Top Executives Average 23% Raise Over Last Year, Average Salary of 10.2 Million

[Conley]

The final figures show that the median pay for top executives at 200 big companies last year was $10.8 million. That works out to a 23 percent gain from 2009. The earlier study had put the median pay at a none-too-shabby $9.6 million, up 12 percent.

Total C.E.O. pay hasn’t quite returned to its heady, prerecession levels — but it certainly seems headed there. Despite the soft economy, weak home prices and persistently high unemployment, some top executives are already making more than they were before the economy soured.

And it’s not as if most workers are getting fat raises. The average American worker was taking home $752 a week in late 2010, up a mere 0.5 percent from a year earlier. After inflation, workers were actually making less.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/business/03pay.html?hp

This is the road to revolution...

[Conley]

The U.S. ranks way behind the European Union and the United Kingdom in terms of inequality of pay, figures show.

In fact, the situation is so extreme the land of the free falls behind countries such as Cameroon, the Ivory Coast and revolutionary Egypt, Tunisia and Yemen - and only just in front of Uganda and Jamaica.

According to the CIA's World Fact Book, which ranks countries in terms of how 'equally' wealth is distributed, the U.S. is the 42nd most unequal country in the world.

In contrast, Tunisia is the 62nd most unequal country, Yemen is 76th and Egypt, which has been ravaged by civil war, comes in at 90th place.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2005550/Americas-pay-gap-Inequality-rich-poor-worse-revolutionary-Egypt.html#ixzz1R4T2IJmD

[MMC]

Any of them abolish poverty? Famine? Disease? Oooops there goes that Utopian Society.

[Mister D]

My salary went down. :(

[Captain Obvious]

Want a 23% increase? Go be a CEO.

Nothing stopping you.

[Conley]

Want a 23% increase? Go be a CEO.

Nothing stopping you.


actually...that is not a possibility for most of us.

[MMC]

That is true CL.....one could go thru all the motions and be qualified to be a CEO. In the End with that deal. I think thats why there are Corporations with more than One Vice President and One President.

[Conley]

I think the biggest reason for the trouble our working class finds them in is the outsourcing of jobs. There just aren't jobs like there used to be in this country. I was just reading in the paper about how BMW took a low interest 3 Billion Dollar loan from the federal government when the feds were trying to jump start the economy. Now they are moving their jobs overseas.

A lot of money was loaned without any strings. I guess my question to Captain and others is if you think it is ok for companies to do this sort of thing. Not if it's legal, I know it is -- but I would also say whoever can afford the best lawyers usually wins, legality is not always clear cut -- but from a moral and ethical standpoint. Perhaps you all have no problem with this sort of behavior. I would say that if I loaned a friend money and he used it to f me over, I'd be upset.

So what to do with the unemployed? There are people who worked at that BMW factory for 30 years, they aren't lazy, or stupid. They have skills, but no where to work. Should they just be left to wither and die, or should there be some sort of safety net to catch them? Don't hold back...

[MMC]

What sort of safety net and by whom?

[Conley]

What sort of safety net and by whom?


Well, that's the question I'm asking. Are you in favor of one?

I am not sure how I feel about unemployment...for a short term bridge, I guess it's fine. However, if there aren't going to be any jobs to move on to, then it seems like just throwing money away. If that money were used for or supplemented by new skill training or public projects that would lead to job creation, that seems like a better long term investment. Sort of like the give a man a fish versus teach a man to fish...

[MMC]

I guess for me it is much simpler.....I own a buisness and have some people who have worked for me over 5 yrs with part time jobs. Some we moved to full-time. Yet either way my partner. and I take care of our employees. Even if we were to go out of buisness. We would take care of those who have become like family to one another. No matter what.

We are talking about people who have given their livelihoods to another, and vice-versa. Shared their families time together. Good and bad. So we cannot allow others to give all without us doing so too. Righteousness comes from the beginning.

[Conley]

I guess for me it is much simpler.....I own a buisness and have some people who have worked for me over 5 yrs with part time jobs. Some we moved to full-time. Yet either way my partner. and I take care of our employees. Even if we were to go out of buisness. We would take care of those who have become like family to one another. No matter what.

We are talking about people who have given their livelihoods to another, and vice-versa. Shared their families time together. Good and bad. So we cannot allow others to give all without us doing so too. Righteousness comes from the beginning.


This is noble of you. Is it reasonable to expect that other businesses would do the same? What if they do not? I fear that this is the exception, not the rule. I also believe the larger the company, the lesser the influence on 'family of employees' and more likely they are to only look at the bottom line. Some on this board believe that is right, fair, and just. So I am wondering if those people who think business should be only about profit have room in their world view for some sort of assistance for those that end up laid off. Or do they feel strongly that it is the workers' own fault that they are no longer employed, and that they should suffer with nothing as a result.

[MMC]

The only other aspect would be as to what is in man's nature. For we do know man is the only creature out to screw over their own kind.

GI Jane (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NT8l-eHZvM#)

D.H. Lawerence's Poem on Self-Pity says it all..... :-\

[spunkloaf]

I guess for me it is much simpler.....I own a buisness and have some people who have worked for me over 5 yrs with part time jobs. Some we moved to full-time. Yet either way my partner. and I take care of our employees. Even if we were to go out of buisness. We would take care of those who have become like family to one another. No matter what.

We are talking about people who have given their livelihoods to another, and vice-versa. Shared their families time together. Good and bad. So we cannot allow others to give all without us doing so too. Righteousness comes from the beginning.


I also agree that's noble of you. But when hard times approach and the money stops flowing, who do you get rid of?

[MMC]

The part time employees who are not looking to keep the job. If we have to shut down and go out of buisness.

[Captain Obvious]

Want a 23% increase? Go be a CEO.

Nothing stopping you.


actually...that is not a possibility for most of us.


Bullshit.

[Conley]

Want a 23% increase? Go be a CEO.

Nothing stopping you.


actually...that is not a possibility for most of us.


Bullshit.


is that all you have to say?

not trying to piss you off, it'd just be nice to actually exchange ideas and continue the thread...

[Mister D]

I think I understand where Captain O is going with this. I'm just going to say that I've learned to be content. I get such a sense of peace and contentment from my religion that I'm sorry I didn't rediscover it until only a few years ago. That's not to say I'd be happy to be poor. I wouldn't be but the I've come to realize that making a lot of money just isn't what I want out of life. For most of us, that takes real commitment that I'm just not willing to make. There are more important things in my life. I don't know...just my two bits.

[Captain Obvious]

Want a 23% increase? Go be a CEO.

Nothing stopping you.


actually...that is not a possibility for most of us.


Bullshit.


is that all you have to say?

not trying to piss you off, it'd just be nice to actually exchange ideas and continue the thread...


I thought it was quite to the point.

I don't see a lot of value shooting down people who have made a success out of their careers. I applaud it, it's what makes this country great. You can be whatever you want to be.

If you want to be a CEO - go be a CEO. It requires hard work and a lengthy education. If you don't want to be one, fine. Be what you want to be, but being jealous or spiteful of those who are is a little pathetic.

Hard core socialism suggests that we're all equal and that we should be happy being just a cog in the wheel. We all know that our values aren't based in that kind of ideology, so I just don't understand why we tear down what makes us great.

[Conley]

I don't think it's really jealous or spiteful to be concerned about people losing their jobs. Maybe you have already read the whole thread, I was curious what you thought about a safety net.

Do you think that CEOs in the last decade are that much greater than their predecessors, who earned a far smaller percentage relative to their company's net worth? That they deserve to be compensated orders of magnitude greater, even if their companies lose money and the common stock loses value? Are you against all worker protection, because you consider that socialism? Just a few of my questions. ;D

[spunkloaf]

Freedom and security are concepts that come from two completely different worlds, and they are hard to blend into one package without interfering with each other. The security of a socialized workforce would be nice. The freedom of a capitalized workforce is also nice, but some people are having a hard time motivating themselves.

[Conley]

If people are losing their homes I don't think motivation is a major problem. Maybe for people in their 20s? For the family breadwinners, it's either get a job or become homeless. I think they are plenty motivated, but can't find work.