Mega-Million Dollar CEO Payouts

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
reply to post by budski

 

I believe the future is not so much in physical creation and wealth addition. While manufacturing is important, ultimately it does not provide anything much material posessions.

What I would like to envisage for the future is a de-centralised form of intertwined business and research. I would like to see research groups in their respective areas of science, technology, farming, arts etc etc innovate and create; and then create wealth for themselves and others by commercialising their innovations/ creations/ products.

I dont know if this will ever come to pass, but I sure hope it will

Agreed - although whether it will happen in our lifetimes is debatable.

For the moment, I see a return to a manufacturing base as vital in order to lead on to the proposals which you suggest, as the money for research needs to actually come from somewhere, and I wouldn't advocate government involvement in the process.

For the immediate future I feel we DO need to move more towards the centre and find a balance between manufacturing and services, otherwise what we are seeing now will be repeated again and again,albeit in different forms.

reply to post by budski


I think overall we need a shift from a "capital is king" economy to a knowledge economy.

Perhaps you're right to say that during the transition and even after it, we would have to move to a manufacturing economy. I just dont see how we could ever compete with China or India though. The only way is to switch directly into a knowledge economy of high tech, cutting edge research and development in all fields.

To drag up the old subject of this thread, I suspect we would see the current vilified CEOs heading up the most successful of the hypothetical market leaders of any future knowledge economy. And such would be an endevour worthy of high pay, however I still think that there would be those less successful who rather than aspire to be like the CEOs, would instead seek to bring them down.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


A good point, but let's not forget how these CEO's made their money.

Yes they were paid a basic salary (good) but they were also paid stock options and other bonusses which inevitibly made them want to drive up the share price - which they did, and got us into the current mess.

Over time, I hope that there is a shift in how we think about the reward system, so that it doesn't incentivise rash judgements and decision making.

I would also question why a CEO should make more money in a tech arena than the guys who are innovating - it doesn't seem like a good mix to me...

reply to post by budski


Oh well in an ideal future, the innovators would be the CEOs. There wouldn't be a massive corporation gaining the fruits of their employees' inventions, with a CEO freeriding on top.

I envisage each entrepreneur/ research group founding their own company and capitalising on their own invention. In my future there would be no scope for a CEO who adds nothing and takes rewards simultaneously.

Example (this is my actual intention in real life) : I personally will not work for a corporation, since they automatically own any patent you file while working in their labs. Im just waiting until I have enough seed capital to start my own research, which I will capitalise upon by myself through bootstrapping. When the time comes, I will approach a VC for a nominal stake to allow me to enter production and whatnot.

I just wish that those who whine incessantly would do something similar to what I have planned in order to increase their own success rather than diminish the achievements (illgotten or otherwise) of others.

Originally posted by budski
reply to post by 44soulslayer

 

A good point, but let's not forget how these CEO's made their money.

I think this is the issue that the majority of people have. For anyone to say they're only employees like the rest of us or they're as much a cog in the system as anyone else is a bit disingenuous.

Not everyone else is able to negotiate salaries, award themselves obscene bonuses or golden parachutes like they have despite many people working equally hard, or being equally deserving. Also, anyone else who is shown to be # at their job is sacked not rewarded.

This isn't about "jealousy" as other posters have stated, more a case of what's right and wrong.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


Here's one of the things that upsets me about these people,
abcnews.go.com...

With the enormous salaries that they receive, this is what they do with company money?!

This is why they were bailed out. $85 billion of our tax dollars to pay for their mistakes, and this is what they spend our money on

I work my butt off and i can't even afford to buy myself a damn pizza once a month, but i have to pay for this

Yeah they command respect alright, from the rest of the lowlife thieves in the world, that's all they are a bunch of theives.

reply to post by chise61


Which is why they shouldn't have been bailed out!

They should have been thrown to the wolves.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


I know that and you know that, hell i'd say 3/4 of the American public knows that, unfortunately our government doesn't work for us anymore they work for men like this.

I'm just sayin that men with morals and ethics like this don't deserve the amount of pay that they receive. They obviously weren't doing their jobs well and put their own wants ahead of the good of the company and the shareholders.