Look what happens to Portland when they tried to reduce imprisonment.

Portland is what happens when you think the prison system is rigged, and many people are in prison should not be there.

Reducing imprisonment did not reduce crime in Democrat city that it was tried, it actually made it worse.

Need to also compare it to the crimes committed by each race, as you are more likely to get shot if you are committing a crime.

Like in Afghanistan? The might US military?

When you assume the worst case scenario, your algorithm will get the worst performance.

Doesn't matter if it's a yearly growth or 10 years growth.

The point is, it's on a period of time.

I mean, what happens the next 10 years? Does the stock stay the exact same amount for ten years? Does that mean it is still 1000% up?

So in 10/20/whatever years, the stock raised by X percent. when happens in the next 10 years though? The increase in X percent is from the original amount or the amount after the X percent increase?

Let's say your investment is 1.

Let's say your yearly salary is 1.

In 1 year, your investment increased by 10x, so now it's 10

In one year, your salary increased by 14x, so now it's 14.

Another year, your investment increased by 10x, so now it's 100.

The same year, CEO salary increased by 14x, so now it's 196.

You are measuring the growth of the growth.

You make no sense.

You need to go back to school.

You are measuring compensation, not salaries.

Most of the CEO's compensation probably come from stocks anyway.

Imagine the stocks also has dividends.

If the CEO's salary is so high, then he would get less compensation in stocks.

You don't understand what you are talking about.

We are measuring growth.

Growth already measure rate.

What you are doing, is second order growth.

You are measuring the growth of the growth.

Taking a percentage of a percentage is kind of stupid.

This is not a 40% difference, it's a 400% difference.