Kasz216 said:
B) That's why you commute to work from cheaper outter areas. The problem isn't that we don't want to pay workers fairly... it's that we don't want to pay workers fairly because the value of many kinds of labor is very low to the point of it being seen as below what we would like to see people work. Most people who are getting paid minium wage crazy enough are getting overpaid, that's why minium wage exists. So companies are forced to overpay for labor because we think people should deserve a minium amount of money for their time even if their time isn't worth that in market value. C) Except it's a lot harder to be a CEO then it is to be a worker. It's hard as hell to find a good CEO to the point where you can make a bunch of money on the pretext of being good... while as you said... there are more then enough workers. Either here or another country. The problem has nothing to do with the rich, and everything to do with labor being so cheap. Back in the day, quality intellegent america labor was worth a LOT, now it isn't. Why? It ain't got nothing to do with companies... it's got everything to do with consumers. Nobody wants to pay a premium for quality labor and quality products anymore. Everyone would rather by the cheap Wal-mart style brands... or when they do buy expensive brands in stuff like shoes, it's for the look, not the quality. We're moving from a Labor intensive value market to an info/knowlege intensive market. I heard today the top 5-6 tech companies employ less people then 1/3rd the workforce of GM in the 1980's. The middleclass isn't shrinking because of corporate greed or anti-middleclass laws or anything like that. The middle class is shrinking because the old middleclass jobs aren't viable anymore, and the new middleclass jobs don't support as many people and require more thinking. |
CEO pay check these days has very little to do with the quality of the work they produce but a lot more to do with the fact that these days a majority of the boards are stuffed with representants of mutal funds which think that rewarding executives with stock options is a good way to motivate them. And the jury is still out on how successfull it is ( it leads to CEO pushing for short terms decisions that will boost the stock price while neglecting the long term health of the company..).
That is the major difference between CEO salary now and 40 years ago....
And it has some very nasty side effect. Each time a company announces massive layoffs, it tends to boost the stock price and as a result nets a very nice bonus to every executive holding stock options.........
As for Herman Cain, if he thought 5 minutes before speaking he would probably say less BS.
Because the idea that everyone can be rich is a non sense. Rich is a concept that is defined by opposition to poor. If everyone was rich, noone would be rich.
Now maybe he is arguing for socialism....








