$15 Minimum Wage by 2021!

Another way to view it: my former company’s ceo made 18 times what a neurosurgeon makes. The person who literally cuts into your brain, who one small oops can kill you makes an order of magnitude less than the ceo. Is a ceo’s work 18 times harder than brain surgery?
Ha! That is how I feel about professional athletes. Should a functioning idiot who can't type literate sentences into Twitter, but who is good at throwing or catching or kicking balls or chasing and pummeling other people be paid 20+ times what the neurosurgeon makes?! I would say no, but that is what the market bears.
 
No you posted an opinion with zero evidence to back it up. The piece gives evidence to back up it's opinion; is any of it wrong?
 




Well if one opinion piece says so, then it must be so....Saw lots of scholarly citations....:sad2:

The best part is in the author's bio, I crap you not: "John Tamny is a speechwriter and writer of opinion pieces for clients...." OPINION PIECES FOR CLIENTS !?!?! That literally says everything you need to know about whether to take this article seriously.
 
The best part is in the author's bio, I crap you not: "John Tamny is a speechwriter and writer of opinion pieces for clients...." OPINION PIECES FOR CLIENTS !?!?! That literally says everything you need to know about whether to take this article seriously.
I am not getting into if this is right or wrong. It is just a pet peeve of mine when people post snippets and not quote the whole thing. If you are going to quote his bio post it all.
 


Ha! That is how I feel about professional athletes. Should a functioning idiot who can't type literate sentences into Twitter, but who is good at throwing or catching or kicking balls or chasing and pummeling other people be paid 20+ times what the neurosurgeon makes?! I would say no, but that is what the market bears.

Would you rather the owners pocket the money and pay the athletes less? At least in that case it is going to the employees (though I'm sure the owners are still pocketing ridiculous amounts of money).
 
Would you rather the owners pocket the money and pay the athletes less? At least in that case it is going to the employees (though I'm sure the owners are still pocketing ridiculous amounts of money).
You totally missed my point (ETA, most likely because I did not express it well). I'm just saying the market is what it is. I personally think it is ridiculous that professional sports is such a huge market, but it is, and people (owners and players) generally get compensated accordingly. That is, they get paid what the market bears.

Posters here have expressed their opinion that CEOs should not get paid what they do, relative to other employees, but they do. Why? The market. Boards think it is worth paying more to get "good" CEOs, and there is competition driving the salaries even higher. Is that right? To many, it is not. The only way to change it, though, is through regulation of the market, and that gets tricky.
 
Last edited:
Here's a question and "theory" I thought of...

Since the instrument for wealth and company profits is equity in the form of stocks, would a regulation (I know, that word alone turns a lot off to the idea) requiring that employees hold a certain amount of equity work? For instance, in Disney's case, employees had to hold 20% of the stock. This way, they are all rewarded for the large gains that are made, it gives them skin in the game, and they can start receiving the increases that the top 20% of the country enjoys. Just a thought....

ETA: This is just a quick overview, obviously there would be a ton of details that would have to be hashed out...
 
Last edited:
No you posted an opinion with zero evidence to back it up. The piece gives evidence to back up it's opinion; is any of it wrong?

Since we are just throwing articles around, here's a good read:

https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/credit-default-swap-cds/

Key points are:

"Since the market was unregulated, banks used swaps to insure complex financial products."

"There was no legal framework to regulate swaps, and the lack of transparency in the market became a concern among regulators."

Again, it's not a credit default swap thread...but here you go.

I realize I brought it up as an off the cuff remark as part of a longer comment, but I hope this helps you some....

ETA: So we don't drag this thread totally OT, if you want to have a scholarly debate with peer reviewed articles and data, start a thread and PM me
 
would a regulation (I know, that word alone turns a lot off to the idea) requiring that employees hold a certain amount of equity work?

No

This way, they are all rewarded for the large gains that are made, it gives them skin in the game

They already have skin in the game. They work for a company. If that company goes under they are unemployed. If that company does well they remain employed and have OPPORTUNITY for advancement. This thread is a prime example of that. See the title. Disney is doing well and they are bumping up their starting salary to 15$ per hour.
 
No



They already have skin in the game. They work for a company. If that company goes under they are unemployed. If that company does well they remain employed and have OPPORTUNITY for advancement. This thread is a prime example of that. See the title. Disney is doing well and they are bumping up their starting salary to 15$ per hour.


They are bumping up their salary because they are being FORCED to by the workers, not because Disney is doing well and is just passing on some of the wealth.
 
No



They already have skin in the game. They work for a company. If that company goes under they are unemployed. If that company does well they remain employed and have OPPORTUNITY for advancement. This thread is a prime example of that. See the title. Disney is doing well and they are bumping up their starting salary to 15$ per hour.

So their skin in the game currently is to do enough to make sure the company doesn't go under? And, I know you aren't a fan of statistics, but simply thinking out loud here, how many management positions are there compared to non management positions? It's simple numbers. Not everyone can advance. Just a fact......

What if you could see the effects of your actions? Stock upticks 10%, you gain 10% (very simple example) under this method. It gives you more incentive than just "keep the place open"...Again, just a thought.
 
Here's a question and "theory" I thought of...

Since the instrument for wealth and company profits is equity in the form of stocks, would a regulation (I know, that word alone turns a lot off to the idea) requiring that employees hold a certain amount of equity work? For instance, in Disney's case, employees had to hold 20% of the stock. This way, they are all rewarded for the large gains that are made, it gives them skin in the game, and they can start receiving the increases that the top 20% of the country enjoys. Just a thought....

ETA: This is just a quick overview, obviously there would be a ton of details that would have to be hashed out...

the negative to that though is if the company goes under not only do the employees lose their jobs they also lose investments that they have ... that was a huge problem with ENRON as employees there were encouraged to invest in the company with thier 401K, etc.

That is why even though my company has a program to invest in the company at a bit of a discount I don't do it as I don't want all my proverbial eggs in one basket
 
You totally missed my point (ETA, most likely because I did not express it well). I'm just saying the market is what it is. I personally think it is ridiculous that professional sports is such a huge market, but it is, and people (owners and players) generally get compensated accordingly. That is, they get paid what the market bears.

Posters here have expressed their opinion that CEOs should not get paid what they do, relative to other employees, but they do. Why? The market. Boards think it is worth paying more to get "good" CEOs, and there is competition driving the salaries even higher. Is that right? To many, it is not. The only way to change it, though, is through regulation of the market, and that gets tricky.

well, not that is not the only way to change it - if society looked down on companies where the CEO was being compensated to too high of a degree and didn't support those companies then the boards wouldn't want to compensate them so much and investors and analysts would look negatively on companies that compensated their CEOs too much ... but that takes full transparency and people willing to act differently based on executive compensation
 
the negative to that though is if the company goes under not only do the employees lose their jobs they also lose investments that they have ... that was a huge problem with ENRON as employees there were encouraged to invest in the company with thier 401K, etc.

That is why even though my company has a program to invest in the company at a bit of a discount I don't do it as I don't want all my proverbial eggs in one basket

Yeah, that’s a good point. Foiled again! Lol

I’m trying to figure out the best way to bridge the gap between the upper and lower tails.....

We’ll have this figured out eventually.....
 
Yeah, that’s a good point. Foiled again! Lol

I’m trying to figure out the best way to bridge the gap between the upper and lower tails.....

We’ll have this figured out eventually.....

fairly confident we are not the first people to work on this issue :teeth: ... but hey, you never know


I think it is tough as the US was really found on and developed due to the feeling of the individual can rise up by working hard and taking advantage of your opportunities - but that puts the individual above society at large beyond what you personally feel connected to and want to contribute to. Doesn't make it bad it just worked better when there were virtually unlimited resources and always the ability to "go west" if your didn't like your current opportunities

Still think the best way is to try and give people the tools and skills that they can use to improve their own position in a changing world and, ideally, close as many loopholes as you can so people at least are paying what they should in taxes and not getting around it via tax havens and stuff, thus pushing more of the responsibility down the ladder to people less able to take advantage of the loopholes
 
Yeah, that’s a good point. Foiled again! Lol

I’m trying to figure out the best way to bridge the gap between the upper and lower tails.....

We’ll have this figured out eventually.....
The goal should be to lift everyone which is done with improving the economy. Not sure why it matters how much the top makes compared to the bottom. The economy is not a zero sum game. If CEO X makes more next year than this, that money doesn't come from janitor Y's pocket. If we want to punish successful people in the end nobody will be, the incentive to work extra long hours or pursue extra degrees or whatever will not exist.
 
You totally missed my point (ETA, most likely because I did not express it well). I'm just saying the market is what it is. I personally think it is ridiculous that professional sports is such a huge market, but it is, and people (owners and players) generally get compensated accordingly. That is, they get paid what the market bears.

Posters here have expressed their opinion that CEOs should not get paid what they do, relative to other employees, but they do. Why? The market. Boards think it is worth paying more to get "good" CEOs, and there is competition driving the salaries even higher. Is that right? To many, it is not. The only way to change it, though, is through regulation of the market, and that gets tricky.

Ok, gotcha. I was looking at it more from the "guy at the top keeps most of the money" side. I agree that the amount of money pro sports pulls in is insane, but people and advertisers are still willing to pay it.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Latest posts

Top