Started By
Message

re: CEOs make too much money

Posted on 8/6/25 at 8:48 am to
Posted by Snipe
Member since Nov 2015
15911 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 8:48 am to
If you spend you life looking at what other people have you'll never be happy with what you've accomplished in life.

How's the saying go, If a fish judged himself on how well it climbs a tree it would live life thinking it was useless and a failure.





Posted by APHA
Corpus Christi
Member since Mar 2013
493 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:16 am to
The 1st thing to do is say good for him/her because they made it. 2nd to do is quit worrying about other people and work on yourself. If you want more money like a CEO, figure out how to do it and make it happen. Worrying about others does nothing for your outcome.
Posted by 4cubbies
Member since Sep 2008
59277 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:17 am to
quote:

The 1st thing to do is say good for him/her because they made it. 2nd to do is quit worrying about other people and work on yourself. If you want more money like a CEO, figure out how to do it and make it happen. Worrying about others does nothing for your outcome.



Posted by wackatimesthree
Member since Oct 2019
10679 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:24 am to
quote:

but I have all of the risk


People who have never taken financial risk to start a business will never understand that.

IMO, willfully so.

I don't think they want to know—it's either that or they simply can't comprehend what it is like—to start something from scratch when you're leveraged up to your eyeballs knowing that if it fails, you lose everything.

The willingness to do that is worth a whole lot, because not many people relatively speaking are willing to do it, and it provides jobs for over half the country (over half the country is employed by small businesses).

But I have attempted to explain that to countless people only to watch it go in one ear and right out the other. You can almost see it happening in real time.
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
57978 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:32 am to
quote:

The CEO to employee ranking use to be 30:1 in the 1980s which I can understand but it is now approaching 300:1 in some companies. Seems like things are out of whack.


Companies can afford it, or they can't. While I think it's out of whack, I also understand the math that those complaining about it don't seem to get. Let's get into it...

The average annual salary of a Fortune 500 CEO is ~$18.9M per year.

The average number of employees a Fortune 500 company has is 62,000.

Let's say we take all but $1M from the CEO's salary, spreading that $17.9M out among 62,000 employees comes out to ~$288.71 per year for each of them.

Generally, 1%-2% of that staff is management. We'll err on the side of caution and go with 2%, meaning we subtract ~1,240 from that 62,000, leaving us with 60,760 and that brings us to a whopping $294.60 extra per year per employee.

But maybe all managers are making too much, so let's put them into the equation as well. Averages are that of that 60,760 left, another 1%-2% are non-executive management, leaving us with around another 1,215 employees removed from the equation, bringing us to 59,545 employees now getting an extra $300.61 per year.

Assuming someone gets paid every two weeks, there are 26 pay period each year, breaking that down to an extra $11.56 per paycheck. That's barely a Happy Meal.

Cutting back on the salaries of other executives could boost that a little, but the math simply isn't there to make the downstream impact many think it would.
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
46242 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:38 am to
It’s really none of your fricking business what salary a company negotiates with its CEO. Do you have a problem with trade collectives threatening to shut an entire industry down in order to squeeze 30% more than the market rate for their services? I bet you don’t.
Posted by JohnnyKilroy
Cajun Navy Vice Admiral
Member since Oct 2012
40326 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:43 am to
quote:

So by that logic the top stars like Lebron and Curry should be paid even more than they are because that’s who the fans pay to see and watch.


It's not really debatable that someone like LeBron is WAY underpaid and has been for nearly all of his career. The economic impact LeBron has on the teams he plays for is MUCH MUCH greater than pretty much all of the other players who make similar money.

Posted by USAFTiger42
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2016
3706 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:44 am to
No the problem isn't the initial money. The problem is when the companies do really well the employees rarely see financial gains only the stakeholders do. It's like removing the rewards and giving to people who aren't doing the work.
Posted by TDTOM
Member since Jan 2021
24813 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:50 am to
quote:

The problem is when the companies do really well the employees rarely see financial gains only the stakeholders do.


You mean those financially at risk?
Posted by PeleofAnalytics
Member since Jun 2021
4934 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 9:53 am to
quote:

As with any job, it is worth whatever an employer is willing to pay.

Problem is, in a lot of cases, it is a club consisting of incestuous boards of directors that do the hiring and approve the pay packages. A lot of, If we hire you and get you this deal, then you also get on this board and hire this other person and it goes on and on. If you look at the biggest companies, their boards consist of people who do a lot of "you scratch my back, i scratch yours". The institutional shareholders that control a bulk of the shares on behalf of the public are also behind the scenes and have many former members on boards as well. I am not sure it is as clean of an supply/demand situation as they want to make us think it is.
Posted by lsu777
Lake Charles
Member since Jan 2004
36790 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:28 am to
quote:


What has changed in “supply and demand” to justify why CEO’s make 300:1 the average employee, when it was 30:1 in the 80’s? At what point is it unacceptable regardless of the “free market” says? 3000:1? 30000:1?

The market ain’t free anymore. Government involvement, activist hedge funds, and buddy buddy BoDs have made a nice little honey pot for themselves. Everyone’s getting rich except the middle class that executes the plan that the consulting firm hired by the CEO comes up with.

But if you don’t agree, you’re a neck beard, communist who’s jealous and doesn’t understand the market.


more companies fighting for limited talent that can handle that level. are you dumb enough to think that companies are just giving away their money for clout?
Posted by Picayuner
Member since Dec 2016
3805 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:34 am to
It’s a matter of morality. Today’s CEOs are scumbags wanting to be billionaires as opposed to being mere multi millionaires! It’s a disgusting personal trait. Board members are scumbags too. The USA has allowed the destruction of teaching morals in schools. It’ll get worse. Keep pandering to the lowest denomination as you’ll see what you’ll get. Society as a whole is of decreasing intellect and values. The future is dim.
Posted by Reagan80
Earth
Member since Feb 2023
1893 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:38 am to
I don’t spend time worrying about what others earn. I’m only concerned with my own financial situation. Envy and hate don’t improve my life at all.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62611 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:51 am to
quote:

What has changed in “supply and demand” to justify why CEO’s make 300:1 the average employee, when it was 30:1 in the 80’s?
Simple. With advances in mechanization and automation manual labor has gotten less valuable over time. The ability to locate, secure and close on CAPEX investment has become far, far more value over time.

quote:

The market ain’t free anymore. Government involvement, activist hedge funds, and buddy buddy BoDs have made a nice little honey pot for themselves.
What do you think happens when we hand MORE power to those same people to
police themselves?

quote:

Everyone’s getting rich except the middle class that executes the plan that the consulting firm hired by the CEO comes up with.
Horsehocky. Take CEO salaries and divvy them up between the workers
and it would amount to… very little. Take GM, their CEO makes about $25 million, and they have 157,000 employees. Distributed, his salary equals $156/employee per year. Or about $0.07/hr.
This post was edited on 8/6/25 at 10:52 am
Posted by NC_Tigah
Make Orwell Fiction Again
Member since Sep 2003
135721 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 10:54 am to
quote:

manual labor has gotten less valuable over time
Perhaps, but not necessarily.



Posted by Sidicous
NELA
Member since Aug 2015
19296 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:03 am to
quote:

The USA has allowed the destruction of teaching morals in schools. It’ll get worse. Keep pandering to the lowest denomination as you’ll see what you’ll get. Society as a whole is of decreasing intellect and values. The future is dim.


You’re close.

The USA has actually forbidden teaching morality and endorses debauchery instead. And the future is unknown and depends on the time frame. There will definitely be some pain in the not too distant future but I think yet again the pendulum will keep swinging.

As far as pandering to the lowest common denominator I think you nailed it. Only leads to the bottom.
Posted by AUauditor
Georgia
Member since Sep 2004
1662 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:13 am to
Then...if you don't like it, vote with your purse and don't buy what they sale.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62611 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 11:13 am to
quote:

Perhaps, but not necessarily.
Thst doesn’t really tell the story. Wages only reflect part of the “value”—the downstream value. Those worker are worth higher wages because they are more productive via tech, automation, etc. that CAPEX provides.

Think about a construction company. In the early 80s we built a house. The carpenters used hammers. and the framing crew was like 10 guys. When was the last time you saw a framer not using a nail gun? Today 4 dudes can frame a house in a couple of days. Much more valuable.
This post was edited on 8/6/25 at 11:14 am
Posted by jclem11
Chief Nihilist
Member since Nov 2011
9583 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 3:23 pm to
quote:

is not w0rking for you it worked great for me and that's all i care about.


Brain rotted boomer alert.

frick everyone else I got mine.

Rest in piss.
Posted by Scruffy
Kansas City
Member since Jul 2011
76603 posts
Posted on 8/6/25 at 4:12 pm to
quote:

It's not really debatable that someone like LeBron is WAY underpaid and has been for nearly all of his career. The economic impact LeBron has on the teams he plays for is MUCH MUCH greater than pretty much all of the other players who make similar money.
Sure, but LeBron couldn’t play if not for the people who run the stadiums, clean the courts, maintain the equipment, etc.

Why are they paid less?

Then you could get into the film crews.

If the cameraman, who is making magnitudes less than LeBron, wasn’t there to film the game, you wouldn’t have broadcasting and subsequent ad revenue.

It isn’t fair that these athletes are paid more than them.




Yes, that is sarcasm, but it goes back to the stupid basis of the thread.

People are paid based on what others deem that they are worth and their replaceability.
first pageprev pagePage 8 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram