Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/index.php)
-   Political Threads (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/forumdisplay.php?f=66)
-   -   creating huge amounts of wealth is good (http://www.striped-bass.com/Stripertalk/showthread.php?t=97945)

Pete F. 02-18-2022 07:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1222741)
if you really want what the ceos have, do what they did and you’ll
have it. whiny and jealous.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Simple isn’t it

Implications of the growth of CEO-to-top-0.1% compensation ratio.
The fact that CEO compensation has grown far faster than the pay of the top 0.1% of wage earners indicates that CEO compensation growth does not simply reflect a competitive race for skills (the “market for talent”) that also increased the value of highly paid professionals: Rather, the growing pay differential between CEOs and top 0.1% earners suggests the growth of substantial economic rents (income not related to a corresponding growth of productivity) in CEO compensation. CEO compensation appears to reflect not greater productivity of executives but the power of CEOs to extract concessions. Consequently, if CEOs earned less or were taxed more, there would be no adverse impact on the economy’s output or on employment.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Jim in CT 02-18-2022 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1222745)
Simple isn’t it

Implications of the growth of CEO-to-top-0.1% compensation ratio.
The fact that CEO compensation has grown far faster than the pay of the top 0.1% of wage earners indicates that CEO compensation growth does not simply reflect a competitive race for skills (the “market for talent”) that also increased the value of highly paid professionals: Rather, the growing pay differential between CEOs and top 0.1% earners suggests the growth of substantial economic rents (income not related to a corresponding growth of productivity) in CEO compensation. CEO compensation appears to reflect not greater productivity of executives but the power of CEOs to extract concessions. Consequently, if CEOs earned less or were taxed more, there would be no adverse impact on the economy’s output or on employment.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Waah waah waah.

Why do you care? What harm are they doing you? They're easing your tax burden, that's all they're doing. That, and keeping HUGE numbers of us employed.

You like to poke fun at me because I took a demotion. You know why I did it? Because while I'll never have as much as many, I have something that those CEOs will never have.

I have enough. It's an amazing feeling. It's nice to not give a rats azz about what anyone lese has. It's a lot healthier than being jealous of what a tiny, miniscule number of people have.

wdmso 02-18-2022 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1222734)
"Simple solutions for simple minds "

It is simple. It's simple to show that his compensation isn't a big deal.

"I know it crumbs"

Funny you use that word, that's exactly how Nancy Pelosi described all the bonuses that companies were giving when Trump cut corporate tax cuts. She mocked the bonuses (usually $1,000 bonuses), calling it "crumbs".

.

Yes Jim That 1000 dollars pays once a 30 cent raise pays over time

why is that a hard concept for you to understand :btu:

Jim in CT 02-18-2022 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wdmso (Post 1222751)
Yes Jim That 1000 dollars pays once a 30 cent raise pays over time

why is that a hard concept for you to understand :btu:

I understand the math, I explained it to you. What I don't understand, is that you're saying $1,000 to these employees is significant. But when Trumps tax cuts incentivized many companies to give employees $1,000 bonuses, NO ONE on the left said "boy that's great". They said it was "crumbs"

Here's what YOU don't understand. It's much better for the Apple employees to have an amazingly capable CEO, than it is for them to have an average CEO and $640 a year. If an average employee making $70k a year is putting money into their 401(k) and buying apple stock with it, their stock appreciates by the same exact percentage as each share of Tim Cooks stock.

Nobody has to work at Apple. People with tech skills are in huge demand. They can go elsewhere. But they don't, huge numbers of people want to work there.

It's the single largest company on the planet in terms of market cap, the company is valued at almost $3 trillion. Cook is doing an amazing, amazing job there. Every possible indication is that hes worth what they're paying him.

His compensation is nothing to that companys balance sheet, absolutely nothing.

Pete F. 02-18-2022 11:43 AM

You’re seriously claiming Tim Apples compensation has no effect on Apples bottom line?

When employees leave Apple, it changes everyone's job title to "associate," so it becomes impossible for other companies to verify their resume, leading to rescinded job offers and lower pay.

Just pointless cruelty by a $2.8 trillion company
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw 02-18-2022 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1222768)

Just pointless cruelty by a $2.8 trillion company
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

some irony here

Jim in CT 02-18-2022 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1222768)
You’re seriously claiming Tim Apples compensation has no effect on Apples bottom line?

When employees leave Apple, it changes everyone's job title to "associate," so it becomes impossible for other companies to verify their resume, leading to rescinded job offers and lower pay.

Just pointless cruelty by a $2.8 trillion company
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"You’re seriously claiming Tim Apples compensation has no effect on Apples bottom line?"

100M a year, for a $3 trillion company, is nothing.

Like all the good commies here, all you're doing is focusing on his cost. You're assuming he ads zero value.

Look at the stock performance, growth, jobs added, any measure you want. He gets an A+ for his management of Apple.

I doubt most Apple employees want him gone and replaced with a cheaper alternative. If they don't care, no reason for you to care.

Jim in CT 02-18-2022 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1222768)
When employees leave Apple, it changes everyone's job title to "associate," so it becomes impossible for other companies to verify their resume, leading to rescinded job offers and lower pay.


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Except hiring companies don't base salary offers only on their title at their previous employer. And, I dunno, maybe the former Apple employee has the ability to tell his interviewer what his job was, or put it on his resume?

What a pathetic joke that was.

Pete F. 02-18-2022 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1222771)
"You’re seriously claiming Tim Apples compensation has no effect on Apples bottom line?"

100M a year, for a $3 trillion company, is nothing.

Like all the good commies here, all you're doing is focusing on his cost. You're assuming he ads zero value.

Look at the stock performance, growth, jobs added, any measure you want. He gets an A+ for his management of Apple.

I doubt most Apple employees want him gone and replaced with a cheaper alternative. If they don't care, no reason for you to care.

Oh, okay
In the last 50 years executive and upper level management compensation has increased at a rate much higher than the rate for lower level employees who in many cases have if you account for inflation, lost income even though worker productivity has increased.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

scottw 02-18-2022 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim in CT (Post 1222772)

What a pathetic joke that was.

he's consistent...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com