yllus
Elite Member & Lifer
Problem:
I've read a bunch of complaints lately along the lines of, "CEOs make millions while their hard-working employees starve." Since no solution was pitched (surprise surprise), I thought I'd give it a whirl.
Solution:
Let's say that tomorrow, all of the world's governments decide to put a cap on what a top executive earns based on what the lowest salary in the company is. A 10x multiplier, for instance.
Advantages:
- The lifestyle of corporate executives and front-line employees are more similiar. An exec may own a bigger house, but only one house as opposed to five. Class envy diminishes.
- Better working relations between management and staff. It's possibly easier to engage in frank discussions with your CEO in the bathroom regarding the company's main product when he really doesn't make that much more than you do.
- The ability of executives to load up and lead the stock market with junk transactions is diminished as they have less capital to work with.
- More emphasis on the greater marketplace to appeal to the middle-class instead of pockets of the population at the top and bottom.
Disadvantages:
- Upwards fiscal mobility isn't really increased. That mobility is defined by your ability, not your pay; ability comes before pay.
- Diminished drive to excel. If I'm not really making that much more money, I may not wish to work as hard. Maybe I'll just reach $150k and call it a day. Now my wonder invention, the toaster that also gives blowjobs, will never see the light of day. :Q
Take for granted that:
- One, this is a global 'law', so if America throws in a cap, European countries can't immediately offer more and steal top execs away.
- Two, adjustments for inflation are done as necessary.
Alternative solutions:
Other than the status quo, you tell me.
I've read a bunch of complaints lately along the lines of, "CEOs make millions while their hard-working employees starve." Since no solution was pitched (surprise surprise), I thought I'd give it a whirl.
Solution:
Let's say that tomorrow, all of the world's governments decide to put a cap on what a top executive earns based on what the lowest salary in the company is. A 10x multiplier, for instance.
Advantages:
- The lifestyle of corporate executives and front-line employees are more similiar. An exec may own a bigger house, but only one house as opposed to five. Class envy diminishes.
- Better working relations between management and staff. It's possibly easier to engage in frank discussions with your CEO in the bathroom regarding the company's main product when he really doesn't make that much more than you do.
- The ability of executives to load up and lead the stock market with junk transactions is diminished as they have less capital to work with.
- More emphasis on the greater marketplace to appeal to the middle-class instead of pockets of the population at the top and bottom.
Disadvantages:
- Upwards fiscal mobility isn't really increased. That mobility is defined by your ability, not your pay; ability comes before pay.
- Diminished drive to excel. If I'm not really making that much more money, I may not wish to work as hard. Maybe I'll just reach $150k and call it a day. Now my wonder invention, the toaster that also gives blowjobs, will never see the light of day. :Q
Take for granted that:
- One, this is a global 'law', so if America throws in a cap, European countries can't immediately offer more and steal top execs away.
- Two, adjustments for inflation are done as necessary.
Alternative solutions:
Other than the status quo, you tell me.
