CEO Pay to Average WORKER pay: By Country :/

[MM2K]

If a CEO makes 475 times what a worker makes, it is probably because there are 475 more peopel capable of being an average worker than there are of being a CEO. Its suppply and demand, nothing more nothing less. The fact that CEOs make 475 more times than an average worker attracts a lot of great talent to the United States. No one has the knowledge of who should be making what. Only GOD knows. The second best way to know is the systemic interactions between vast amounts of poeple. That knowledge is divided into tiny bits and fragments and can only be tapped through systemic interactions. The knowledge cannot be grouped and put into one person.

Do you care more about how much money YOU make or how much the other person makes?

[24KT]

I realized that day one and you are correct.  Self employment Owning a business is the only possible way for most people to obtain any measure of wealth or financial freedom.  There is no guaranty of course, but there is more a possibility and opporutnity for advancement being self employed owning your own business than there is working like cog in wheel for some company.

Fixed. ...and I completely agree,
...except there's a big difference between owning your own business and being self employed.

Both provide a certain degree of freedom & autonomy, ...but when you own a business, it can survive without you.
When you're self employed, ...if you're out of the picture, ...everything comes to a grinding halt. 

[pedro01]

If a CEO makes 475 times what a worker makes, it is probably because there are 475 more peopel capable of being an average worker than there are of being a CEO. Its suppply and demand, nothing more nothing less. The fact that CEOs make 475 more times than an average worker attracts a lot of great talent to the United States. No one has the knowledge of who should be making what. Only GOD knows. The second best way to know is the systemic interactions between vast amounts of poeple. That knowledge is divided into tiny bits and fragments and can only be tapped through systemic interactions. The knowledge cannot be grouped and put into one person.

Do you care more about how much money YOU make or how much the other person makes?

hmmm...

So you are implying that...

- all people that are capable of being CEOs are CEOs
- by definition then - all those employed as CEOs are capable of being CEOs
- that there is a linear relationship between salaries and availability of employees

Neither of the above 3 hold out in the real world. CEO's can be completely fucking useless and have better people holding the company together for them.

You can't start applying the laws of supply & demand to determine salary here because it is the CEOs themselves that set their own salaries, although most try to do it in via a committee overseen by a bunch of people that could be fired by... The CEO. It is a stretch to imagine that the CEO sets their own salary according to market dynamics as opposed to whatever the fuck they can screw the company for without being lynched by the shareholders.

When times are good, even the most ludicrous packages are largely ignored. In bad times, the media is all over them. Most publicly listed companies have their shares spread across many shareholders who also own shares in many companies. This creates apathy on the behalf of the shareholders as long as the price of shares is increasing.

So what to some CEOs do facing this set of circumstances? They fuck the company up with policies that increase the share price in the short term at the detriment of the long term. At the same time, they compensate themselves way out of relationship to the value they bring, knowing that the shareholders won’t complain whilst the share prices are increasing. Furthermore, when the prices eventually do go down – what do the shareholders do? Lead a rebellion to have the guy taken out? Nope – they just dump the shares.

You can’t blame the CEOs for this – it’s human nature.

[Deicide]

[IFBBwannaB]

TA what do you care about money...you said that you can make as much Gold as you like...so stop complaining that you're broke!

[Deicide]

TA what do you care about money...you said that you can make as much Gold as you like...so stop complaining that you're broke!

Hehe.

What passport do you own?

[Soul Crusher]

TA what do you care about money...you said that you can make as much Gold as you like...so stop complaining that you're broke!

When you dont work you dont have $$$$.  TA doesnt work so he doesnt generate income. 

[BM OUT]

I work at a place where the CEO makes about 4 million a year and another 2 or 3 in bonus money[plus an amazing benefits package over 200,000 a year in travel for his family and stuff like that].I DONT CARE!!!!!!!

I'm very happy with my job,what I make,my benefits,my work environment.In fact,I normally "give" the company and extra 3 hours a week coming in early off the books or staying late off the books.Why in the hell would I care what the CEO makes,when I'm happy with my lot in life?This is whiny ,baby bullshit and class envy at its finest.IF YOU DONT LIKE THE JOB,QUIT AND GET A NEW ONE OR START YOUR OWN COMPANY!!!

[OzmO]

I work at a place where the CEO makes about 4 million a year and another 2 or 3 in bonus money[plus an amazing benefits package over 200,000 a year in travel for his family and stuff like that].I DONT CARE!!!!!!!

I'm very happy with my job,what I make,my benefits,my work environment.In fact,I normally "give" the company and extra 3 hours a week coming in early off the books or staying late off the books.Why in the hell would I care what the CEO makes,when I'm happy with my lot in life?This is whiny ,baby bullshit and class envy at its finest.IF YOU DONT LIKE THE JOB,QUIT AND GET A NEW ONE OR START YOUR OWN COMPANY!!!

What if your CEO start making decisions that are bad for the company but good for him?  For example, revenues start declining for a period of years, so instead of investing money that could keep his company competitive he cut programs, lays people off but still keeps paying himself the same bonuses.

[BM OUT]

What if your CEO start making decisions that are bad for the company but good for him?  For example, revenues start declining for a period of years, so instead of investing money that could keep his company competitive he cut programs, lays people off but still keeps paying himself the same bonuses.

This CEO has saved the company!!The best thing we have done is to keep unions OUT!!!Laying people off sometimes saves the company.This CEO actually forgoes his bonus pay and that of all execs for the last two years to stave off the bad effects of the economy.So,I cant speak for anyone else,but again,if you dont like the direction of the company,QUIT,find a new line of work.When you work for someone else,those are the chances you take.

[Soul Crusher]

This CEO has saved the company!!The best thing we have done is to keep unions OUT!!!Laying people off sometimes saves the company.This CEO actually forgoes his bonus pay and that of all execs for the last two years to stave off the bad effects of the economy.So,I cant speak for anyone else,but again,if you dont like the direction of the company,QUIT,find a new line of work.When you work for someone else,those are the chances you take.

Its amazing to hear TA whine about things he has no clue about.  College is the perfect environment for socialists because they never have to live with or be accountable to actual real life results of wrong ideas and beliefs.

I told TA many times, the day he gets a mortgage, a real job, real responsibilities, his whole attitude on life will change.   

[OzmO]

This CEO has saved the company!!The best thing we have done is to keep unions OUT!!!Laying people off sometimes saves the company.This CEO actually forgoes his bonus pay and that of all execs for the last two years to stave off the bad effects of the economy.So,I cant speak for anyone else,but again,if you dont like the direction of the company,QUIT,find a new line of work.When you work for someone else,those are the chances you take.

No, I'm talking about the CEO not forgoing his and the execs bonuses, but instead raping the company by lay offs, and pulling R & D funding.   

This is why some of our companies are in the tank. 

[OzmO]

Its amazing to hear TA whine about things he has no clue about.  College is the perfect environment for socialists because they never have to live with or be accountable to actual real life results of wrong ideas and beliefs.

I told TA many times, the day he gets a mortgage, a real job, real responsibilities, his whole attitude on life will change.   

True dat.

[IFBBwannaB]

Hehe.

What passport do you own?

Which country's passport do you want me to own?

[MM2K]

So you are implying that...

- all people that are capable of being CEOs are CEOs

Pretty much, yes. Ofcourse, there are some people who are capable of being CEOs that are not CEOs, but not as great as the ones that already are. Some of these people will be CEOs in the future. Ofcourse, in a world of imperfect humans, there are people who are capable of being CEOs who will never be CEOs.

- by definition then - all those employed as CEOs are capable of being CEOs

Not quite all, but for the most part, yes.

- that there is a linear relationship between salaries and availability of employees

Not a PERFECT linear relationship, but for the most part, yes. There is definately a linear TREND. Im not so sure why that would be hard to beleive. A company is not going to bid $1 million dollars for a CEO if it doesnt think the CEO will contribute $1 million dollars to revenues.

Neither of the above 3 hold out in the real world. CEO's can be completely fucking useless and have better people holding the company together for them.

You can't start applying the laws of supply & demand to determine salary here because it is the CEOs themselves that set their own salaries, although most try to do it in via a committee overseen by a bunch of people that could be fired by... The CEO. It is a stretch to imagine that the CEO sets their own salary according to market dynamics as opposed to whatever the fuck they can screw the company for without being lynched by the shareholders.

When times are good, even the most ludicrous packages are largely ignored. In bad times, the media is all over them. Most publicly listed companies have their shares spread across many shareholders who also own shares in many companies. This creates apathy on the behalf of the shareholders as long as the price of shares is increasing.

So what to some CEOs do facing this set of circumstances? They fuck the company up with policies that increase the share price in the short term at the detriment of the long term. At the same time, they compensate themselves way out of relationship to the value they bring, knowing that the shareholders won’t complain whilst the share prices are increasing. Furthermore, when the prices eventually do go down – what do the shareholders do? Lead a rebellion to have the guy taken out? Nope – they just dump the shares.

But it is in companies that are owned soley by private investment firms where CEOs make the MOST money. NOT publicly owned companies where a committe board represents the shareholders.  As far as short term gains in share prices, investors within the company and financial ratings agencies are more likly to be concious of the distant future than are government beurocrats.

[liberalismo]

Pay should equal the quality of work done and how much money the person makes for the company.

Do CEOs really make companies millions a year? No. MOST companies could run smoothly if they hired some experienced  manager and taught him the info quickly but paid him 100,000 a year. No real differences.


CEOs make so much $ mostly because companies think they "owe" them this for one reason or another. They are mostly useless.

[pedro01]

Pretty much, yes. Ofcourse, there are some people who are capable of being CEOs that are not CEOs, but not as great as the ones that already are. Some of these people will be CEOs in the future. Ofcourse, in a world of imperfect humans, there are people who are capable of being CEOs who will never be CEOs.

Not quite all, but for the most part, yes.

Not a PERFECT linear relationship, but for the most part, yes. There is definately a linear TREND. Im not so sure why that would be hard to beleive. A company is not going to bid $1 million dollars for a CEO if it doesnt think the CEO will contribute $1 million dollars to revenues.

But it is in companies that are owned soley by private investment firms where CEOs make the MOST money. NOT publicly owned companies where a committe board represents the shareholders.  As far as short term gains in share prices, investors within the company and financial ratings agencies are more likly to be concious of the distant future than are government beurocrats.

OK - let's say that there are 20,000 CEO positions in the US. By your logic, around 20,000 people exist in the US that are capable of fulfilling that role and few more. This makes no sense.

The CEO of a company I work with retired and a senior VP stepped in as CEO and is now running the company. Was this VP unqualified the day before the CEO retired & did he suddenly become qualified when the old CEO retired ?

Bottom line - plenty of people can do the job & the laws of supply & demand are not what drives CEO salaries. There is plenty of supply. 

[big L dawg]

ahh the American dream....you have to be asleep to believe it.

[Eyeball Chambers]

OK - let's say that there are 20,000 CEO positions in the US. By your logic, around 20,000 people exist in the US that are capable of fulfilling that role and few more. This makes no sense.

The CEO of a company I work with retired and a senior VP stepped in as CEO and is now running the company. Was this VP unqualified the day before the CEO retired & did he suddenly become qualified when the old CEO retired ?

Bottom line - plenty of people can do the job & the laws of supply & demand are not what drives CEO salaries. There is plenty of supply. 

I'm going to take a wild guess here and say "pedro01" = "loco".

[Matt C]

Ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay:

Japan
11:1
Germany
12:1
France
15:1
Italy
20:1
Canada
20:1
South Africa
21:1
Britain
22:1
Hong Kong
41:1
Mexico
47:1
Venezuela
50:1
United States
475:1


http://www.cab.latech.edu/~mkroll/510_papers/fall_05/Group6.pdf

If a good CEO saves a company 200 million in a year, they are definitely worth 20 million in salary.  That 200 million ends up getting passed on to consumers in terms of savings or put towards upgrades of expansion of the company.  This is not a difficult concept to grasp to be honest.

[IFBBwannaB]

If a good CEO saves a company 200 million in a year, they are definitely worth 20 million in salary.  That 200 million ends up getting passed on to consumers in terms of savings or put towards upgrades of expansion of the company.  This is not a difficult concept to grasp to be honest.

You moron failed to grasp the concept that he is trying to pass, do you think that only US companies have CEO's that save millions of Dollars ?    (Disclaimer, this have nothing to do with my opinion on the subject, it's just to show you that you're a moron with a 131 IQ)

[pedro01]

I'm going to take a wild guess here and say "pedro01" = "loco".

Way to debate the point about supply & demand setting salaries (or otherwise).

[Slapper]

This is a weakness of some of our companies.  CEO's make decision on their pay and not necessarily what's good for the company long & short term.  It's this same greed that has shown itself in the birth of Unions too.

What gave birth to a unionized working class was the fact that in the XIX century people were working 15 hours per day, 6-7 days a week under unsanitary conditions for a meager salary.

Greed had nothing to do with it.

It was the working conditions.

[Slapper]

I just have one thing to say about the subject: In a free market environment EVERYTHING is tied to production, including salaries. That is how the game was initially set up. Those who produce the most ought to get paid the most. It's simple. Once you break this golden rule you may as well be playing Monopoly. And at this point in time we have such immense market distorsions (including rampant corruption) that I seriously wander about someone's sanity when they actually agree with someone who decides to give himself 200 million for getting the company share price up two bucks.

Many operation management gurus have warned American companies that they needed a less hierarchical business model (too many chiefs and too few Indians) and that they needed more democratic compensation packages. They have repeatedly refused to do so.

And when it comes to doing away with unions, all corporations have an easy fix: Match their benefits, sit back and observe the exodus. The biggest problem is that corporations are not made that way. Their # 1 motto is: Profit is out # 1 goal. And, as they say, "Live by the profit, die by the profit".

Cheers.

[Soul Crusher]

I just have one thing to say about the subject: In a free market environment EVERYTHING is tied to production, including salaries. That is how the game was initially set up. Those who produce the most ought to get paid the most. It's simple. Once you break this golden rule you may as well be playing Monopoly. And at this point in time we have such immense market distorsions (including rampant corruption) that I seriously wander about someone's sanity when they actually agree with someone who decides to give himself 200 million for getting the company share price up two bucks.

Many operation management gurus have warned American companies that they needed a less hierarchical business model (too many chiefs and too few Indians) and that they needed more democratic compensation packages. They have repeatedly refused to do so.

And when it comes to doing away with unions, all corporations have an easy fix: Match their benefits, sit back and observe the exodus. The biggest problem is that corporations are not made that way. Their # 1 motto is: Profit is out # 1 goal. And, as they say, "Live by the profit, die by the profit".

Cheers.

My answer is always the same, if someone is not happy where they are working, they are free to leave and get a higher paying job, start their own business, or try to become CEEO themselves.