Does anyone really think it's ok for the average CEO to make so much more money than the average worker that a person earning the median income in this country would have to work 244 years to earn what the median CEO earns in a year?
I mean, I think $3,072 an hour is pretty excessive pay for anyone, but let's give the conseratives their due: The person worked hard, and deserves to earn what the maket will pay him or her. If the typical worker in this country earned $500 an hour, that would be fine -- the person at the top ought to earn more than his or her employees (at least, that the capitalist way) -- but multiples of 244-1 are excessive an unstable.
Why not link CEO pay to the pay of the average worker? Why not say that no CEO can get more than 10 times (or even 20 times) what the lowest-paid person at that company makes? Nice incentive to pay your workers more.
Have at it, trolls.
Most Commented On
- HINT: SFUSD should have done - July 24, 2014
- San Francisco's untouchables - July 24, 2014
- Joe whenever someone challenges you, you call them a troll. - July 24, 2014
- We have - July 24, 2014
- Did you - July 24, 2014
- His clothes weren't more - July 24, 2014
- I don't know why you have it in for that dude but - July 24, 2014
- Yes, greatly superior analysis - July 24, 2014
- Ah, but Probal Young, - July 24, 2014
- SFBG doesn't want to be post-racial because - July 24, 2014