Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 325 posts

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#51

Post by dmos62 »

johnchristopher wrote: post #13
locklock wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you're getting a $365k bonus you are likely already so rich that the money is only going for luxury things while for someone making $7.25 it's quite literally the difference between living in a car or not. I wonder if you could apply this to the rest of American society...

Isn't money used to buy luxury things supposed to stimulate the economy that would then stimulate the job markets and then trickle down to people ? /s edit: forgot the /s

This shouldn't be downvoted, because Trickle-down economics, or rather politics, is a big part of today's world, and it needs to be discussed. It tries to justify socioeconomic stratification and deregulation, which is nuts in this late-stage capitalist society. It shouldn't be supported, in my opinion at least, but it should be critiqued and discussed. It's too important to be downvoted out of the thread.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#52

Post by EliRivers »

bigred100 wrote: post #33
locklock wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you're getting a $365k bonus you are likely already so rich that the money is only going for luxury things while for someone making $7.25 it's quite literally the difference between living in a car or not. I wonder if you could apply this to the rest of American society...

Yeah indeed. I wonder why more rich Americans don’t feel shame and embarrassment at such purchases.

I understand that a popular philosophy is that they're rich because they deserve it; they're simply better people. There's no shame to be had; it's simply the natural order of things, it's morally right.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#53

Post by Chris2048 »

mcv wrote: post #21
johnchristopher wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't money used to buy luxury things supposed to stimulate the economy that would then stimulate the job markets and then trickle down to people ? /s edit: forgot the /s

Money for luxury things doesn't do nearly as much as money for necessities, because luxury things are optional. The person with the money can easily decide to postpone the purchase and save the money instead. Or spend the money abroad, which doesn't do much for the local economy. People who are short on necessities will immediately buy them when they get the money for them, because they are necessities. Money for the…

Maybe saving money is as important as "stimulating" the economy? Maybe the type of economy is important too, i.e. luxury items that push the envelope wrt novel manufacturing methods or R&D

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#54

Post by HeWhoLurksLate »

justaguyhere wrote: post #50
petercooper wrote: post #6

I was thinking the math didn't work out, but it does. If you ignore taxes and say a raise of +7.50 an hour for a working week comes to around $14500 extra a year, over 500 employees that's about $7.3m. If that were split into 20 executive bonuses, that'd be $365K each.

This is a nice gesture from this CEO/company. I wish more companies tried this. That said, we shouldn't depend on the largesse/good nature/etc of a few rich individuals - if there is sensible minimum wage, sensible labor laws (and enforcement of these laws), sensible housing laws etc, we probably wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

Putting so many laws into place about how much you have to pay workers / etc. makes it harder for small companies to even start. To me, seeing a company pay its workers more voluntarily is the best option, and also one I wish more companies would go with.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#55

Post by turk73 »

vishnugupta wrote: post #44
locklock wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you're getting a $365k bonus you are likely already so rich that the money is only going for luxury things while for someone making $7.25 it's quite literally the difference between living in a car or not. I wonder if you could apply this to the rest of American society...

> you are likely already so rich that the money is only going for luxury things while for someone making $7.25 it's quite literally the difference between living in a car or not This is a great insight which unfortunately doesn't get much attention in the inequality debate. I'm now rich enough to be in the top 0.5% of the world. The marginal utility/value of money is so low for me that I've begun valuing my time and…

I'm not quite where you are wealth-wise but definitely I have had that moment several times recently where I am re-evaluating hiring out work I would have just done myself in the past. I didn't have some big windfall, but pretty much earned and saved my way to wealth. Now it is hard to not do things like fix my own cars as well as bring my own lunch. I do them out of habit now. That's the discipline. Anyways, you don't want idiots working on your cars and you don't want to eat at restaurants all the time.

It makes no sense to me why the CEO and higher ups of the company I work at still work there. They are already set for life many times over. I can only speculate that they share a character flaw that they all see as virtuous. However it isn't--they are impeding someone's chance to "make it" in life, especially the older executives who could have stepped aside a decade ago or more. Even if you just look at the absurd salaries, it doesn't paint a pleasant portrait of greed in America.

There is a great absurdity to life in America. We basically work for the appearance of something that ends up being eaten away to a large degree. Taxes and inflation keep the goalposts moving away but we don't rebel because it's a magic trick and who doesn't like magic?

I don't work because I enjoy it but because it is a means to an end that is a better formula than some other arrangement. I would happily volunteer my time, travel, read, or simply do nothing if I could.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#56

Post by erfgh »

locklock wrote: post #8
petercooper wrote: post #6

I was thinking the math didn't work out, but it does. If you ignore taxes and say a raise of +7.50 an hour for a working week comes to around $14500 extra a year, over 500 employees that's about $7.3m. If that were split into 20 executive bonuses, that'd be $365K each.

And if you're getting a $365k bonus you are likely already so rich that the money is only going for luxury things while for someone making $7.25 it's quite literally the difference between living in a car or not. I wonder if you could apply this to the rest of American society...

Someone is making this luxury thing.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#57

Post by erfgh »

hedonic_ wrote: post #16
johnchristopher wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't money used to buy luxury things supposed to stimulate the economy that would then stimulate the job markets and then trickle down to people ? /s edit: forgot the /s

Yes and no. Give someone earning $7.50/hour more money and it gets spent and put back into the economy like you said. Give someone earning a base salary of say 500k more money and it gets put into a bank to earn them even more money, taking it out of the equation.

Nobody puts that money in a bank. They invest it in a mutual fund or similar, so it ends up funding businesses and their employees.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#58

Post by Someone1234 »

HeWhoLurksLate wrote: post #54
justaguyhere wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a nice gesture from this CEO/company. I wish more companies tried this. That said, we shouldn't depend on the largesse/good nature/etc of a few rich individuals - if there is sensible minimum wage, sensible labor laws (and enforcement of these laws), sensible housing laws etc, we probably wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

Putting so many laws into place about how much you have to pay workers / etc. makes it harder for small companies to even start. To me, seeing a company pay its workers more voluntarily is the best option, and also one I wish more companies would go with.

Benefits that cost small businesses more than large ones are a huge problem maybe the biggest problem, because it takes an already risky venture and essentially punishes people who want to pursue it.

For example health insurance costs 10x or more either via either the public exchange or for a small business to offer relative to corporations in the same market. That's a huge disincentive for employees to work for you.

If we were really interested in making it easier for small businesses we'd improve social safety nets, not weaken them further with re-regulation. We need to reduce the risk/pressure for employee rather than concerning ourselves with how cheaply we can exploit an underclass.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#59

Post by atonse »

HeWhoLurksLate wrote: post #54
justaguyhere wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a nice gesture from this CEO/company. I wish more companies tried this. That said, we shouldn't depend on the largesse/good nature/etc of a few rich individuals - if there is sensible minimum wage, sensible labor laws (and enforcement of these laws), sensible housing laws etc, we probably wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

Putting so many laws into place about how much you have to pay workers / etc. makes it harder for small companies to even start. To me, seeing a company pay its workers more voluntarily is the best option, and also one I wish more companies would go with.

Not at all. Many laws only apply to companies with certain amounts of employees.

It is entirely possible to put in laws that are reasonable for larger companies to follow, but not hurt small business growth.

Re: I froze the salaries of my executive team to benefit other workers

#60

Post by systemtest »

bigred100 wrote: post #33
locklock wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if you're getting a $365k bonus you are likely already so rich that the money is only going for luxury things while for someone making $7.25 it's quite literally the difference between living in a car or not. I wonder if you could apply this to the rest of American society...

Yeah indeed. I wonder why more rich Americans don’t feel shame and embarrassment at such purchases.

Most Americans have smartphones worth about as much as a monthly salary in Europeans countries. Should people feel embarrassment about that?
Post reply on HN