CEO's in America are making 100-300times their average employees sallaries for doing considerably less work. So why is there no law that says CEO's can't make 30 times or more than their median employees income?
Wouldn't a law like this want CEO's to pay their employees more so they could make more?
why don't you ask them to hand over the MOP while you're at it? what a silly question
kek also don´t forget about asking them to hand over their toothbrush nicely
You might as well be sending them to the gulags.
because ameritards are classcucked to oblivion
I could see multiple loopholes, and if you are literally wondering why, there is no popular support.
OP you must realize that the bourgeoisie will never willingly give up their power, even if it was in their best interest to do so.
You cannot consort with porky.
The lolitarians and reactionaries generally think massive income inequality is a good thing and that these glorious capitalist ubermensch deserve to live like kings as the country falls apart around them (as long as the capitalist in question is white, of course)
burger king isn't nearly as popular in europe as it is in america so this comparison doesn't work, a better analogy would be between some sort of tradesmen
Sounds like "soc"dem shit desu. What about 1 time?
Burger king, McD, KFC, doesn't matter. That is the rough pay and benefits you get, no matter what job you do in DK, as a low wage worker.
user are you retarded, it's the entire corporate structure. It's not just CEOs it's also vice presidents, corporate managers, subdivision presidents and so on. they're all milking it in a massive scam
Not saying the salaries are justified, but that's bullshit. CEOs work much harder than your average employee.
It's true. If you want to go against unjustified salaries in relation to labor go against the members of the supervisory board.
Whining about the manager salaries is the worst kind of vulgar left-populism, a salary cap would actually even increase profits for the shareholders, and it's also toxic moralism. The capitalist manager is subjected to the reproduction of capital like everybody else.
CEOs work like 100 hours a week at a high-stress job. Retarded high schoolers like you are why the left can't be taken seriously.
Please do the left a favor and kill yourselves. Corporate shilling is unacceptable.
They work purely for shareholders and/or themselves and have an antagonistic relationship with their employees. Whatever work they do has no value to society and thus they deserve to be mocked and ultimately removed from any state of being which allows them to exploit others.
you are assuming that such a law could not only pass through all the committee bullshit and budget bullshit, go on to pass in in both chambers of congress, and be signed into law. undoubtedly it would be immediately challenged as unconsitutional under the 5th amendment. the supreme court is GOP majority.
the game is set up to be lost from the start. let’s not play their game.
You do realize the slaves didn't build the pyramids and Egypt had basically the first command economy right?
No cases of "I was talking with someone for two hours while playing golf on a private course with them, that's two hours of work!"
SOURCES: FORBES USATODAY
go back to Holla Forums you faggot
if you aren't going to read a book or even remotely learn how our society works and just how bad labor is being exploited by porky then kill yourself
If you bring in a law preventing CEOs from earning a certain amount more than their employees, they'll find a loophole and hire lawyers to eternally ward off the tax office.
If you have CEOs who also own the company, you have a shitty economic system that allows them to exploit the people working for their company.
Both workers and managers work for the maximization of surplus value in capitalism. There is no difference.
Rich people make the laws.
ceos don't work 100 hours/week and their job isn't THAT stressful as you put it. ceos spend a lot of time travelling and at meetings.
being able to manage one or more production facalities in an efficient manner demands a number of different skills plus all responsibility lies on the ceo at the end of the day, i.e. he gets blamed if things to go as intended. really talented managers such as steve jobs are rare. don't shit on what ceos do if you don't know it, their work deserves as much respect as the work of say a main coder who develops algorithms or the guy who works 8h/day on an assembly line. they DO work and their job isn't easy. whats more, don't forget that they are *forced* to act like capitalists because the environment (capitalism) warrants it, they aren't neccessarily bad people who intend to fuck over workers. there ARE piece of shit types though, but they usually work for consulting firms, are shareholders or literally make a living off hating workers by working for neocon think tanks. consider that even under communism ceos would exist in one form or another, however they wouldn't be forced to fuck over other workers in order to generate more profit anymore.
demand more pay for the median employees. that is the real problem there. a wage cap for ceos would change absolutely nothing for those that earn not enough to lead a decent life from their main income.
They don't need a minimum wage because they have strong unions. We don't have strong unions in the US, so we need a minimum wage - otherwise employers would pay low skill labor scraps.
Managers aren't capitalists. Idk why this meme is a thing. Absentee ownership of property is the issue. And CEO's don't actually necessarily own the company.
They worked harder than you creating the company so they deserve to have all the money because their the boss, and this should motivate you to do even harder work because thats how it works and I heard it on JRE, and Adam carolla's show
That used to be the case, but after the late sixties the federal reserve stopped increasing the minimum wage relative to worker productivity.
"They deserve their millions." t. my grandma
Why is it an issue? There's nothing inherently wrong with passive income. Anyone can earn passive income. Say I own a building. I turn it into a restaurant and I pay people to work there. At what point did anyone gain the right to steal my building? Public property vs private property, means of production vs wealth, I get that you have a bunch of slang that I'm supposed to read about while I'm banned, but I don't see how any of that nonsense justifies you stealing my shit. These are made up distinctions. What, you can steal a factory but not a house? If I can't own a factory, then I can't own a house, because real ownership means I can control what I use it for. Obviously if I'm trying to turn my house into a rape dungeon then the community should intervene, but a sweatshop is a voluntary exchange.