually do the math and show everyone it doesn't matter? "Nooooo not those guys!"

Thank you for your service and hard work you are appreciated

Unfortunately there are a tad bit more than 2 companies with CEOs, so sorry for the lack of astonishment over "large number divided by 2.1 million is a small number, therefore argument over sheeple"

---

sktgamer_13dude posted...

Broseph said Amazon didnt exploit labor, so its safe to say anything he says isnt with listening to.

I don't think that's relevant, I just didn't see anything in all those words and points that said much of anything. It just reads as corporate apologism pretty much throwing out any excuse that will stick - like literally one of the arguments was that it's government incompetence is at fault that this (allegedly perfectly okay) situation. It's just not very compelling

---

It's funny how the right claims they're a bunch of manly independent men yet they act like complete B's to rich people. At this point I think they'd literally bow and kneel if a rich person is in their presence.

---

MacadamianNut3 posted...

Unfortunately there are a tad bit more than 2 companies with CEOs, so sorry for the lack of astonishment over "large number divided by 2.1 million is a small number, therefore argument over sheeple"

ANY fucking CEO compensation divided up by the workforce is going to result in a low number, you have missed the point by a mile. A smaller company also means less CEO pay and the end result remains the same.

You can take a company with tons of revenue, high CEO compensation and relatively few employees like Chevron and you'll find the exact same thing, CEO pay has no impact on average wages.

Sit. Down.

Apparently Elon musk makes 41,000x median employee salary

www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2019/6/26/18744304/ ceo-pay-ratio-disclosure-2018


---

Hairistotle posted...

Broseph argues in bad faith, anyone who isn't a troll recognizes that by now

Also. This does not seem sustainable

Balrog0 posted...

I just didn't see anything in all those words and points that said much of anything. It just reads as corporate apologism

I love how mad people get when they can't refute anything I say.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

I love how mad people get when they can't refute anything I say.

What's there to refute? I've never seen anyone say that you could fix economic inequity by reducing CEO compensation.

I have seen tons of people use it as an example of a sick economic system and your rebuttals make that argument look stronger, not weaker

---

Hairistotle posted...

Why...wasn't this guy a billionaire to begin with

It's actually pretty interesting. But he also might make zero. It's a very unique compensation agreement.

Anyway though the article kind of talks about the bigger issues involved with CEO compensation

---

Balrog0 posted...

What's there to refute? I've never seen anyone say that you could fix economic inequity by reducing CEO compensation.

This is exactly what they say. In this very topic even. There's zero reason to even bring up CEO pay otherwise.

Balrog0 posted...

the bigger issues involved with CEO compensation

it's as if there was some kind of change in the tax code that tied CEO pay to company performance

Broseph_Stalin posted...

1. Companies are far bigger than they were in 1965 and running them is a lot more complicated. There is competition for good CEOs like any other worker. They are paid based on that competition.

Work has grown harder and more complicated for everyone, not just CEOs since 1965. The share of demand in the labour market for post-secondary education has tripled since the 70s, and worker productivity has more than doubled. If it was level of responsibility that explained the growth of CEO pay, then why hasn't worker pay exploded as well? What has happened instead is something you so helpfully touched on in your post; a decrease in the total number of firms through mergers as well as decrease in the growth of new firms contributing to labor market monopsonies

Broseph_Stalin posted...

2. The sudden rise in CEO compensation a couple decades ago is the result of a change in the tax code that Bill Clinton introduced which was meant to limit CEO compensation. Never underestimate the governments ability to accomplish the exact opposite of what they set out to do.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2018/06/22/622646316/episode-682-when-ceo-pay-exploded

Seems like it makes a great argument not to compromise with conservative economic policy and pass tax code regulation thats as stringent as possible.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

3. CEO compensation might be large compared to a single worker, but it is nothing compared to the companies total wage bill. What would happen if CEO compensation was instead divided among the workers? Disney employees would get about $300 extra a year. Walmart employees... $11. Turns out lower CEO pay wouldn't make your life any better and the entire premise of this topic is pretty dumb!

We're talking about the level of growth in CEO wages contrasted with those of workers. If the real wages for the working class has massively increased in turn, that wouldnt be a problem. The issue isn't in just comparing the pay of a CEO to one worker.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

4. Similarly, a person in 1965 did not have a better life because the CEO pay gap was smaller. In fact I have a far higher standard of living than they did, why would I want to trade places with them?

No one's saying average standard of living is lower than it was 60 years ago. But they have gone up in spite of growing economic inequality. Extreme levels of inequality are tied with stifled GDP growth, lower economic mobility, higher levels of crime and a whole host of other issues that negatively impact standard of living. The "hurr dur even roockerfeller dint have a ifhone" meme is something i'd expect out of only the laziest conservatrolls


---

Technology continues to improve processes and makes management easier.

Compensation does not have to be redistributed as wage. It can be used for purchasing better benefits, improving hardware, improving work spaces, hosting events, etc.

---

CapnMuffin posted...

Technology continues to improve processes and makes management easier.

Compensation does not have to be redistributed as wage. It can be used for purchasing better benefits, improving hardware, improving work spaces, hosting events, etc.

Then it wouldn't be going to the CEOs lol

Broseph_Stalin posted...

This is exactly what they say. In this very topic even. There's zero reason to even bring up CEO pay otherwise.

No one has done that in this topic and I literally just explained why you might bring it up anyway.

For example, only idiots think that fixing marijuana laws will fix mass incarceration.

But your post itt would be like if I said "yeah we should fix federal weed laws, they're really bad" and then you said something like "actually, it was Democrats who made it worse and anyway more prisoners are at the state and local level. Besides, most people aren't even in jail for pot so it's not gonna fix mass incarceration."

Only no one said that fixing this one specific issue would solve the bigger problems.

So like I said it's just a weird non-sequitur

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

it's as if there was some kind of change in the tax code that tied CEO pay to company performance

This is exactly what I'm talking about, so you have an issue with CEO compensation or not? It's like you want to criticize what enabled the exact situation you're defending in the first place. You don't see how this makes you look like a shill due to your lack of consistency?

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Disney employees would get about $300 extra a year. Walmart employees... $11. Turns out lower CEO pay wouldn't make your life any better and the entire premise of this topic is pretty dumb!

your only examples are massive global corps. most people are employed by medium sized business.

even there the difference is criminal
---

you all know that you can just Ignore and Block broseph_stalin, right?

---

Income inequality literally doesn't matter as long as workers are treated fairly and being paid well.
---

It's well established that income inequality harms social and economic mobility

Well yeah, if there is a lot of income inequality then it would be a lot less likely for me to advance socioeconomic classes.

But who cares, I just want to live comfortably.
---

Hairistotle posted...

ok cool what about everyone else

I think that feeling would apply to everyone else too.

Like I said, the problem arises when workers are being treated poorly or not being paid enough to live comfortably or even get by.
---