Why do CEO's make som much?

[KLATTU]

I don't think anybody has ever said they need them. That's not accurate.

The reason for the last tax cut- which I've already said I din't agree with - was to enable economic growth which ultimately benefits everydody.

And that has happened -Wages up , unemployment almost nonexistent.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

I've already argued that it is NOT a zero sum game.
I fact I specifically stated that the AFL Cio came up with that misleading ~ 300 to 1 figure is that they want the rubes to believe they are making less because the greedy CEO's are making more.

You do know what zero sum means, dont you? I already said its not a question of "because", its a question of "and".

As you call them, the rubes, are making less AND at the same time CEO'S ARE making more.

Before someone tries to say this.....wages are "up" less than cost of living rises, so really they are making less. Giving a person a 1500 dollar a year raise means pretty little when the cost of living goes up 1800 a year. Yes, i suppose they could be 3300 in the hole, but the point still remains....CEOS arent worrying about cost of living rises since they are getting raises that are substantially larger than that rise.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

I don't think anybody has ever said they need them. That's not accurate.

The reason for the last tax cut- which I've already said I din't agree with - was to enable economic growth which ultimately benefits everydody.

And that has happened -Wages up , unemployment almost nonexistent.

Wages are up less than cost of living, so theres that.

 

[marke]

You lied when you said he was not prosecuted by Obama and Holder because he's black. Obama didn't get into office until 5 years after he already stepped down from Fannie. You made a racist and ignorant post and you were called out on it.

I don't think God is a bigot or looks kindly on people who are. And he definitely does not like liars.

The Justice Department shook down several CEOs of major lending institutions after the collapse of Wall Street, but not Raines. Fannie Mae was found guilty of fraud and mismanagement, for which Raines was allowed to retire with hundreds of millions in retirement benefits intact, in spite of his part in the scandal which cost American taxpayers around a third of a trillion dollars. White CEOs were made to forfeit their bonuses and earnings, but not Raines.

Do you people like facts when color is injected into the scenario? Are blacks proven to having been mistreated by the Justice Department on the basis of the larger numbers of blacks being incarcerated? If so, can we also assume blacks are getting away with hundreds of million dollar robbery schemes since only the white guys are being prosecuted?

 

[KLATTU]

Y...CEOS arent worrying about cost of living rises since they are getting raises that are substantially larger than that rise.

Well obviously their skill set is valued more.
What ? You think they tell the board what to pay them?

 

[KLATTU]

Wages are up less than cost of living, so theres that.

And?? You expect a tax cut to lower cost of living ??

 

[bullseyelqcs]

And?? You expect a tax cut to lower cost of living ??

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or do you really not understand what I was responding to?

Someone else that I was replying to was touting the fact that wages were up. I was pointing out that the rise in wages wasnt commensurate with the rise in cost of living, meaning that even with the raise, most people are still in the hole. I then pointed out that CEOs arent having that problem because they are getting raises that are substantially larger than the rise in cost of living.

 

[KLATTU]

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or do you really not understand what I was responding to?

Someone else that I was replying to was touting the fact that wages were up. I was pointing out that the rise in wages wasnt commensurate with the rise in cost of living, meaning that even with the raise, most people are still in the hole. I then pointed out that CEOs arent having that problem because they are getting raises that are substantially larger than the rise in cost of living.

No I think I had it right:
I said :
Originally Posted by KLATTU View Post
I don't think anybody has ever said they need them. That's not accurate.

The reason for the last tax cut- which I've already said I din't agree with - was to enable economic growth which ultimately benefits everydody.

And that has happened -Wages up , unemployment almost nonexistent.


Then you replied :
Wages are up less than cost of living, so theres that.

So I assumed your comment was in reference to the tax cut.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

No I think I had it right:
I said :
Originally Posted by KLATTU View Post
I don't think anybody has ever said they need them. That's not accurate.

The reason for the last tax cut- which I've already said I din't agree with - was to enable economic growth which ultimately benefits everydody.

And that has happened -Wages up , unemployment almost nonexistent.


Then you replied :
Wages are up less than cost of living, so theres that.

So I assumed your comment was in reference to the tax cut.

My bad....i thought that response was to someone else.

That stated, you would think that if these tax cuts were going to stimulate economic growth, wouldnt it stand to reason that they would provide people the money to actually participate in the economy? Getting less new money than you are going to have to spend for the same things doesnt accomplish that. Not sure how you would mathematically square that circle.

 

[Renae]

The purpose of a business is to make money. Who said or even implied it wasnt?

Now you answer one.....

Elon Musk isnt slapping together Falcon X rockets and Teslas in his garage by hand, right? So without the people doing the work, all you have is a guy with a ****load of money and and an idea, right?

So the question is, whats the missing ingredient in the profit creation equation?

Right now, here is what you look like:

View attachment 67266243

Eh, you are partially correct. It is to make money. For those with a vested financial stake in the venture. I.E. the people funding the business. They created and invested in said business for THEIR profit.

That's why CEO's make so much, because the people VESTED to the company, want to hire the best people they can to make themselves rich. That's how it works. A business doesn't exist to enrich the workers, if you could start a profitable business that had ZERO employees, you'd have investors running to sign up for that.

That's the reality of the situation. If you don't like that, don't support such businesses, find those that operate "for and by the workers". Don't work for businesses that are there for the "shareholders". Start your own "Not for profit for me but the workers" business. Nothing is stopping you or anyone else, well aside Economics 101....

 

[Renae]

You are welcome to stick with your "promotions of inhumanity" and when you start talking about bribes, maybe you need to turn on "actual news" or simply read... you might find out what your beloved Republicans have been up to in Ukraine and how the stabbed the Kurds in the back, while still abusing people who are pursuing immigration... it might even dawn on you just how many peoples lives have been disrupted by Trump's tweets and madness in the escalation of war activity in Syrian and Turkish Border Area. But... we do understand, when one has not a great depth of concern for the betterment of humanity, such things likely don't matter much.
You might be Ok, with the Conservative Agenda of give the wealthy another tax break, and let them fleece the nation and pursue trying to privatize what ever they can to feed their avarice hearts.... but thank goodness.... the majority of American people don't care to embrace what you aspire to.

Whataboutism is your defense? Thanks for the white flag of debate surrender, you are dismissed.

 

[KLATTU]

My bad....i thought that response was to someone else.

That stated, you would think that if these tax cuts were going to stimulate economic growth, wouldnt it stand to reason that they would provide people the money to actually participate in the economy? Getting less new money than you are going to have to spend for the same things doesnt accomplish that. Not sure how you would mathematically square that circle.

Another way to look it is, if COst of living goes up and you DON't make more then you are even worse off. Tax cuts can only take care of one side of the equation.
By the way , Why it feels like wages aren't outpacing inflation, even though they are | PolitiFact
The issue came up when we fact-checked two Democrats: Sen. Kamala Harris of California and Stacey Abrams, who ran for governor of Georgia in 2018. Harris is a candidate for president, while Abrams delivered the Democratic response to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union.

Abrams said in her speech that "wages struggle to keep pace with the actual cost of living." Harris said that "the cost of living is going up, but paychecks aren’t keeping up." We rated Harris’s statement Mostly False.

and that's from left friendly politifact.

 

[tres borrachos]

The Justice Department shook down several CEOs of major lending institutions after the collapse of Wall Street, but not Raines. Fannie Mae was found guilty of fraud and mismanagement, for which Raines was allowed to retire with hundreds of millions in retirement benefits intact, in spite of his part in the scandal which cost American taxpayers around a third of a trillion dollars. White CEOs were made to forfeit their bonuses and earnings, but not Raines.

Do you people like facts when color is injected into the scenario? Are blacks proven to having been mistreated by the Justice Department on the basis of the larger numbers of blacks being incarcerated? If so, can we also assume blacks are getting away with hundreds of million dollar robbery schemes since only the white guys are being prosecuted?

Cool story that doesn't excuse your bigoted lie. You lied about Obama and Holder, and I outed your lie.

And Wall Street didn't collapse while Raines was at Fannie. He was gone over 3 years.

Stop lying. God is watching you.

 

[marke]

Cool story that doesn't excuse your bigoted lie. You lied about Obama and Holder, and I outed your lie.

And Wall Street didn't collapse while Raines was at Fannie. He was gone over 3 years.

Stop lying. God is watching you.

Fannie Mae did more to weaken the financial markets precipitation the collapse of Wall Street than any other lending institution involved, and it was found guilty of cooking the books while Raines was CEO.

 

[tres borrachos]

Fannie Mae did more to weaken the financial markets precipitation the collapse of Wall Street than any other lending institution involved, and it was found guilty of cooking the books while Raines was CEO.

Once again, trying to run away from your ignorant and bigoted lie isn't working. You are getting on God's bad side.

 

[marke]

Once again, trying to run away from your ignorant and bigoted lie isn't working. You are getting on God's bad side.

Is it racist to point out that there are more blacks per black population size in prison than whites?

Is it racist to point out that the only CEOs of mortgage companies responsible for the 2008 collapse forced to give up their excessive earnings were white executives and not black executives?

Franklin Raines made upwards of $350 million at Fannie Mae even while Fannie Mae was in the tank financially. Franklin Raines paid a fine of $25 million, the majority of which was written off in his forfeiture of Fannie Mae stock, the value of which had plummeted after the 2008 collapse but the former value of which he was allowed to count as payment for his fine.

 

[tres borrachos]

Is it racist to point out that there are more blacks per black population size in prison than whites?

Is it racist to point out that the only CEOs of mortgage companies responsible for the 2008 collapse forced to give up their excessive earnings were white executives and not black executives?

Franklin Raines made upwards of $350 million at Fannie Mae even while Fannie Mae was in the tank financially. Franklin Raines paid a fine of $25 million, the majority of which was written off in his forfeiture of Fannie Mae stock, the value of which had plummeted after the 2008 collapse but the former value of which he was allowed to count as payment for his fine.

It's racist to lie, like you did, and say he wasn't prosecuted by Obama and Holder because he's black.

Obama and Holder were not in office until 4 years after he was already gone from Fannie.

Own your bigotry.

 

[Eriech]

I'm glad that CEO's make a gigantic amount of money while voting republicans make average to below average salaries.

Big corporate CEOs are Democrat. Small privately held business tend to be Republican.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[marke]

It's racist to lie, like you did, and say he wasn't prosecuted by Obama and Holder because he's black.

Obama and Holder were not in office until 4 years after he was already gone from Fannie.

Own your bigotry.

Obama and Holder oversaw the drive to force white CEOs to forfeit major portions of their salaries and benefits after the collapse. White CEOs, not blacks. Raines made off with a $250 million golden parachute after being ousted for accounting irregularities at Fannie Mae, but he never had to forfeit any of that after the 2008 collapse. Fannie Mae ended up costing Americans nearly a third of a trillion dollars because of its corruption, the most of which can be laid at the feet of its CEO during the time the books were being cooked for the bonuses its officers received as a result. Raines was the CEO during that time, but he claimed, like Ken Lay, that he never knew what was going on. Typical criminal response.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Big corporate CEOs are Democrat. Small privately held business tend to be Republican.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

There are a gazillion Republican voters who just work a job and are middle to lower middle class. Or poor.

 

[tres borrachos]

Obama and Holder oversaw the drive to force white CEOs to forfeit major portions of their salaries and benefits after the collapse. White CEOs, not blacks. Raines made off with a $250 million golden parachute after being ousted for accounting irregularities at Fannie Mae, but he never had to forfeit any of that after the 2008 collapse. Fannie Mae ended up costing Americans nearly a third of a trillion dollars because of its corruption, the most of which can be laid at the feet of its CEO during the time the books were being cooked for the bonuses its officers received as a result. Raines was the CEO during that time, but he claimed, like Ken Lay, that he never knew what was going on. Typical criminal response.

Obama and Holder were not in a position to prosecute Raines. They weren't in office for another 4 years.

Why do you keep lying? The GOP should have prosecuted Raines.

Just embrace your bigotry and keep waving it around like a flag.

 

[tres borrachos]

Big corporate CEOs are Democrat. Small privately held business tend to be Republican.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

You shouldn't lie.

First of its kind study shows CEO political donations favor GOP - Axios

 

[Bandit]

Big corporate CEOs are Democrat. Small privately held business tend to be Republican.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Sources? Or just more horse [emoji90] from the cut and run party.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[marke]

Obama and Holder were not in a position to prosecute Raines. They weren't in office for another 4 years.

Why do you keep lying? The GOP should have prosecuted Raines.

Just embrace your bigotry and keep waving it around like a flag.

The CEOs were forced to give up their wages and bonuses long after they had taken them. Raines did not have to forfeit much if any of his $250 million golden parachute package given him at his retirement after accounting irregularities were discovered in Fannie Mae. Blame it on Bush or Obama or the American people, I just don't think it was fair that the white guys had to pay back their wages and earnings and Raines did not, even after he was implicated in the huge accounting fraud which netted him tens of millions but which led to the 2008 disaster and $300+ billion bailout by the US government.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

That's only a few CEO at the heads of multi-billion dollar companies. The average is about $160,000

wow, look at the size of your data set!

Updated: Mon May 08 2017
•
Individuals Reporting: 40