Income Inequality

[Big Red 40]

Its not about envy or whining.  i honestly do care if they have "theirs", i'm just sick of them telling me my hard days work isn't worth crap while they make billions.  I had an agreement with my company to do x amount of work for x amount of pay/benefits, and i resent them constantly try to whittle my piece of the pie down so they can have more in their pockets. Lots and lots of places are economically oppressed and there is nowhere "better" to go either. Its not that easy.

[commando]

8 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Yeah, because if a greeter at Walmart makes $8 an hour, the CEO should be capped at $80 an hour. That seems logical...as does the government dictating wages. 

 

The people who whine about wage inequality would be a lot better served to spend that time bettering themselves so they can get better jobs. Envy is such a colossal waste of time.

 

 

if the greeter is only making $8 an hour someone is violating the minimum wage...wouldn't someone be in trouble?  

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, commando said:

if the greeter is only making $8 an hour someone is violating the minimum wage...wouldn't someone be in trouble?  

 

His point still is valid.  If the greeter makes $10 per hour, the CEO can only make $100 per hour?

No thanks....

[RedDenver]

1 minute ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

His point still is valid.  If the greeter makes $10 per hour, the CEO can only make $100 per hour?

No thanks....

I agree that a wage cap doesn't make sense. But I think that if CEO's have huge salaries and corporations are making profits, then the workers at the bottom need protections like minimum wage increases. We've seen this song and dance throughout the 300 years of capitalism - capitalists will try to squeeze every last penny they can out of the workers. (And to be fair, the workers would also do it in return if they had that power.)

[BigRedBuster]

10 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I agree that a wage cap doesn't make sense. But I think that if CEO's have huge salaries and corporations are making profits, then the workers at the bottom need protections like minimum wage increases. We've seen this song and dance throughout the 300 years of capitalism - capitalists will try to squeeze every last penny they can out of the workers. (And to be fair, the workers would also do it in return if they had that power.)

 

I have been caught before in a pickle where people say "CEOs" and they really mean CEOs of publicly traded companies over a certain size.  So, I'm assuming this is what we are talking about here too.

 

These ideas all sound well and good in discussions.  But, in reality, they don't work.  These laws get talked about with one group of people in mind and in actuality, that group is an extremely small part of the population that really is a meaningless group.  

 

If you take the CEO of Walmart and split his income up amongst all the employees at Walmart, it really would be an extremely small amount to each one.  Now, yes, those people would appreciate that small amount.  But, in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't accomplish what the main goal is other than make people at the bottom feel like their sticking to the the man.

 

FYI....the CEO of Walmart earned 22.8 million in 2016 and had 2.2 million employees.  Split his salary up completely and that's $10.36 per person.

[RedDenver]

5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I have been caught before in a pickle where people say "CEOs" and they really mean CEOs of publicly traded companies over a certain size.  So, I'm assuming this is what we are talking about here too.

 

These ideas all sound well and good in discussions.  But, in reality, they don't work.  These laws get talked about with one group of people in mind and in actuality, that group is an extremely small part of the population that really is a meaningless group.  

 

If you take the CEO of Walmart and split his income up amongst all the employees at Walmart, it really would be an extremely small amount to each one.  Now, yes, those people would appreciate that small amount.  But, in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't accomplish what the main goal is other than make people at the bottom feel like their sticking to the the man.

 

FYI....the CEO of Walmart earned 22.8 million in 2016 and had 2.2 million employees.  Split his salary up completely and that's $10.36 per person.

And then on the other hand:

Walmart is paying $20 billion to shareholders. With that money, it could boost hourly wages to over $15.

 

I agree it's not just about the CEO pay but rather the equity of the entire system and CEO pay is just part of it. I can't find data on all the Walmart execs, but I'd bet a lot of money that if you took their salaries and bonuses and stocks and what-not, even a fraction of that would be way more than $10 per worker. The tax cuts alone will save Walmart about $2 billion/year, which would be about $1000 per worker, which is a goodly amount if you're making minimum wage.

[BigRedBuster]

10 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

And then on the other hand:

Walmart is paying $20 billion to shareholders. With that money, it could boost hourly wages to over $15.

 

I agree it's not just about the CEO pay but rather the equity of the entire system and CEO pay is just part of it. I can't find data on all the Walmart execs, but I'd bet a lot of money that if you took their salaries and bonuses and stocks and what-not, even a fraction of that would be way more than $10 per worker. The tax cuts alone will save Walmart about $2 billion/year, which would be about $1000 per worker, which is a goodly amount if you're making minimum wage.

 

Well, then that's what the discussion needs to be about instead of what was being discussed.

 

Again, I can understand the principles behind wanting to do something like this.  Problem is that in the real world, it absolutely sucks and always has unintended consequences.

 

In general, I'm not for regulating pay like this even tough I think some people in upper management of some companies shouldn't make what they are.  My typical problem is when the top management is making huge amounts of money and the company is going broke.

[FrankWheeler]

It would be cool if there was a way for workers to come together and bargain with the CEO's of these corporations for pay increases.

[ZRod]

Why we're all these bonuses handed out after the tax cuts a one time bonus? Why not a permanent raise? After all these corporate tax cuts don't expire like the public ones do. 

[Moiraine]

8 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Well, then that's what the discussion needs to be about instead of what was being discussed.

 

Again, I can understand the principles behind wanting to do something like this.  Problem is that in the real world, it absolutely sucks and always has unintended consequences.

 

In general, I'm not for regulating pay like this even tough I think some people in upper management of some companies shouldn't make what they are.  My typical problem is when the top management is making huge amounts of money and the company is going broke.

 

 

Just curious what your opinion is.

What would you think of a $15 minimum wage with limitations. Some examples of those could be: start ups by new business owners are not included, businesses with < X employees not included, and it depends on the cost of living. E.g. the minimum wage in L.A. could be $20, in Nebraska $12.

[Ric Flair]

11 hours ago, commando said:

if the greeter is only making $8 an hour someone is violating the minimum wage...wouldn't someone be in trouble?  

 

Way to completely miss the point. 

[commando]

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

 

Way to completely miss the point. 

i've learned how to do that from you.  you are the master of missing and ignoring the point.  i am just the padawan of missing the point.

[Ric Flair]

8 hours ago, RedDenver said:

And then on the other hand:

Walmart is paying $20 billion to shareholders. With that money, it could boost hourly wages to over $15.

 

I agree it's not just about the CEO pay but rather the equity of the entire system and CEO pay is just part of it. I can't find data on all the Walmart execs, but I'd bet a lot of money that if you took their salaries and bonuses and stocks and what-not, even a fraction of that would be way more than $10 per worker. The tax cuts alone will save Walmart about $2 billion/year, which would be about $1000 per worker, which is a goodly amount if you're making minimum wage.

 

The profits belong to the shareholders, not the employees. If they want to pay the CEO millions and greeters $10 an hour, they’re free to do so.

 

if the greeter is unhappy with making $10 an hour, he doesn’t have to work there.

[RedDenver]

4 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

 

The profits belong to the shareholders, not the employees. If they want to pay the CEO millions and greeters $10 an hour, they’re free to do so.

 

if the greeter is unhappy with making $10 an hour, he doesn’t have to work there.

Yes, that's the entire point of what's wrong with this system. A few people who do little to no actual work somehow get much, much more of the profits than the people who actually work there. And the only option is to quit and hope the other corporations who are all part of that same system will treat you better.

[Landlord]

7 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

if the greeter is unhappy with making $10 an hour, he doesn’t have to work there.

 

My uncle recently went through an insanely traumatic experience with an incredibly rare disease (sadly I can't remember what the hell it was called) that left him physically and mentally handicapped. He's still got a family to provide for, and being a greeter at Wal-Mart is literally the only work he's been able to find through months of very hard work looking and after near bankruptcy from medical expenses.