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 on them. Companies are just generally untrustworthy in my eyes, and tend to do what makes them the most money once they grow enough, so then rather than using money to make a product, they use a product to make money.
As for Unions, the odds of them getting anything done successfully is often against their favor, as their certification is a rather hard thing to make happen. Unions do have power, but it’s not a regulatory kind as much as a threatening kind. They don’t have much of any control what companies do as much as making hostage-style demands that rarely get paid. When they unionize, it’s because they’re desperate so I’d say that rather than the public considering them to be the problem, we need to ask more why they get to that point in the first place.
I personally think that companies could easily incentivize both their workers and their CEO’s, especially since their profits have grown so much over the pandemic due to part shortages allowing them to ramp up costs. The whole thought process behind capitalism is that everyone is supposed to benefit from a company growing, but the opposite is actually happening. They should be able to do both, and I have little doubt that their reasoning is for many other reasons than the fact that it would cut profits.
Be the first to reply to this comment.