Kelvin's Ferret wrote:This is why CEOs and other execs tend to come from a small in-group of people and the skills and experience required is less tangible than certain other well paid, highly skilled roles i.e. you would expect a Consultant Surgeon to be a qualified doctor, with many years of certified training and experience in their specialist field, whereas CEOs and executives may not actually have any specialist skills and experience in their industry and instead have more opaque credentials where their exact contribution is harder to quantify.
I get that to an extent - but in the cutthroat world of private business, if the CEO doesn't have the skills and experience required and therefore doesn't deliver the results the stakeholders you refer to demand, he or she is moved on; with significantly more alacrity than would happen in the public sector.
So whilst I take your point that exec skillsets are not as immediately quantifiable - results are, and they live or die by those results.
I don't necessarily recognise the covert world of interchangeable CEO's you allude to though; to my knowledge - firsthand - that type of appointment is handled by specialist recruiters, and they fish in a large pond; albeit they're not using Indeed or Facebook to source candidates, which is entirely appropriate.
King Street Cat wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/worlds-richest-1-per-cent-richer-wealth-poor-three-charts-graphics-oxfam-a7529396.html
At this rate there'll be one person standing at the end with all the money and the rest will be dead.
That will only happen when the mega-rich have taught their robots to consume the tat they peddle. At that point people become dispensible.
King Street Cat wrote:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/worlds-richest-1-per-cent-richer-wealth-poor-three-charts-graphics-oxfam-a7529396.html
At this rate there'll be one person standing at the end with all the money and the rest will be dead.
Very few wealthy people have a social conscience with most only being driven by the desire to be wealthier than their peers.
Although Corbyn's idea of an upper wage limit may, in some ways, sound sensible, it will never happen and sadly, people end up like commodities and if a few end up "worn out", they are easily replaced.
Nobody would mind if someone worked twice as hard as the next man and was paid twice as much. However, wealth is often gained by exploiting others and yet we are encouraged to look up to these people and admire their status.
wrencat1873 wrote:However, wealth is often gained by exploiting others and yet we are encouraged to look up to these people and admire their status.
I think people are starting to wise up to the 'wealth creators' lie they've been fed for so long, especially now they realise they're not benefitting from the wealth created and are merely scrabbling around for scraps.
"Back home we got a taxidermy man. He gonna have a heart attack when he see what I brung him."
wrencat1873 wrote:Very few wealthy people have a social conscience with most only being driven by the desire to be wealthier than their peers.
Although Corbyn's idea of an upper wage limit may, in some ways, sound sensible, it will never happen and sadly, people end up like commodities and if a few end up "worn out", they are easily replaced.
Nobody would mind if someone worked twice as hard as the next man and was paid twice as much. However, wealth is often gained by exploiting others and yet we are encouraged to look up to these people and admire their status.
I think we will see a return to progressive tax rates in future. Service sector jobs are starting to see the job losses due to innovation that the manufac
wrencat1873 wrote:Very few wealthy people have a social conscience with most only being driven by the desire to be wealthier than their peers.
Although Corbyn's idea of an upper wage limit may, in some ways, sound sensible, it will never happen and sadly, people end up like commodities and if a few end up "worn out", they are easily replaced.
Nobody would mind if someone worked twice as hard as the next man and was paid twice as much. However, wealth is often gained by exploiting others and yet we are encouraged to look up to these people and admire their status.
I think we will see a return to progressive tax rates in future. Service sector jobs are starting to see the job losses due to innovation that the manufacturing sectors and agricultural sectors saw in times of old. Those job losses will be on a large scale in the next few years. As a result governments will need to raise taxes to fund education / training to make people fit for those jobs that are available in the economy and also to stave off civil unrest. Governments cannot raise money by borrowing indefinitely and soon they will need to raise via taxing multinational companies and those individuals with good incomes.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... says-study This is an interesting read on this topic. Share price, while not a perfect reflection of company performance, is the best approximation we have. The average pay package of a FTSE 350 CEO increased 82% from 2001 to 2014. The return on invested capital? Less than 1%.
I disagree with the idea of a maximum wage. The reason for a minimum wage is so that people can survive (in theory) off what they earn. There's no such justification applicable to a maximum wage.
However, this isn't to say that inequality isn't an issue, particularly when regressive taxes like VAT have been increased since the Conservatives came to power. We need to do more in terms of progressive taxation as inequality has high negative external costs, for example the implications for mental and physical health. Poorer people also have a higher propensity to consume and also a lower propensity to import, both of which are good things for the economy.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... says-study This is an interesting read on this topic. Share price, while not a perfect reflection of company performance, is the best approximation we have. The average pay package of a FTSE 350 CEO increased 82% from 2001 to 2014. The return on invested capital? Less than 1%.
I disagree with the idea of a maximum wage. The reason for a minimum wage is so that people can survive (in theory) off what they earn. There's no such justification applicable to a maximum wage.
However, this isn't to say that inequality isn't an issue, particularly when regressive taxes like VAT have been increased since the Conservatives came to power. We need to do more in terms of progressive taxation as inequality has high negative external costs, for example the implications for mental and physical health. Poorer people also have a higher propensity to consume and also a lower propensity to import, both of which are good things for the economy.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 135 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
