bigloser42 t1_jad4wpm wrote

Yeah, you need to cut a PS player, but teams(at least good ones) do that all the time.

You don’t need to cut a player from the active roster to escalate someone from the PS. Each week you can escalate any 2 PS players to the active roster, giving you a total of up to 55 players. You can do this with any PS player up to 3 times per season before you must sign them to the active roster. They can be active for game day just like any other player on the active roster, so long as your total active players does not exceed 46.


bigloser42 t1_jacejrp wrote

They could have cut a PS player, signed a QB to the PS then elevated him to the roster & activated him for the game without cutting any of their active players. Or, you know, not tried to block a prolific pass rusher with a 3rd string TE on an island. Twice.


bigloser42 t1_jacecf3 wrote

Unique players on the field in all phases would total 25; 11 offense, 11 defense, 1 kicker, 1 punter, 1 long snapper. The remainder of the spots are backup or rotational players.


bigloser42 t1_j5q1lm7 wrote

If the company is doomed to fail regardless of leadership, then it should fail the quality of the CEO is irrelevant.

If only shitty CEOs are going to run the bad companies, where do the good CEOs go once there are no longer good companies with CEO slots open? Either they’ll have to swallow their egos and take a lesser position or they’ll have to try to right a sinking ship in the hopes of a future payday.

Unless your saying there are more good companies than there are good CEOs, but that just means right now there are shitty CEOs getting massive compensation packages because their company is successful in spite of the CEO.

The only way to get a companies as a whole to raise the pay of their works to something commensurate with the work being done by their employees is to tie the wages of the companies leadership to the workers wages and their bonuses to the companies success.

We already have CEOs today making thousands of times the average workers pay running a company into the ground while getting huge bonuses because the stock is going up then getting massive golden parachutes when they leave. That needs to stop, and the only way to do that is to legislate it.

I’m not saying that the CEO should get a pittance. Something in the 500-1000% the average wage should be plenty, and if you have a sliding scale for bonuses where the more workers your company has the higher percentage of the gross profits you’re allowed to receive as bonus, CEOs of top-tier companies will still be able to get massive paydays. There will always be people willing to take the job, and if it weeds out some shitty CEOs that are only doing it for the money, so be it. Those guys probably shouldn’t be CEOs anyway.


bigloser42 t1_j5puj8x wrote

They will if they think they can turn it around and get the big bonus options. You’re looking at a single company in a vacuum. If the same rules apply to everyone your options are be a CEO of a sinking ship, or don’t work. And if no established CEOs want to do it, someone new will jump in.


bigloser42 t1_j5oub49 wrote

You set the CEOs max pay as a percentage of the average workers salary, with the percentage on a sliding scale where CEOs of companies with more employees get a larger percentage. Cut employees, cut max CEO salary. Set max bonus’s as a percentage of gross company profit. No more bonus for CEOs when the company posts a loss.


bigloser42 t1_j5mis2w wrote

I also think those rules should apply to union bosses(and anyone else who’s salary is paid by union dues) and members of Congress. They should get paid a fixed percentage of the average salary of those they represent plus a stipend for flights to and from DC when Congress is in session(one flight in, one flight out per session, but only if they actually fly to and from DC)


bigloser42 t1_j1w2ggr wrote

Rockets have issues all the time, the more rockets you need to launch to assemble/refuel your ship in orbit the greater the odds that one will fail/get delayed, which will then delay your entire mission. Once you stage something in orbit you are now committed to waiting for the next launch(es) to actually leave.

The window to launch to Mars is only open for 2 weeks every 2ish years. If you get enough of a delay that you miss your window, you have to wait 2 more years. It's better to launch everything at once on a single rocket to minimize points of failure.

Having said that, most of the Mars missions profiles are effectively staging on Mars, then launching Humans in the next transfer window. As for the Moon, that's close enough that staging in Earth orbit isn't really necessary.