The Minimum Wage: What's the Big Deal?

#276
#276
Carl Pickens said:
What do you define as executive pay and why do you say its outpaced inflation?
Click to expand...

Top CEOs Make 373 Times the Average U.S. Worker - Real Time Economics - WSJ

BN-IK165_CEOPAY_G_20150513131330.jpg



Why CEO Pay Grows Faster than Worker Pay

ceo-pay-vs-average-worker.jpg
 
#278
#278
The article you posted actually explains why "executive" pay increases faster than worker pay..... Nice job Ras....

Why the CEO Pay Ratio is Skewed
Whereas an employee may increase his or her own productivity by 10%, thus netting 10% more output for the firm, a CEOs decision-making affects everyone.

This can be made analogous to the examples in my post about Wall Street brain drain. A young, Ivy League-educated physics master might earn $200,000 working for a technology firm to make one product, as he or she produces only $250,000 in productivity at the tech firm.

However, the same person working for a Wall Street bank may design a new insurance product for the entirety of the technology industry, thus allowing his or her work to scale. On Wall Street, the physicist is paid significantly more, because he or she produces more output. Million-dollar salaries and bonuses are a normal occurrence.

Naturally, the CEO produces more in output than an individual worker. One awesome worker who increases productivity by 10% for his or herself generates maybe $10,000 per year in additional productivity. One CEO who produces 10% more output for the entirety of the firm, however, may produce tens of millions (even billions) of dollars in additional profits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#281
#281
Carl Pickens said:
The article you posted actually explains why "executive" pay increases faster than worker pay..... Nice job Ras....

Why the CEO Pay Ratio is Skewed
Whereas an employee may increase his or her own productivity by 10%, thus netting 10% more output for the firm, a CEOs decision-making affects everyone.

This can be made analogous to the examples in my post about Wall Street brain drain. A young, Ivy League-educated physics master might earn $200,000 working for a technology firm to make one product, as he or she produces only $250,000 in productivity at the tech firm.

However, the same person working for a Wall Street bank may design a new insurance product for the entirety of the technology industry, thus allowing his or her work to scale. On Wall Street, the physicist is paid significantly more, because he or she produces more output. Million-dollar salaries and bonuses are a normal occurrence.

Naturally, the CEO produces more in output than an individual worker. One awesome worker who increases productivity by 10% for his or herself generates maybe $10,000 per year in additional productivity. One CEO who produces 10% more output for the entirety of the firm, however, may produce tens of millions (even billions) of dollars in additional profits.
Click to expand...

Nice post!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#282
#282
Carl Pickens said:
The article you posted actually explains why "executive" pay increases faster than worker pay..... Nice job Ras....

Why the CEO Pay Ratio is Skewed
Whereas an employee may increase his or her own productivity by 10%, thus netting 10% more output for the firm, a CEOs decision-making affects everyone.

This can be made analogous to the examples in my post about Wall Street brain drain. A young, Ivy League-educated physics master might earn $200,000 working for a technology firm to make one product, as he or she produces only $250,000 in productivity at the tech firm.

However, the same person working for a Wall Street bank may design a new insurance product for the entirety of the technology industry, thus allowing his or her work to scale. On Wall Street, the physicist is paid significantly more, because he or she produces more output. Million-dollar salaries and bonuses are a normal occurrence.

Naturally, the CEO produces more in output than an individual worker. One awesome worker who increases productivity by 10% for his or herself generates maybe $10,000 per year in additional productivity. One CEO who produces 10% more output for the entirety of the firm, however, may produce tens of millions (even billions) of dollars in additional profits.
Click to expand...

The so-called productivity created on Wall St isn't productivity at all, but rather it is gambling on derivatives and paper created wealth. At some point, the game will end, and those that create real products and real wealth will be paid justly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#284
#284
volfanhill said:
Well are you referring to all c-suite members, just the CEO, or are you including the executive team ( ala the president of the company who is often not the CEO, the EvP of human resourceses etc..)
Click to expand...

The graphs only showed CEOs, but if we want to include everyone from CEO to one or two levels below CEO in most organizations (different companies have a different number of layers of management), then we can include them, as well.

I don't see what the difference would be either way. You still have one group of people with pay that is outpacing another group... the group that actually represents where the rubber meets the road and actually produces widgets.
 
#285
#285
Rasputin_Vol said:
The graphs only showed CEOs, but if we want to include everyone from CEO to one or two levels below CEO in most organizations (different companies have a different number of layers of management), then we can include them, as well.

I don't see what the difference would be either way. You still have one group of people with pay that is outpacing another group... the group that actually represents where the rubber meets the road and actually produces widgets.
Click to expand...

I will refer you back to CP's post. The decisions those people make impact the company at a far different level. Greater responsibility includes greater pay and risk. I will concede the banking/finance industry is an exception to this because the government is in bed with them.
 
#286
#286
volfanhill said:
I will refer you back to CP's post. The decisions those people make impact the company at a far different level. Greater responsibility includes greater pay and risk. I will concede the banking/finance industry is an exception to this because the government is in bed with them.
Click to expand...

What risk has a CEO (outside of the Enron gang) assumed in the last 20-25 years? You have companies that launder money to Mexican cartels and Jihadists, companies that engage in fraud and manipulation of markets, and companies that have eagerly sent jobs overseas at the expense of American manufacturing and the worst these guys get is a fine (which the shareholders end up actually paying) and/or fired with a cotton-soft landing on the other side thanks to the buyout package.

Some of these people should be in jail!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#290
#290
Rasputin_Vol said:
What risk has a CEO (outside of the Enron gang) assumed in the last 20-25 years? You have companies that launder money to Mexican cartels and Jihadists, companies that engage in fraud and manipulation of markets, and companies that have eagerly sent jobs overseas at the expense of American manufacturing and the worst these guys get is a fine (which the shareholders end up actually paying) and/or fired with a cotton-soft landing on the other side thanks to the buyout package.

Some of these people should be in jail!
Click to expand...

The risk of if you don't continue to make the stock value go up we will fire you in 6 months
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#291
#291
Rasputin_Vol said:
The so-called productivity created on Wall St isn't productivity at all, but rather it is gambling on derivatives and paper created wealth. At some point, the game will end, and those that create real products and real wealth will be paid justly.
Click to expand...

It irks me when anyone talks about innovation on Wall Street like it's good for society because innovation on Wall Street really means "make a quick buck at the expense of everyone else." Maybe it's just the innovative products I'm familiar with (mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps, leveraged buyouts, etc). Who thinks it's a good idea to buy and sell these innovative products that even the "experts" on Wall Street don't understand?
 
#292
#292
McDad said:
If minimums were good, wouldn't a minimum of $50 be great, or a minimum of $100 be outstanding?
Click to expand...

Why isn't everything just free? You could all go to work and work your asses off and I could stay home and do nothing. That way if no one gets paid anything then we are all equal.
 
#293
#293
82_VOL_83 said:
Why isn't everything just free? You could all go to work and work your asses off and I could stay home and do nothing. That way if no one gets paid anything then we are all equal.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you'd be corpulent
 
#294
#294
GoBigOrangeUT said:
Not necessarily. If a person gets laid off or let go from a good paying job, and they need a job just to put food on the plate, I don't consider them having minimum skills.
Click to expand...

You would only do that job our of necessity for a short period of time and not as a career plan.
 
#296
#296
Rasputin_Vol said:
The so-called productivity created on Wall St isn't productivity at all, but rather it is gambling on derivatives and paper created wealth. At some point, the game will end, and those that create real products and real wealth will be paid justly.
Click to expand...

Did you even read the example they provided?
 
#297
#297
Rasputin_Vol said:
Is the converse true?
Maximum pay = maximum skills?

You telling me we couldn't find just as talented people for less?
Click to expand...

Have you ever worked with someone who is highly intelligent? I get the point you're making about the outrageous salaries some CEOs are paid, but these guys are a rare breed. They didn't make it to the top just because they knew someone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#299
#299
Carl Pickens said:
Have you ever worked with someone who is highly intelligent? I get the point you're making about the outrageous salaries some CEOs are paid, but these guys are a rare breed. They didn't make it to the top just because they knew someone.
Click to expand...

You can't convince me that a Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein is worth $1 billion of productivity in their lifetimes... yet they are.

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs on the other hand I can agree with because they male widgets. What do Dimon and Blankein produce?
 
#300
#300
Rasputin_Vol said:
You can't convince me that a Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein is worth $1 billion of productivity in their lifetimes... yet they are.

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs on the other hand I can agree with because they male widgets. What do Dimon and Blankein produce?
Click to expand...

Did you read my post? I said I get your point with the outrageous CEO salaries..... I'm not trying to convince you of anything.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top