Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In the last 5 years Tim Cook has created $1900 b in shareholder value. That's just obviously not the case unless Tim is the only person working at Apple. All employees contributed that and it's perfectly reasonable to discuss how these rewards should be distributed, even if they should be distributed to shareholders at all.
No matter how you look at it, a CEO that earns less than 0.1% of the shareholder value created under his watch can’t reasonably be called overpaid.
Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
111–120 of 360 posts
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
> by their scarcity By their perceived scarcity Chances are that anyone other than Tim could have done just as well. Still, this is over 10 years, and Apple shares have increased in value by 1900%. If they were still the same value he’d have gotten 40M, for about 4M per year. Which is much more reasonable. I still think it’s high, but in line with what others get.
Because it should be about productivity. People are highlighting a moral failing of society.
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#113> In 2015, Mr Cook said he would give away his entire fortune before he dies, and is known to have donated tens of millions of dollars to charity. I'm normally a proponent of reducing income inequality. But this has got me thinking. Is the world actively better off when billionaires like Cook/Gates/Buffett make a ton of money. Consider the alternative: someone in the 75th percentile of USA income gets a fat raise. Mo…
But if you think that's always going to be the case, why bother having democracies then? We can return to the tradition of noblesse oblige and let kings and lords take all the products of everyone else's labor and just hope that they'll feel sufficiently obligated to be kind and charitable to the rest of us. There are plenty of people who believe this, so you won't be alone, and I'm sure others will argue we're better off now that the men being rewarded by being allowed to own everything got there by being good at product design and regulatory capture rather than past centuries when they were good at raising armies and taking land from other people.
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
> by their scarcity By their perceived scarcity Chances are that anyone other than Tim could have done just as well. Still, this is over 10 years, and Apple shares have increased in value by 1900%. If they were still the same value he’d have gotten 40M, for about 4M per year. Which is much more reasonable. I still think it’s high, but in line with what others get.
Because it should be about productivity. People are highlighting a moral failing of society.
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#115From the article : "In 2015, Mr Cook said he would give away his entire fortune before he dies, and is known to have donated tens of millions of dollars to charity". Success during one's life , paying it back to make the society a better place once gone. Take a bow, Mr Cook. What more can one ask for in a lifetime :)
And during his lifetime, this money is locked away, only accessible by him, taken out of circulation and thereby not adding any worth against ever-growing inequality, supporting economic prosperity or tax-funded investments. This is just once again a case of philanthropic green-washing of what should be actually simply heavily taxed.
At least there is a chance it goes somewhere good now.
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#116Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you can say that about anyone who makes anything based on work from anyone else. While it's important to recognise those others (as those at Apple with stock based compensation have been), I don't think it nullifies the point because they didn't do all the work themselves.
In what possible world could Tim Cook personally have done anything worth $75m, let alone $750m? How can any single human being create value at that scale? I don't understand the apologia for what is, on its face, a massively skewed system of compensation completely unrelated to any possible basis in reality.
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My question is: how is Tim so productive that he does roughly 160,000 people’s work, or 1/8th of Foxconn’s total workforce? [2] /s Nobody has been making these productivity claims to begin with, but leftists commonly use productivity vs salary to ridicule CEO compensation. CEOs are paid for numerous reasons, for example board wants to trust the person with billions worth of assets which makes it sensible to pay cer…
You are justifying someone being paid $750m. No one needs that much money. No one. Why are you defending this? It's obscene. Really reminds me of this https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/002/147/150/e2c...
Otherwise, 750 million dollars is probably more than what anybody needs.
It reminded me of SpaceX almost dying in the early days because even Elon Musk is not made out of unlimited money.
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#119So according to this 2018 article by The Verge [1], Foxconn workers producing iGadgets in China earn on average $390.16 per month. Times that by twelve and we find that workers earn $4,681.92 per year on average. If we divide Tim's $750,000,000 bonus/payout this year by that $4,681.92 yearly Foxconn salary, we get 160,190 My question is: how is Tim so productive that he does roughly 160,000 people’s work, or 1/8th of…
Re: Apple chief executive Tim Cook gets $750m payout
#120From the article : "In 2015, Mr Cook said he would give away his entire fortune before he dies, and is known to have donated tens of millions of dollars to charity". Success during one's life , paying it back to make the society a better place once gone. Take a bow, Mr Cook. What more can one ask for in a lifetime :)
Rich people spend money on charities they like. They change society the way they want it to change that does not necessarily make society a better place nor is it necessarily what most people want. If he had to pay all of this on taxes, society could decide how to use that money and it would be just as much, if not more "a better place".