Top CEOs leave 99% in the dust

[captain morgan]

So you agree that high disparity affects the economy.

You mean, like when unions shut down essential services of which I have no optional or competitive service?... Then yeah, I agree.

$8 million equates to $3,000 to $4,000 an hour. Does that kind of wage even fall within the realm of common sense?

What does Gates make per hour JLM?.. Is it fair or would it be better if you didn't have Windows with which to use on your PC?

Yep, if the commitment isn't working and then fire the guy who made it! :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol:So, in your view, there should be no such thing as a contract :lol: as it can be arbitrarily canceled, changed :lol: or ripped-up at any time based on your sole discretion? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[mentalfloss]

You mean, like when unions **** down essential services of which I have no optional or competitive service?... Then yeah, I agree.

Strikes and lockouts can definitely be a symptom of the main problem: a high level of income disparity.

 

[JLM]

What does Gates make per hour JLM?.. Is it fair or would it be better if you didn't have Windows with which to use on your PC?

That argument can be extended to the inventer or the car, the airplane, the T.V. the discoverer of penicillin, the inventor of the vaccuum cleaner and ad infinitim! :lol:

 

[captain morgan]

Strikes and lockouts can definitely be a symptom of the main problem: a high level of income disparity.

Now we're getting somewhere. The unbalanced disparity between union and non-union translates directly into a higher cost of living to the average person. This notion, coupled with the willingness of individuals in other nations that will produce far superior results for a fraction of the pay results in the out-sourcing of labour.

You're finally getting it MF... Congratulations.

 

[JLM]

:lol: :lol: :lol:So, in your view, there should be no such thing as a contract :lol: as it can be arbitrarily canceled, changed :lol: or ripped-up at any time based on your sole discretion? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Of course there should be contracts and of course they should be able to be cancalled, NOT arbitrarily, just when they are not working as indicated by dwindling funds in the kitty month after month. Contract are often drawn up according to conditions at the time................conditions change......................why shouldn't contracts change? :smile:

 

[mentalfloss]

The unbalanced disparity between union and non-union translates directly into a higher cost of living to the average person. This notion, coupled with the willingness of individuals in other nations that will produce far superior results for a fraction of the pay results in the out-sourcing of labour.

Correct.

The private industry doesn't mind outsourcing to save costs even if it results in a lower standard of living. As long as the corporation maintains a profit, it doesn't care about its workers and it's allowed to give all the proceeds to the big cheese even if all his underlings are doing the real work.

 

[petros]

You mean, like when unions **** down essential services of which I have no optional or competitive service?... Then yeah, I agree.




What does Gates make per hour JLM?.. Is it fair or would it be better if you didn't have Windows with which to use on your PC?

Bill Gates and the Unions are pretty damn tight. Both Gates and Unions are partners with Govt of Canada in the Action Plan and Asia Pacific Bill Gatesway in Prince Rupert.

Union pensions are heavily invested in Canadian infrastructure right alongside Govt and private. I kinda like seeing Canadian worker's pensions being invested in Canada.

There are reasons why every item in a Wal-Mart or Costco was transported by union logistics companies. They are investors in the infrastructure.

Both Wal-Mart and Costco seem to be doing pretty damn good and can sell competitively

 

[JLM]

Now we're getting somewhere. The unbalanced disparity between union and non-union translates directly into a higher cost of living to the average person. This notion, coupled with the willingness of individuals in other nations that will produce far superior results for a fraction of the pay results in the out-sourcing of labour.

You're finally getting it MF... Congratulations.

I don't THINK all union jobs pay higher than non union jobs. Smart employers who pay good wages and hire smart, hardworking people often avoid the encumberance of a union! :smile:

 

[captain morgan]

Of course there should be contracts and of course they should be able to be cancalled, NOT arbitrarily, just when they are not working as indicated by dwindling funds in the kitty month after month. Contract are often drawn up according to conditions at the time................conditions change......................why shouldn't contracts change? :smile:

The world is in a perpetual state of change and if cancelling a contract was that easy, we'd have no contracts. Basically, what you're saying is that you want to be able to reneg on your deal if the conditions aren't preferential to you.

On that note, MOST companies experience dwindling funds and many continue on to fail. If you are under the impression that operating a business is easy and risk-free, then you are definitely dreaming.

 

[JLM]

He'll be disappointed there are no swans. Noisy sandhill cranes, cormorants, pelicans, coots, loons, duck, geese and of course **** hawks but no swans.

He was up there years ago when he was working for Vencore out of Whitecourt, so he knows the environment. :lol:

 

[captain morgan]

The private industry doesn't mind outsourcing to save costs even if it results in a lower standard of living.

Here's a little fun fact for ya... There is no legislation that prevents Mentalfloss from moving from Company A to Company B at your sole discretion and for your sole benefit.

You don't like your standard of living, then man-up and do something about it.

As long as the corporation maintains a profit, it doesn't care about its workers and it's allowed to give all the proceeds to the big cheese even if all his underlings are doing the real work.

... Really.. Got a link on this, or is that your own personal experience that is the definitive and factual generalization?

 

[petros]

I don't THINK all union jobs pay higher than non union jobs. Smart employers who pay good wages and hire smart, hardworking people often avoid the encumberance of a union! :smile:

Try getting into a trade union these days. You can have all the TQ tickets in the world but make one mistake and you're gone. The bar has been raised pretty high.

 

[mentalfloss]

Here's a little fun fact for ya... There is no legislation that prevents Mentalfloss from moving from Company A to Company B at your sole discretion and for your sole benefit.

There is no legislation that prevents Mentalfloss from agreeing with this, but also acknowledging a lower standard of living for most employees across all organizations as reflected in high levels of income disparity in both public and private sectors.

... Really.. Got a link on this, or is that your own personal experience that is the definitive and factual generalization?

Top CEOs leave 99% in the dust

 

[captain morgan]

There is no legislation that prevents Mentalfloss from agreeing with this, but also acknowledging a lower standard of living for most employees across all organizations as reflected in high levels of income disparity in both public and private sectors.



Top CEOs leave 99% in the dust

Wow.. So the link definitively proves that employers just don't care about their employees (funny, I never really saw that)... I would sure like to see the data set on those numbers, but alas, they were probably destroyed in an unfortunate accident.

 

[mentalfloss]

Wow.. So the link definitively proves that employers just don't care about their employees (funny, I never really saw that)... I would sure like to see the data set on those numbers, but alas, they were probably destroyed in an unfortunate accident.

Don't take everything I say as gospel. If it makes you happier, you can replace "doesn't care" with "doesn't have to care."

The main point is that CEO's are allowed to funnel as much corporate capital as they want to their own bank account even if there is no annual profit. Meanwhile, there could be departments within that corporation that do provide a profit, but do not receive any compensation.

 

[JLM]

Correct.

The private industry doesn't mind outsourcing to save costs even if it results in a lower standard of living. As long as the corporation maintains a profit, it doesn't care about its workers and it's allowed to give all the proceeds to the big cheese even if all his underlings are doing the real work.

Some words from a wise man...............................

"The six phases of a project: 1. Enthusiasm 2. Disillusionment 3. Panic 4. Search for the Guilty 5. Punishment of the innocent 6. Praise and Honors for the Non-Participants" :smile:

 

[captain morgan]

Don't take everything I say as gospel. If it makes you happier, you can replace "doesn't care" with "doesn't have to care."

Your own mother doesn't 'have to care' about you either.. What makes a corporation any different?

The main point is that CEO's are allowed to funnel as much corporate capital as they want to their own bank account even if there is no annual profit. Meanwhile, there could be departments within that corporation that do provide a profit, but do not receive any compensation.

Learn something about the public companies that you elect to comment on before you deride them.

The CEO cannot change anything (significant or material like their wages or options for example) without the expressed and tacit support of the BOD. This has been mentioned umpteen times over multiple threads by numerous posters.... Grow up all ready.

 

[mentalfloss]

Learn something about the public companies that you elect to comment on before you deride them.

The CEO cannot change anything (significant or material like their wages or options for example) without the expressed and tacit support of the BOD. This has been mentioned umpteen times over multiple threads by numerous posters.... Grow up all ready.

While the primary responsibility of boards is to ensure that the corporation's management is performing its job correctly, actually achieving this in practice can be difficult. In a number of corporate scandals of the 1990s, one notable feature revealed in subsequent investigations is that boards were not aware of the activities of the managers that they hired, nor the true financial state of the corporation. A number of factors may be involved in this tendency:

• Most boards largely rely on management to report information to them, thus allowing management to place the desired 'spin' on information, or even conceal or lie about the true state of a company.
• Boards of directors are part-time bodies, whose members meet only occasionally and may not know each other particularly well. This unfamiliarity can make it difficult for board members to question management.
• CEOs tend to be rather forceful personalities. In some cases, CEOs are accused of exercising too much influence over the company's board.
• Directors may not have the time or the skills required to understand the details of corporate business, allowing management to obscure problems.
• The same directors who appointed the present CEO oversee his or her performance. This makes it difficult for some directors to dispassionately evaluate the CEO's performance.
• Directors often feel that a judgment of a manager, particularly one who has performed well in the past, should be respected. This can be quite legitimate, but poses problems if the manager's judgment is indeed flawed.

Board of directors responsibilities


There was a pretty good paper written in 1993 which pins down the effect that unequal distribution has on the economy..

Hence, the long-run levels of income and wealth are positively related to the initial number of individuals who inherit more than g. Thus, an economy which is initially poor, ends up poor in the long run as well. An economy which is initially rich and its wealth is distributed among many, ends up rich. But an economy with a large amount of wealth, which is held by the few, ends up poor in the long run. If we would like to describe these results in more popular terms, we could say that a country has better growth prospects if it has a relatively larger middle class.

http://www.econ.brown.edu/fac/glenn_loury/louryhomepage/teaching/Ec%20237/Galor%20and%20Zeira%20%28RES%201993%29.pdf

 

[JLM]

Don't take everything I say as gospel. If it makes you happier, you can replace "doesn't care" with "doesn't have to care."

The main point is that CEO's are allowed to funnel as much corporate capital as they want to their own bank account even if there is no annual profit. Meanwhile, there could be departments within that corporation that do provide a profit, but do not receive any compensation.

Until the sh*t hits the fan, as it apparently did with Ken Lay. (I think toward the end he was starting to wonder if it was all worth it) :lol:

 

[petros]

Originally
Posted by mentalfloss

Don't take everything I say as gospel. If it makes you happier, you can
replace "doesn't care" with "doesn't have to care."

The main point is
that CEO's are allowed to funnel as much corporate capital as they want to their
own bank account even if there is no annual profit. Meanwhile, there could
be departments within that corporation that do provide a profit, but do not
receive any compensation
​

.

Until the sh*t hits the fan, as it apparently did with Ken Lay. (I think toward the end he was starting to wonder if it was all worth it) :lol:

The CFO would know and would also be liable.