Quoted post unavailable.
[flagged]
Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
211–220 of 259 posts
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your dreaming or delusional if you think a CEOs output is 400x someone else's. Dangerously delusional.
CEOs simply control more powerful tools so their output is multiplied. Someone driving a tractor might produce 400x the output of someone with hand tools, but its not because of the person, its the tool. Swap the two people and there will still be a 400x difference in output. It doesn't mean the tractor driver, or business leader is some sort of outlier genius.
Right. Just like the CEO, a fair amount of people could theoretically drive the tractor, but few have the experience. If you let the wrong person drive the tractor, they might just drive it right in to a river.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, but if you were to take all $212 million and divvy it up to the nearly 1 million US Amazon employees it wouldn’t go very far.
I see this theme a lot when this topic comes up, and I feel it misses the point. Does the CEO provide 700x the value (based on $21.2M / 2000 hrs = $10600 "hourly rate") of a warehouse worker earning $15/hr? They absolutely provide critical input and decisions at the helm of a large ship, but if you break down their input versus the input of everyone under them...is it actually such a huge disparity of mental and phys…
I bet there are far more than 700 people that can do the warehouse worker's job for every 1 that both can and is qualified to do the CEO's job.
The point of that theme is primary to point out that the worker's wages aren't low because of the C-level pay. The worker's wages are low because almost anyone can do their job.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Damn near everyone in America, at least, has access to YouTube or other streaming services. I learned how to program in R (...) Enough with this pseudo-moralistic perpetuation of abuse, specially the tone-deaf ones based on survivorship bias. Just because someone is not able to win the lottery that does not mean they have no right to earn a living wage that allows them a honest living. Aren't we supposed to live in…
> Just pay people a fair wage. Is it that hard? Yes. Because we have no idea how to define 'fair'. I hear 'fair wage' over and over but no one can ever explain to me what makes the wage 'fair' other than, "I have a job and I should be able to live on that single job!" Okay... why? Where is it written that you should be able to live on a single job? As soon as you can come up with an argument that's not emotive, and i…
> Okay... why? Where is it written that you should be able to live on a single job?
> As soon as you can come up with an argument that's not emotive, and is instead quantitative, I'll listen.
I have a feeling that you will not accept any argument based on general morality as you would describe it as 'emotive'.
I think first that humans should not spend the majority of their lives working and sleeping. In other words: surviving. Especially when there are more than enough resources available to achieve this ( in your country).
Second, exploiting other humans (as above) is absolutely wrong.
These two arguments are not emotionally driven.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Pay is a function of scarcity and value they bring. I seriously doubt those skills which are supposed to define scarcity at this point. There is too much management to require a seriously special person on that chair. I'm sure you could have someone from mid-management on that chair and it still wouldn't run worse. It would probably even run better. So what is the value there? It's almost like with a piece of art.…
If folks who had to pay them believed that, then they wouldn't pay them that (in my experience). As to if you think the folks who pay them are clueless to do so, do you know any of them personally?
Just like the folks here who cheer this madness, those folks who pay them believe in the hype for the same stupid reasons OP outlined above and to justify their own wages.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Pay is a function of scarcity and value they bring. I seriously doubt those skills which are supposed to define scarcity at this point. There is too much management to require a seriously special person on that chair. I'm sure you could have someone from mid-management on that chair and it still wouldn't run worse. It would probably even run better. So what is the value there? It's almost like with a piece of art.…
> I seriously doubt those skills which are supposed to define scarcity at this point. There is too much management to require a seriously special person on that chair. I'm sure you could have someone from mid-management on that chair and it still wouldn't run worse. It would probably even run better. Did you ever try to manage small org vs big org vs huge company? It's very naive to think that managing dozens of peop…
Of course I did.
I'm Bill Gates.
Did you?
I worked for small and huge companies though and I could see that it requires far less work to manage a huge one than to manage a small one. I wouldn't even call it "work" if managing the small one is work. It's more like pointing your finger.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#217What I find telling about all of the critiques of CEO pay, billionaire taxation, etc. is that there is almost no discussion of how to get maximum impact for the monies taxed. People don't want to tax Jeff Bezos because they have really great ideas on how to spend public money to achieve great ends -- if they did, they'd be more interested in how to better spend the entire government budget rather than increasing it by fractions of a percentage point.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tom Brady did actual work for his team, a CEO does not do $500M worth of work. If there were no employees other than the CEO then the $500M doesn't get made.
> CEO does not do $500M worth of work The decision to make AWS created 100s of billions of dollars of value. CEO decisions can make and break companies. > If there were no employees other than the CEO then the $500M doesn't get made. Right, and if Tom Brady doesn't have receivers to throw to he doesn't win any super bowls. It is the leadership that can create massive amounts of value.
> The decision to make AWS created 100s of billions of dollars of value
I can make decisions to create something all day, none of it makes any money unless effort is put into it's creation. Product and engineering and design made AWS which allowed the company to make billions. The marketing team after that.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tom Brady did actual work for his team, a CEO does not do $500M worth of work. If there were no employees other than the CEO then the $500M doesn't get made.
He isn't being paid for his work (which I assume you are conflating with labor); he is being paid for the perceived value he can bring to the company. His decision-making can absolutely influence the bottom line far more than any single Amazon warehouse worker could. Now, I'm not saying that warehouse workers are worthless or should be treated like shit, far from it, but if Amazon doesn't pay him this much, some othe…
> he is being paid for the perceived value he can bring to the company.
Regardless of if he's a magician or not, we're talking about work.
> His decision-making can absolutely influence the bottom line far more than any single Amazon warehouse worker could.
I decided to have coffee this morning, but if I don't put in a doordash order and there's no barista, then I don't get to have coffee.
Re: Amazon investors nuke ethics overhaul and say yes to $212M CEO pay
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
So… your point is that “anyone can become a developer that pays good money”? And this is a solution for systemic poverty and classism? Who do you think keeps society and your life functioning while you sit in front of a computer and code?
My point is that anyone can learn what they want to do on YouTube. I served with an Electronics Technician in the Navy who started watching YouTube videos on commercial HVAC and now he does that as a living, servicing mostly restaurants in the Fort Worth-Dallas Metroplex, and not just making a "living", but last year his one-man operation made $300,000. Not too shabby for just watching YouTube and going to get the ne…
Okay, but if “everyone” goes out and gets a high paying job, who is leftover to do the jobs that keep us all functioning? Should we just mistreat them because they didn’t watch enough YouTube and “upskill” themselves?