patrick.net

Strategist says

The trickle down is due to capitalism and democracy. It started way way before the 1980's.

Don't get me wrong. The future of mankind is not dependent on a few billionaires. It's dependent on what the average person can do. Invent, research, teach etc etc.

We need capitalism because of the wealth and opportunities it creates. Communism and socialism may create equality, but they don't create the wealth to progress and benefit everyone.

This isn't an issue of capitalism or not. I'm a capitalist. This is an issue of maintaining a cohesive society. I don't see the same level of cohesion in the US as I do in Europe and Japan for example. Having a very small minority of society soaking up more and more of the wealth as others are squeezed is simply not good for society in the long term.

Bigsby says

Strategist says

I don't think you are getting his point, Bigs. Marvel is saying...the reason why CEO's get so much more is because very few people have that ability. Most CEO's are at a genius level to begin with, and then the energy drive time sacrifice.

I do get his point and I don't accept it. That isn't the reason why CEOs get 300 times average employee salary.

So why does the board agree to give the CEO's so much money? You tell us.

Bigsby says

And most CEOs are at genius level? You are joking right? I know quite a few top managers and CEOs. I suspect even they would laugh if they heard that. Most CEOs in major companies worked their way up the ranks of that or other companies. They are generally capable and know how to play the game.

Most CEO's are at the genius level. I believe that applies mostly to the Fortune 500.
I have all the education requirements, but I am no genius. My professors knew everything in the book, but they do not have what it takes to be a CEO. I even considered becoming a professor myself, but you know what? I don't think I could even succeed at that. We all have our unique skills, and capitalism gives us the opportunity to capitalize on that. I did OK over time, nothing special, because capitalism gave me that opportunity. The same applies to everyone else.

Bigsby says

Strategist says

The trickle down is due to capitalism and democracy. It started way way before the 1980's.


Don't get me wrong. The future of mankind is not dependent on a few billionaires. It's dependent on what the average person can do. Invent, research, teach etc etc.


We need capitalism because of the wealth and opportunities it creates. Communism and socialism may create equality, but they don't create the wealth to progress and benefit everyone.

This isn't an issue of capitalism or not. I'm a capitalist. This is an issue of maintaining a cohesive society. I don't see the same level of cohesion in the US as I do in Europe and Japan for example. Having a very small minority of society soaking up more and more of the wealth as others are squeezed is simply not good for society in the long term.

I actually agree with you. Excessive wealth in the hands of a few is not healthy for mankind. That is why I support the death tax. Let them create the wealth for society, let them create the wealth for themselves, but eventually they will die. All the landowners, all the Kings and Emperors in history left all their wealth behind when they kicked the bucket.

Ironman says

The want wealth equality

Which ends up with everyone getting zero wealth.
Cubans making $20.00 per month. LOL.
Venezuela sitting on the world's largest oil reserve, don't have enough toilet paper. LOL
I'm so glad I am right here in the US where every Capitalist Pig exploits the hell out of me.

Strategist says

Most CEO's are at the genius level. I believe that applies mostly to the Fortune 500.

Based on what? And what do you mean by genius? I'm sure you think Steve Jobs was a 'genius,' but I wouldn't personally refer to him as one. He was, however, very skilled at pushing that company forward (at least second time round). Any well-structured company can chop and change their CEO without it having a major impact upon the business. As long as the replacement is reasonably competent, things tend to continue as normal. That presumably means they aren't irreplaceable 'geniuses' or some such, just more than averagely capable managers who have made it up the food chain. I honestly think your view of CEOs has been shaped by a few high profile start ups that have been massively successful and had highly intelligent founders. That isn't the norm for most companies.

Bigsby says

Strategist says

Most CEO's are at the genius level. I believe that applies mostly to the Fortune 500.

Based on what? And what do you mean by genius?

Based on an article I read many years ago. I never forget what I find interesting.

Bigsby says

I'm sure you think Steve Jobs was a 'genius,' but I wouldn't personally refer to him as one.

Harvard has established 13 types of intelligence. I think I read that a couple of years ago. Steve Jobs was a creative genius in his own right. If Steve Jobs was born anywhere else in the world, we would not have had the benefits of Apple. His premature death was a terrible loss to mankind.

Strategist says

Based on an article I read many years ago. I never forget what I find interesting.

A research paper? Someone went to 'most' CEOs and tested their genius level? I find that highly unlikely. You may have read some puff piece on 'super-duper genius CEOs' in a newspaper or the like, but that doesn't make it the reality.

Strategist says

Harvard has established 13 types of intelligence. I think I read that a couple of years ago. Steve Jobs was a creative genius in his own right. If Steve Jobs was born anywhere else in the world, we would not have had the benefits of Apple. His premature death was a terrible loss to mankind.

I'm quite sure there are different types of intelligence. That doesn't then mean most CEOs are geniuses. It more likely means that they are good at a range of things that moves them up corporate ladders, mixed in with a good deal of luck. As for Jobs being a 'creative genius,' I'm not clear what his role was in terms of creating within the company. I thought his job was more driving the product design forward and demanding a certain 'polish' that other products lacked. He also had the good fortune/skill at bringing out 3 products that turned that entire company around. He/his colleagues grabbed those openings, but does that then translate into him being a creative genius? I imagine people take on new and super qualities the greater the success they are associated with.

Strategist says

Yes I do. They are worth less because they don't have the same skills. Ask yourself ....why would a company even want to pay someone a 1000 times more than the average worker? Some of the 18 year old brats are not worth $10.00. I've seen how they work. I would not even pay them 10 cents an hour. They come to work when they feel like, freak looking skinheads who can't even spell their names. If they were my slaves, I would give them their freedom just to get rid of them.

The reason they get paid more is because it's a good ole boys club. They all serve on each others boards and have quid pro quo agreements with each other.

I see you have rationalized that people who make low wages are all undependable slackers. I'm sure that makes you feel better, but I can guarantee you that's not the case. I think there is probably an inverse relationship between how hard one works and how much money one makes.

Strategist says

I don't think you are getting his point, Bigs. Marvel is saying...the reason why CEO's get so much more is because very few people have that ability. Most CEO's are at a genius level to begin with, and then the energy drive time sacrifice.

Marvel is stating...If being a CEO is so easy, why don't you make millions? He is right.

No he's not. It is ridiculous. Like I said above--CEOs get so much because the boards are all incestuous. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.

mell says

the CEOs don't make 300 times their employees salary, because their valuations are not that high.

They actually probably do--if you consider stock options and/or company ownership.

Strategist says

So why does the board agree to give the CEO's so much money? You tell us.

I believe I've answered that one already.Strategist says

Most CEO's are at the genius level. I believe that applies mostly to the Fortune 500.

Please stop. You are hilarious.

Ironman says

This is what Bigs and Tat don't understand with their version of socialism. They want wealth equality, but the wealth equality they are looking for will lower the bar for EVERYONE, including them.

My version of socialism is the US in the 1950s and1960s. Was the bar lowered for everyone then? Please show me some data that shows the US economy was worse during those decades then it is now.

Bob Nardelli's a genius? I thought they got most CEOs from a pool of members down at the "whites only" country club.

Because many of these highly paid idiots ruin companies a la Fiorina, but actually get hired again to destroy their next company.

If it were merit based, a lot of them wouldn't have gotten the job in the first place, nor proceed to fail upwards.

tatupu70 says

You know where I lived when I was in NJ. It sure as hell wasn't in Ocean county.

Westfield >>>>>>>> Toms River (except price of homes). After all, everyone who buys a home anywhere that's expensive has to be an 'idiot'.

Despite my family being there and doing well, I'd never raise kids there myself, even if it is better than where I grew up in Bumblefuck, NM.

CL says

highly paid idiots ruin companies a la Fiorina,

Sneed is her maiden name. :) Totally WASP Country Club from a long line of fat corrupt asses and politicians.