That’s never getting fixed through voting. Only violence will change things. These cunts seem to forget that once we have nothing left to lose, they have EVERYTHING to lose.
Well, here I go clubbing again.
CEO(L) clubbing?
Clever clogs.
Well, if the government heavily taxed everything above like 100 million $$$, then the money would flow back into the economy, which it obviously doesn’t while being sat on by pathologic hoarders.
the most obedient and loyal slaves are the ones who think they’re completely free
People should push for ballot initiatives in the half of US states where citizens can practice direct democracy.
Legislators have simply been refusing to implement winning initiatives.
I am actually still not sure why it isn’t fixed through voting. And I mean shareholder-voting, not public voting.
But after things like Elon Musk’s compensation package getting approved (again) it cleared won’t work through that mechanism either.
Why would it be fixed through shareholder voting? Most employees aren’t represented in those votes. The major shareholders have fundamentally different interests that are opposed to the interests of the employees. If employees were a majority shareholder, then that could work, but that’s almost never the case.
My comment was aimed more towards the excessive CEO pay, not the stagnation in worker’s pay.
Probably not the best source (just one of the first Google results), but as an example, if I read something like this:
How much money did Marissa Mayer make while running Yahoo? During her five years at Yahoo, from 2012 to 2017, Marissa’s total compensation, including salary, stock, and bonuses, was $405 million. Verizon acquired Yahoo for a little over $4 billion in 2016. Marissa earned roughly $120 million from the acquisition through a mix of bonuses, accelerated stock options and salary. For example, she was paid a onetime bonus of $23,011,325 once the Verizon acquisition was finalized.
Then it seems to me like the shareholders somehow got the short end, despite being the ones with the power to make changes.
Because shareholders can pay some armed thugs to keep them safe from the dirty plebs, which is cheaper than paying said plebs decent wages
no, half of your country votes for trump. You have absolutely no right to complain about voting not working or calling for violence.
Again, half of your country strongly disagrees with you and you suggest violence? No wonder your democracy is so bleak.
Your comment is partially correct, but not totally. 63% of republican voters want to increase taxes on the wealthy and large corporations. Reoublican voters are just very stupid and are easily convinced to vote against their own interests because you can easily scare them with some “other” that isn’t a threat.
It’s even worse than that. The Republican side is full of all the gun enthusiasts. In a civil war I don’t like the “north’s” chances this time around.
Not to mention all the fighter jets, bombers, tanks, and drones the military has.
That’s another point lemmy warriors don’t consider. US is getting closer to a civil war no matter which side wins the elections. And, I got some news for you lemmy, you will lose that war and fast.
We should cut their pay.
Just a bit off the top, please
Best I can do is 98% off the top.
Pay raise means jack all for ordinary people. Our buying power went down a lot more than 24%.
This does seem to be adjusting for inflation; according to one of the sources they cited:
From 1979 to 2020, net productivity rose 61.8%, while the hourly pay of typical workers grew far slower—increasing only 17.5% over four decades (after adjusting for inflation).
That said I think there’s some problems with how inflation is calculated, and the implications of the distribution of total ownership of wealth isn’t really mitigated by increasing affordability of consumer goods.
So we should be paid what, 3x more? Or am I too reductive? I’m trying to understand how much we SHOULD be getting then (in 2020 btw), and now more actually, as shit got expensive af thru Covid and is still lingering today.
Dunno, not sure there’s a way to conclusively pick an amount that’s “fair” since any metrics for that are arbitrary. Just going by productivity vs wages and the premise that what people were paid in 1979 was what they “should” be paid given that ratio, you could say 3x, but there’s a lot of assumptions there. To me the bigger story seems to be the ongoing trend of how capital keeps accumulating capital, and the share of the pie owned by regular people continues to decrease regardless of their contributions, and what that might mean for our future.
Existential crisis: Activated
And here we have the root cause of every other problem that plagues the US - the entire nation, socially, politically and even psychologically, has been warped towards the sole purpose of pouring as much wealth as possible into the pockets of a relative few.
Always has been.
The United States was founded by land owning business owners who didn’t want to pay taxes that didn’t benefit them directly (partially justified because of what it was for) who owned slaves and committed genocide to expand territory. The most venerated citizens are those that built their wealth by ruining the lives of their workers, abusing the patent system, and gangsters. Today’s hustle culture is just the current trend of tricking the poor into working 24 hours a day since we only get to have legal forced slavery in prisons.
US culture has always been about the centralization of weath.
That’s human history. The wealth gets pulled towards a small elite because king, high priest or banker. It reaches a peak and then there is a revolution, the debt records are burned and the land is redistributed. Measures are out in place to prevent wealth concentration and the new elite starts chipping away at the measures. Rinse and repeat.
We know this but always choose to ignore the dynamic.
It’s understandable republicans ignore the obvious cause, that’s what they do, just deny reality.
But it really fucking sucks Dem leadership does the same thing. There’s Bernie, AOC, a handfull of other progressives that will openly say this is the problem, but a “moderate” won’t say they’re the problem.
We need to take the party back to where it was 80 years ago when FDR pushed to limit pay to fight wealth inequality.
Moderates stopped him back then just like they did for universal healthcare tho. So 80+ years later we’re still fighting for it.
The regime hates the plebs… ruling 101
No! It’s the browns and the Jews and the gays and them book learned women! No 99%!
Sounds fair to me. I keep reading every year that the super-rich get ever richer, so these CEOs have clearly done their job. Exploit everything and everyone to make their billionaire masters richer.
As it should. They bring so much value. /s
We need to rise up and topple this gd system.
Yeah but they do 1,085% more work. /s
I wish I could say they are liable for the company or they have to make stressful decisions. Except, nope and nope. If they ever were, that’s the first thing they gutted from the judicial system. Then by being rich and immune to criminal prosecution what sorts of things would stress you out?
It’s really a wonder that Martin Shkrelli got toasted so badly. Definitely new money and he definitely pissed off some people he wasn’t suppose to. Remember folks, scam all the poors you want but don’t kick up any dirt on the kings shoes.
Remember this
And yet most of population is still bootlicking.
Gonna need to see 10000% to get these people to understand I guess
For any EU citizen I can recommend to sign the official petition to the European Commission — so that billionaires can finally contribute their fair share to society: https://www.tax-the-rich.eu
WTF happened in the 1970s?
Neoliberalism
Are you actually referring to 1971?
Kill them, obvious answer.
Median household income has increased over 400% in that period.
