Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BurnTheBoats21 t1_j5mgb8s wrote

I get the merit behind that, but if it were true, it would be an amazing financial hack that shareholders can use to cut expenses. Instead, it's an unbelievably competitive market to attract and hold executive talent, so it seems clear that the market supply and demand drives that salary growth.


dr_reverend t1_j5mn3cb wrote

Again, if they are that valuable then why not just hire a great CEO and fire everyone else. If he is worth 400 regular workers then he should be able to manage just fine.

Sorry, I don't deny that good management is important but it simply is not that valuable that one person should be a multi million / billionaire while every one under them has to buy food stamps.


BurnTheBoats21 t1_j5mplgt wrote

I get it. but shareholders care about making the max amount of money and they don't give a shit if a CEO is rich or broke. The fact that the market has driven exec. wages up shows that there's a value add there. it's depressing and unethical, but the free market has demonstrated that it is a worthy expense if you want to remain competitive.

I think the conversation should start at legislation that regulates the free market so we don't do this to ourselves, not a question of whether or not they're worth paying that much. If they weren't worth it, nobody would pay them that much. that's it.


trevor32192 t1_j5mymm5 wrote

The market doesn't determine anything. It's such a cop out. They arent worth it there is nearly zero impact.


pookiedookie232 t1_j5mzg95 wrote

Not worth it to you maybe, but if it's not your company your opinion doesn't matter


trevor32192 t1_j5mzsw4 wrote

Not worth it to anyone. There have literally been studies that show ceo impact is basically a statistical error. They basically do nothing. The only reason they are massively overpaid is because they are budies with the boards which often consists of other ceos and rich people.


pookiedookie232 t1_j5mzzol wrote

It must be worth it to someone or they wouldn't pay it. You don't get to decide what is worthwhile to others.


trevor32192 t1_j5n0bfc wrote

Can you even read my responses? Ceo impact is a rounding error this isnt debatable its empirical fact.

If you pay 20k for a piece of dog shit it doesn't suddenly make the dog shit more valuable.


pookiedookie232 t1_j5n0ib9 wrote

You apparently don't understand that other people get to value things differently than you.

Your measure of worth is not the same as everyone else on earth.


trevor32192 t1_j5n3w1z wrote

No I just can recognize a scam when I see it. It's not an opinion when there is empirical data.


pookiedookie232 t1_j5n5nkq wrote

The numbers may be empirical, but whether it is worth it or not is a matter of opinion.

Is $5,000 a lot of money? Opinions will vary, but the amount in question is the same.


pookiedookie232 t1_j5mzdho wrote

You may not think they are that valuable, but if it isn't your company your opinion doesn't matter.


CyanideKAide t1_j5nehuk wrote

That’s why I said it’s a mix of money in/money out AND supply/demand. It’s very cheap to replace a cashier