Author Topic: California Prop 8  (Read 4377 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California Prop 8
« Reply #45 on: October 22, 2008, 09:09:10 PM »

Sine there is NO WAY that 2% could produce such a huge amount of goods and services for the society, it indicates that the distribution of rewards in our society is hideously skewed and very unfair.




What?

This is a very strange concept.

Could more than 2% of us play in the majors?

It isn't a strange idea at all that only a few are extremely productive.

Further ,there is a social utility in the collection of a fortune, if there were no fortunes there would be very little risky investment.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California Prop 8
« Reply #46 on: October 23, 2008, 11:25:57 AM »
Please. The ability to administer a company is not the same as a simple physical talent like throwing or hitting a ball.

There is no way that anyone should be paid 400 times as much as a regular employee. There is no way that that much money is needed to lure them to take that job.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California Prop 8
« Reply #47 on: October 23, 2008, 06:39:06 PM »
Please. The ability to administer a company is not the same as a simple physical talent like throwing or hitting a ball.

There is no way that anyone should be paid 400 times as much as a regular employee. There is no way that that much money is needed to lure them to take that job.



Do you think that a company that offered a lower compensation to its CEO would have a compeditive advantage?

Seems as if sheer Darwinism would make this problem self correcting.

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California Prop 8
« Reply #48 on: October 24, 2008, 11:59:10 AM »
Do you think that a company that offered a lower compensation to its CEO would have a compeditive advantage?

Seems as if sheer Darwinism would make this problem self correcting.

===========================================================
It isn't, because the boards of most companies are more often toadies of the company presidents.

European companies pay their CEO's a lot less, to no measurable disadvantage.

Observe that there are telephone companies that have paid their presidents many times more than the president of the US. It is hardly a tougher job to run a phone company. It is very unlikely that a phone CEO would have to be as knowedgeable of the world as the president of a country.
"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."