61–70 of 157 posts
Maybe Karl Marx had a point? Sure, communist revolutions of the 20th century produced suboptimal results, but only because violent psychopaths were in power. We need democratic socialism. Maybe Bernie Sanders has right ideas.
There were way more problems with socialism than just the fact it breeds dictators.
If you're starving your people in the time of greatest abundance of food in history it might be more fundamentally flawed.
> This escalation of CEO compensation and of executive compensation more generally has fueled the growth of top 1% and top 0.1% incomes, leaving fewer of the gains of economic growth for ordinary workers and widening the gap between very high earners and the bottom 90%. I ignore every article that separates the top 1% from ordinary workers. In the UK, to be in the top 1% of earners you need to earn 120K GBP gross a y…
[1] https://www.healthcareers.nhs.uk/explore-roles/doctors/pay-d...
> This escalation of CEO compensation and of executive compensation more generally has fueled the growth of top 1% and top 0.1% incomes, leaving fewer of the gains of economic growth for ordinary workers and widening the gap between very high earners and the bottom 90%. I ignore every article that separates the top 1% from ordinary workers. In the UK, to be in the top 1% of earners you need to earn 120K GBP gross a y…
The difference in feasibility between top X% of income vs wealth is large. Last I checked it was like $600k gross household income to get into the top 1% of incomes, but like $10mm wealth. You’d need to make a top 1% income and invest a good portion of the after-tax income for quite a while to get there.
All these punching up class warfare policies hurt the wrong people IMO. I have a 98%ile income and I live in a studio and can’t afford a house in the neighborhood I live in. Meanwhile Joe Rich works in a stereotypical rich boy field like sales, has a lot of family money ultimately stemming from things like land grants or moving to a US metro area a hundred years ago, has way more money than me and a more lavish lifestyle, and pays less taxes.
As far as I see it, higher income taxes actually just entrench class divisions and make it harder to enter upper classes. Rich people aren’t affected much by income taxes and remain rich, except even more unattainably so
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CEOs getting insane pay doesn't exist in a vacuum. You can't use the "trickle down" economy as a proverbial carrot when people can't put gas in their car or heat their home while Bezos&co buy a new yacht every other day > The idea that if things get bad enough "people" are going to do something about it can just occur to someone that hasn't seen enough of the world. Or I'm French, who knows ;) Continue selling ports…
Last time heads were rolling in France people were starving.
But at the time, we understood that the police was really representing the business owners (landowners, industrialists) more than the government and put their crimes not on the individual, but on the hand that lead them. I feel like this understanding is coming back in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Damn, why did people create companies for the past 300 years ? Why did people become entrepreneur ? They didn't have anywhere close to 400 times their workers salary, must have been a miserable life What's the point of it all when you have enough money to sustain your entire genealogy tree from the birth of earth to the heat death of the universe ? These people are clinically ill
Tech driven automation is creating opportunities that didn't exist before and there is way more competition. CEOs have a crucial impact on company and are paid in stocks. Does this article and related figure accounts for all the failed startups CEOs whose stock turned out to be worthless?
> This escalation of CEO compensation and of executive compensation more generally has fueled the growth of top 1% and top 0.1% incomes, leaving fewer of the gains of economic growth for ordinary workers and widening the gap between very high earners and the bottom 90%. I ignore every article that separates the top 1% from ordinary workers. In the UK, to be in the top 1% of earners you need to earn 120K GBP gross a y…
> This escalation of CEO compensation and of executive compensation more generally has fueled the growth of top 1% and top 0.1% incomes, leaving fewer of the gains of economic growth for ordinary workers and widening the gap between very high earners and the bottom 90%. I ignore every article that separates the top 1% from ordinary workers. In the UK, to be in the top 1% of earners you need to earn 120K GBP gross a y…
From a job complexity standpoint, CEO jobs are more challenging than bankers since they have to manage a real business to generate a positive return. Bankers have no skin in the game and yet make millions.
If you want to see how people's well-being has evolved, you have to make somewhat more intelligent comparisons: for example by looking at what people can afford today compared to 50 years ago, or through quality of life indexes. The only thing that has changed for the worse seems to me to be the cost of real estate in the big cities, because of an obvious concentration of the population in them and not because the 1 percent of the population has bought everything.
But outraged people will always find something to be outraged about.