7 7

I agree. The pay of top bosses should indeed be linked to the pay of their normal workers.


By Petter8
Actions Follow Post Like

Post a comment Add Source Add Photo

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account


Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.


you should get what you earn

Precisely. Not some overinflated sum that bears no relationship to your worth.

@Petter ants termites have society sewn up. they all get what they need.


The person who risks (bankruptcy and loosing the money it takes to start a business) gets the reward. Just because Bill Gates has lots of money doesnt give you the right to his money, or him yours. This is America not China

This isn't about entrepreneurs. It's about the top managers of large public companies, who award themselves huge pay packets.

@Petter why does ownership and running it make a difference? Why do you get to dictate someone elses business? Sounds like jealousy not fairness

@Renickulous So you think it's fine for boards to award managers huge salaries and bonuses, even when the company is faring badly and shareholders' meetings have indicated their displeasure at the disproportionate remuneration packages?

@Petter I don't know alot about business, but yes if someone wants to run their business into the ground they can. Why should everyone get a say in how someone else runs their business? How much of their money do you deserve?

@Renickulous It is NOT "their" business. It is owned by hundreds of shareholders, (or it is parastatal.)
Who owns the Shell oil company? The Royal Mail in England? There is no individual person or family. These are publicly quoted companies, where ownership is spread amongst shareholders. If one person hold 51% of the shares then that person technically owns the company, but that is rare.
So when the boss earns $10,000 per hour, whilst a thousand employees receive minimum wages to compensate for it, something is seriously wrong.

@Petter as long as noones right are violated why does his salary matter?

@Renickulous When a company is underperforming, yet the bosses are giving themselves raises whilst keeping down the wages of employees and paying very little dividend to shareholders, then there is something morally wrong. Keep in mind, also, that the greatest category of shareholders comprises pension funds. So if you have a pension arrangement somewhere, these bosses are living extravagantly at your expense.

@Petter keeping wages down? Average household income has increased for a very long time. Just because people make more than others doesn't mean theres a fault. Why should someone who has zero vested interest and won't suffer the consequences get to decide how much I pay an employee?

@Renickulous Zero vested interest? You have no idea!
Average household income may be rising, but average household DISPOSABLE income is dropping. You are obviously simply arguing for the sake of argument, not from any conviction.

@Petter I'm not talking about you, in general(about not having a vested interest in others work). So household income and quality of life has gone up but because we don't have extra money on top of it we need to regulate how much a citizen can make?


Yes, time to start demanding it.

Jolanta Level 8 Mar 25, 2019



The CEO of Starbucks makes $10,000 an hour...and yet refuses to pay at least $15 an hour for his slave employees


I agree!

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text 'q:318157'.
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content read full disclaimer.
  • is a non-profit community for atheists, agnostics, humanists, freethinkers, skeptics and others!