Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marmar

(77,086 posts)
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:38 PM Feb 2013

The Scruffy and the Stuffy Agree: Cap CEO Pay


from Too Much: A Commentary on Excess and Inequality:


The Scruffy and the Stuffy Agree: Cap CEO Pay
February 9, 2013

From hiking trails in Oregon to boardrooms in Berlin, critics of our staggeringly unequal corporate order are calling for new limits that link executive compensation to worker paychecks

By Sam Pizzigati


When do societies start taking a new idea seriously? Easy. New ideas start gaining traction when starkly different sorts of people start standing up as their champions.

Just this exact process now seems to be unfolding on the notion some have dubbed the “maximum wage,” the idea that we should limit the income our society’s most exalted executives take home to a specific multiple of the income that goes to ordinary mortals.

Already this winter we’ve seen striking pitches for capping executive incomes emerge from two camps about as different as they could be.

The first came last month with the publication of new environmental movement manifesto, Enough Is Enough: Building a Sustainable Economy in a World of Finite Resources. The authors — Oregon conservationist Rob Dietz and UK ecological economist Dan O’Neill — have become familiar fixtures at confabs that scruffy tree-huggers frequent. ...............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://toomuchonline.org/the-scruffy-and-stuffy-agree-cap-ceo-pay/



6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Scruffy and the Stuffy Agree: Cap CEO Pay (Original Post) marmar Feb 2013 OP
Enough is enough, indeed. love_katz Feb 2013 #1
I get a big laugh when I hear the reason why executives got a raise was because the boards voted Thinkingabout Feb 2013 #2
I do agree! Scruffy Rumbler Feb 2013 #3
Tie it to the median wage of non managerial workers Warpy Feb 2013 #4
Only if you include contract workers. aquart Feb 2013 #5
You betcha! Warpy Feb 2013 #6

love_katz

(2,583 posts)
1. Enough is enough, indeed.
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:50 PM
Feb 2013

Greed has gone on far more than enough! Thank you for posting this.

I hope this goes viral.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)
2. I get a big laugh when I hear the reason why executives got a raise was because the boards voted
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 08:52 PM
Feb 2013

For it. They sit on several boards and vote each other a raise. Then the claim the executives would not stay unless they got the big salaries. My answer for that one is BS. They could have dependable replacements in hours and ones which would work for a decent salary.

Have you ever stuck your finger in a glass of water? When you pulled it out did it leave a hole? There is your answer, you can be replaced, even the executives. Their salaries needs to get in line with the 90%. Talk about job creators, pay the 90% a decent salary and jobs would be created. The greedy pigs at the top does not create jobs.

Warpy

(111,316 posts)
4. Tie it to the median wage of non managerial workers
Sun Feb 10, 2013, 09:15 PM
Feb 2013

It's one way to get wages raised to a livable level if the CEO wants a new yacht.

BODs need to be restricted to people who will sit on the board of that company, only, and no one who is an executive at another company is permitted to serve on a board. That would help, too, by reducing the incestuous nature of these corporate boards.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Scruffy and the Stuff...