[Rhiamon]

Okay yes I know another news article

Elite CEOs to make average annual income by midday
Elite CEOs to make average annual income by midday - The Whig Standard - Ontario, CA

This was in the newspaper today. Seriously why do you need that much money???
Here is a quote from the firt paragraph.

The 100 highest-paid chief executives in the country will have made more money than the average Canadian will all year by 2:30 p.m. Monday, according to a new report.

 

[mndtrp]

The stress and amount of work these CEOs do may justify a lot of that pay. Besides, I'm guessing a lot of that amount is in stock, not a cut check.

I wouldn't want to do their job, regardless of the amount of money they make. I see what the people even a few steps above me put up with, and it isn't worth the pay.

 

[Greebo]

A better question you might want to consider is, why do you think it's your right to ask that question?

 

[Rhiamon]

My problem with this, is the tax cuts that upper income is getting in my area well the lower income are being left in the cold. There is a reason why the rich keep getting richer and the poor can't get ahead. And that gap just keeps getting bigger. An average two bedroom apartment even in the poorest part of my town is 950 + a month. Well the average income is way less then 30,000. But if you make more then 25,000 you don't qualify for anything.
I understand that these jobs can and are high stress jobs. So I am sure that the deserve a large pay. In the same respect most of us in my community are having to work 2 to 3 jobs just to make it to the 25,000 a year. I have no problem with upper income or even middle income but in one morning pretty much when you make more then the average Canadian I find that a little umm how do I put this off putting. I have worked with the poor in my city, homeless etc. Now I am one of the poor. I have never been rich but have had times were income is average. People think that those on Ontario works get a huge amount of money or on disability but that is not true. A single person gets 450 a month for rent on ontario works and a person on disability gets 550. The waiting list for social housing is 5 years. Read some of the comments they express what I am trying to say better then I am probably explaining this.
This is just my opinion any ways.

 

[Greebo]

My problem with this, is the tax cuts that upper income is getting in my area well the lower income are being left in the cold. There is a reason why the rich keep getting richer and the poor can't get ahead.

Yes, that is - but do you think the blame falls on the rich? Or the poor?

I mean - technically by many standards, I'm in the "rich" group. I earn over 6 figures from my day job, I have ancillary income in real estate, I manage my money well, I invest it well, I don't use debt, and as such, my net worth is accumulating. I'm not CEO rich by any means, but I'm working on it.

Is it your opinion that I and people like me are "keeping the poor poor"? And if so - how am I doing so?

And that gap just keeps getting bigger. An average two bedroom apartment even in the poorest part of my town is 950 + a month. Well the average income is way less then 30,000. But if you make more then 25,000 you don't qualify for anything.

And the CEO's are keeping the rent high how?

In the same respect most of us in my community are having to work 2 to 3 jobs just to make it to the 25,000 a year.

Yes and that's unfortunate - but again - is that a problem of the CEO's making?

I have no problem with upper income or even middle income but in one morning pretty much when you make more then the average Canadian I find that a little umm how do I put this off putting.

So you basically think that one should only be "so" rich. But again - what blame falls on the CEO's for the state of the poor?

 

[Nishu]

A better question you might want to consider is, why do you think it's your right to ask that question?

We're not allowed to ask questions? :laugh:

However, I will humor you! I know she's in Canada, but hey, you would have given the same answer to anyone in the US who asked the same question.

It's my right because...
Bailout List: Banks, Car Companies, and More | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica

Even when companies aren't receiving bailout money directly, a huge chunk of companies are getting pork dollars and money from other corrupt government contracts. I was shocked to read the truth about the public school system and how so many businesses are basically just leeching money off of it. It's everywhere, it's completely pervasive.

You give me any corporation and I can just about guarantee you that they're somehow leeching money out of the US taxpayer. Fairly, too, not just in a round about way.

Go on. Try it.

That's how it's my right to ask.

 

[Greebo]

Good answer Nishu - you're right - they lose their right to autonomy when they get in bed with Government (which means they use force of law to gain advantages) and just about all of them are in triple decker bunk beds with Gov't.

 

[lparker]

A better question you might want to consider is, why do you think it's your right to ask that question?

Because I'm paying that salary by paying inflated prices for goods and services. If the people paying the salary don't have a right to question it...who does?

I personally - my opinion - believe in the 7x rule. The top boss gets paid 7x the wage of the lowest paid worker. Which pretty much caps it at around $50/hour. If the boss needs more, he pays the lowest worker more (and most likely the ones in between). Any business that does not create capital, that is, not directly in the agriculture (farming), mining (digging/drilling), fishing (catching), or forestry (planting and cutting) business, should have a top cap that's not very high because it is a leech on society (if you are a true capitalist).

Lee

 

[nuisance26]

~I don't believe in wage caps. In general your pay should reflect your value to society. Your pay does not reflect the value of your person, just the work you do. Yes, picking up trash or being a cashier is a valuable service to many people but running a company affects thousands and hundreds of thousands and often millions of people. This rule of course does not apply to those who hold elected office. They're all grossly overpaid for the "work" they do.
I always wonder why people want to cut the pay of people actually working for a living and not the salaries of people who "play" for a living: i.e., anyone in the entertainment industry, which includes professional sports. I mean, why work at a salary of $60K or so and then spend what little you have left over making people who earn $1 million a year + even richer? So I do my part by not supporting the entertainment industries whenever possible. Entertainment should be free since it isn't an essential service. ~

 

[Tess B]

maybe another way to look at it all would be......if they wanted to pay ME what some might consider an exorbitant salary would I say NO? can i really fault anyone for ACCEPTING the pay level offered to them? do i want someone saying that I am overpaid?

that's of course not to say that a lot of big corporations in all facets of the business world aren't downright criminal in their business models and practices.......until something breaks in the supply and demand chain there's little to encourage or force any real change.

 

[cab54]

1. Freedom from financial worry. Most of us have been through it at some time in our lives and of course, wish to avoid experiencing it again.

2. Enough to easily (without much sacrifice on the home front) educate your children (or yourself!) in very good schools--and colleges.

3. Enough to donate to those schools so that others with less can get a good education.

4. Enough to donate to all kinds of causes. Sick children, families who are hurting financially especially at the holidays, people down on their luck, people who suffer natural disasters, like in Haiti, or New Orleans.

Not everyone who wishes to make a great deal of money is all into the gimme, gimme, gimme, I want more, more, MORE thing. I thinkk most people know that there's only so much 'stuff' you can buy, and then money is a burden. Many give selflessly of their wealth.

 

[monkeywrangler71]

The income tax rate in Ontario for upper income earners is 46%. Add in the sales and property tax and these people gave the government more money today than they got to keep.

Who do you think is paying for all those social programs?

 

[Greebo]

Because I'm paying that salary by paying inflated prices for goods and services. If the people paying the salary don't have a right to question it...who does?

They do, but you aren't. You are free to not buy those goods and or services and do without. Being a customer does not make you an owner.

I personally - my opinion - believe in the 7x rule. The top boss gets paid 7x the wage of the lowest paid worker. Which pretty much caps it at around $50/hour. If the boss needs more, he pays the lowest worker more (and most likely the ones in between). Any business that does not create capital, that is, not directly in the agriculture (farming), mining (digging/drilling), fishing (catching), or forestry (planting and cutting) business, should have a top cap that's not very high because it is a leech on society (if you are a true capitalist).

Lee

You have a very odd definition of capitalist and an even odder one of economics if you think that one must be in the work of material production alone in order to produce else one is a leach. I think you must have insulted just about everyone here with that notion.

Curious, what do you call someone who creates software that frees your time to produce? Or the person who keeps your books so you don't have to? Or the person who builds your house? I mean - the house apparently in your world has no added value since it's not one of those fields you mentioned. I guess the house is really only worth the raw ore and raw timber?

 

[dancemommy]

I admittedly do not know much about Canada and the tax system. However, I am so sick of the "rich" being portrayed as evil in the US. I do not have any problem with CEO's being paid what a company determines they are worth. I have more problem with sports figures and celebrities being paid what they are. No one complains much about that, but plenty of people complain about the salaries of physicians! Makes no sense to me.

 

[Rhiamon]

I do have a problem with what celebrities and sports players make. I was commenting on the article because that was what was in the paper yesterday.

Who do you think is paying for all those social programs?

Anyone who pays taxes pays for the social programs the rich and working poor alike. The poor still get taxed and still have to pay taxes. When I owned a house with my ex I paid property taxes. I still have to pay taxes.

By some of the reasoning then nurses, doctors, police, teachers etc should all be paid more. I do believe that they should be paid more.

Until there is some great equalizer there will always be a huge gap between the poor and the not.

Some people are poor because yes they have mismanaged their money in one way or another. Others that is not the case at all, that would be like saying all big companies have sleazy business practices.

I think the one thing we can all agree on is that this is a passionate topic for many, and the reasons you feel one way or another about it are probably very personal to you. I was not looking for a heated debate when I posted the article, I was looking for feedback.( and yes I know I have gotten it) I know that this is a topic that people are passionate about. I know ultimately I have no say in how much someone makes. I was honestly asking why someone would need all that money. Maybe because I can’t fathom what it would be like to have all that money. I would happily take what they made that day and could live very comfortably off it for a year.

 

[Nishu]

I don't care what celebrities make. They're a much better model for a free market society than corporations are. There's no celebrity lobbyists in Washington right now lobbying for eyeliner subsidies or for the deregulation of plastic surgery. Their income is directly related to their job performance. They don't get paid for not selling movies or for making crappy albums in the same way that CEO's get paid for driving corporations into the ground. They also stop getting paid when they piss people off. If the boss of BP were in show business, he's be just as broke as Lindsay Lohan.

 

[dancemommy]

I am not wealthy. I do have family members who are. They are the most generous people I know. Yes, they have nice things- a nice home, a vacation home, etc. They do not waste money, however, and have worked very hard for what they have. Not to say that a poor person doesn't work hard, but I don't think someone should be thought of poorly for success in their career. They also are the most giving people I know- have bought cars for people who have needed them, paid medical bills for others, bought a house for someone, and more and have given of their time as well. I am sure it is difficult to be on the poorer side of the economic scale, but without the rich most programs would not be funded to benefit the poor.

 

[HappyMama]

A better question you might want to consider is, why do you think it's your right to ask that question?

Questions are wonderful, introspective and can be very powerful for discussion purposes.

I truly believe and have raised my children to never be afraid to ask a question, get an answer, seek an opinon, polietly disagree, stand in your grace and right to an opinion and acknowledge when you are wrong. Knowledge is power. Ask away, throw away answers you don't like or don't help you. Just my thoughts.

We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers. Carl Sagan

I come from a family that works hard for what we have, some self employed and very generous . That said I have no problem with someones salary or what they do with it. I agree with some the salary does come at a high price and stress level once you reach that stage in your career.

We're not allowed to ask questions? :laugh:

However, I will humor you! I know she's in Canada, but hey, you would have given the same answer to anyone in the US who asked the same question.

It's my right because...
Bailout List: Banks, Car Companies, and More | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica

Even when companies aren't receiving bailout money directly, a huge chunk of companies are getting pork dollars and money from other corrupt government contracts. I was shocked to read the truth about the public school system and how so many businesses are basically just leeching money off of it. It's everywhere, it's completely pervasive.

You give me any corporation and I can just about guarantee you that they're somehow leeching money out of the US taxpayer. Fairly, too, not just in a round about way.

Go on. Try it.

That's how it's my right to ask.

I agree! LOL

 

[lparker]

They do, but you aren't. You are free to not buy those goods and or services and do without. Being a customer does not make you an owner.

>No - don't have a choice...wife won't let me not buy.
I'd be happy as a minimalist in a cave.<

You have a very odd definition of capitalist and an even odder one of economics if you think that one must be in the work of material production alone in order to produce else one is a leach. I think you must have insulted just about everyone here with that notion.

> I can't insult anyone that won't let me. I'm just as much of a leech as anyone. Maybe more - government employee for 40 years. I don't hold anything against a leech - they have to live too. And that was - in order to produce capital, not just produce. I read about the production idea a long time ago...Maybe before computers, but maybe in the '70s. Coulda been written by a neo-ludite. Material has to be taken from the earth for someone to do any value-added work with it. The definition of a capitalist has evolved as people invent more ways to add value.<

Curious, what do you call someone who creates software that frees your time to produce? Or the person who keeps your books so you don't have to? Or the person who builds your house? I mean - the house apparently in your world has no added value since it's not one of those fields you mentioned. I guess the house is really only worth the raw ore and raw timber?

>A house has added value in the building of it, but that doesn't build capital. Capital and worth, while related, are two different creatures. Peoples WANTS, not needs, makes worth. BTW, I don't think that real estate should increase in value past the initial cost.

If we went back to basics, we wouldn't need (want?) computers. If I had to pay a bookkeeper to keep track of my money, that would be a sure sign I'm obsessed with $$$ instead of living.

This whole conversation doesn't address the subject of this thread -
Why do you need that much money? No one needs that kind of money unless they have some kind of psychological problem. They WANT it.

Pay attention...all I have said is my opinion. No one has to agree with it as I don't have to agree with anyone else's opinion on the subject. But I reserved the right to look into what anyone has to say and not reject it outright.

You know Greebs...this could be made into a dandy of a separate thread

Lee

 

[Hamada]

Personally I would not want the responsibility or stress from being a CEO of one of these companies. I don't even know the companies but do know I can't handle it.

What I do question is the practice of giving bonuses when the company has to lay people off after being given money from the government to stay afloat. Anyone remember when that was going on?