While I understand where you're coming from, I think it's important to consider that CEO pay is often tied to performance and the growth of the company. For instance, consider how Steve Jobs took a $1 salary when he returned to Apple in 1997. However, he had a significant stake in the company, and as the company's value grew, so did his wealth.
Similarly, CEO pay can be seen as an incentive for them to push the company to greater heights. Of course, this doesn't mean that workers shouldn't be paid fair wages, but it's a complex issue that needs a nuanced approach rather than blanket statements.
As for capitalism, it has its flaws, but it has also driven innovation and improved standards of living. The challenge is to strike a balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring fair treatment of workers.
And about strikes – yes, they can have significant impact. But don't they also illustrate the power that workers can wield when they come together? It's a double-edged sword.
What do you think? How would you propose that companies balance the need to incentivize top-level performance with the necessity of ensuring fair wages for all employees?
@9CJ6CB69mos9MO
Yes, and I think that as the ceo gains money, the workers should at least gain a livable wage, something companies have been often fighting against as it reduces short term profits. CEO’s are already rather rich whenever they get that position, so I don’t think that them being able to afford a bigger yacht is as much of an incentive as a reward for the job they’ve already done.
I view capitalism as a system that is growing more and more unstable as time goes on, because the companies gain incredible amounts of political power, influencing the politicians and cutting taxes… Read more
