Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
613
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

613 Views
Message 11 of 137

@rk9152 wrote:

 

Back to the issue. It isn't whether or not workers' co-ops exist and can work. It is the definition of workers' co-ops for example, should a CEO make 100 times the workers or 10 times or the same?  Then there is the issue of how the co-op is created - for example, is it O.K. for the government to either created it or convert an existing business to a workers' co-op?


Shouldn't the definition be based on what already exists in the real world?  I use National Dairy Farmers because it is the largets U.S. co-op and I can remember it's name.  

 

The co-op, partnership, or employee owned stock corporation would all decide their CEO's pay based on the factors important to the owner's. Just like any General Motors, for instance.  Now that companies are required to report all reimbursement to their CEO's, it will either drop or not but the owners/Stockholders now know what they are paying.  Plus, this is not part of the conversation. If you want to talk salary comparisons, we should start a new thread. 

 

I don't know how Conservatives feel about taking a company away from its owners but Democrats and particularly Progressives would be the first to call that illegal and immoral. As I said, I can't speak for Conservatives. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
613
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
622
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

622 Views
Message 12 of 137

@jimc91 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:


You are comparing apples and oranges.  Publix CEO does not make 335 times the front line workers pay, it is probably less than 100 times.  This is an old article comparing Publix CEO pay to other companies.

 

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-05-08/business/os-cfb-kassab-publix-ceo-paid-less-20110508_...


@sp362

 

You make an interesting point here.  Just curious, what is an acceptable ratio for CEO pay? 50, 100, 200, 300.

 

Also I would ask, Who gets to determine what is acceptable?

 

 


I already discussed that earlier in the thread.  Our executives are overpaid in comparison to other countries.  Also, when you go back in history, in 1965 the ratio of CEO to worker pay was about 20 to 1.  Where it is now, is just a ridiculous level.  Either industries can choose to police themselves, or it will be up to Congress to decide what is fair and do it for them.

Look no further than Delta Airlines recent move increasing their compensation for bumping a passenger.  While some of that is for PR purposes, I think it was also done hoping that Congress does not step in and tell them what they have to do.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
622
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
614
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

614 Views
Message 13 of 137

@sp362 wrote:


You are comparing apples and oranges.  Publix CEO does not make 335 times the front line workers pay, it is probably less than 100 times.  This is an old article comparing Publix CEO pay to other companies.

 

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-05-08/business/os-cfb-kassab-publix-ceo-paid-less-20110508_...


@sp362

 

You make an interesting point here.  Just curious, what is an acceptable ratio for CEO pay? 50, 100, 200, 300.

 

Also I would ask, Who gets to determine what is acceptable?

 

 

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
614
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
612
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

612 Views
Message 14 of 137

@Olderscout66 wrote:

You reject the reality of the absolute connection between TMR and worker compensation because you find reality inconvenient inside the Republibubble. That being the case, why did you ask what the "right" compensation for a CEO would be?

 

Here's how you determine the likelyhood two everts are connected.

If you have a system where two factors are changing in "lock-step" - like productivity increases and worker wages - for 30 years, and suddenly that bond is broken, you need to find what else changed. In this case, the ONLY factor that changed was the TMR effecting the ones dividing the profits.

 

Neither automation nor outsourcing has any influence on the workers who remain AFTER those factors have reduced the size of the labor force, and it is the wages of the people remaining that have stagnated.

 

Conclusion - the change in the distribtuion of profits observed in the change in CEO-worker compensation is caused by the change in TMR.

 

What worker owned business (ESOP) do you have in mind that saw the same change in CEO-worker compensation as the average for stockholder owned businesses?

 

FOCUS! It helps clarify your vision.


I just didn't understand why you were going off topic and back to the usual "Reagan taxscam" and "Republibubble". I really thought that the idea of no bosses, no CEOs, no stockholders would appeal to you . I thought that the idea of the workers getting all of the yield from their efforts would hit a responsive note with you. Why are you leaving those obviously attractive possibilities and straying off to the same old themes?

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
612
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
605
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

605 Views
Message 15 of 137

You reject the reality of the absolute connection between TMR and worker compensation because you find reality inconvenient inside the Republibubble. That being the case, why did you ask what the "right" compensation for a CEO would be?

 

Here's how you determine the likelyhood two everts are connected.

If you have a system where two factors are changing in "lock-step" - like productivity increases and worker wages - for 30 years, and suddenly that bond is broken, you need to find what else changed. In this case, the ONLY factor that changed was the TMR effecting the ones dividing the profits.

 

Neither automation nor outsourcing has any influence on the workers who remain AFTER those factors have reduced the size of the labor force, and it is the wages of the people remaining that have stagnated.

 

Conclusion - the change in the distribtuion of profits observed in the change in CEO-worker compensation is caused by the change in TMR.

 

What worker owned business (ESOP) do you have in mind that saw the same change in CEO-worker compensation as the average for stockholder owned businesses?

 

FOCUS! It helps clarify your vision.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
605
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
603
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

603 Views
Message 16 of 137

@Olderscout66 wrote:

We solved the problem of "how much is enough" for CEO pay in 1936 and it worked like a charm for 30 years. Then LBJ decided to try and get Republicans to support his worthless War in Vietnam and screwed the pooch by dropping the TMR from 91% to 70%, and Reagan completed the screwing by slashing the TMR to 28%.

 

The only way to keep the ones who get to divide the profits from keeping it all to themselves is to make sure they cannot keep what they give to themselves. While the TMR was over 70%, the workers received 96% of the PRODUCTIVITY gains they gave the company. When the rate dropped to below 40%, the workers got less than 9% of the productivity gains, and ALL of the difference went to Management compensation (stockholder share dropped half a percent as well)

 

Anybody out there got a better solution?


Well, one solution might be to stay on topic. TMR has no relationship to worker owned businesses.

 

Why not start a topic about that 1936 perfect tax rate. Then you can explain how taxing the hated 1%ers exorbitantly makes them pay their employees more and you can also substantiate your numbers there.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
603
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
608
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

608 Views
Message 17 of 137

We solved the problem of "how much is enough" for CEO pay in 1936 and it worked like a charm for 30 years. Then LBJ decided to try and get Republicans to support his worthless War in Vietnam and screwed the pooch by dropping the TMR from 91% to 70%, and Reagan completed the screwing by slashing the TMR to 28%.

 

In 1965, the last year of the Eisenhower tax rates, the ratio of CEO to Worker compensation was 20 to 1. By 1978 the gap had grown to 30 to 1. In 1995 after a decade of the Reagan taxscam, it was 127 to 1 and today it's 354 to 1. Please remember, these rations only apply to the workers who still have jobs, so the fact many were outsourced or replaced by automation is totally irrelivant to the discussion.

 

The only way to keep the ones who get to divide the profits from keeping it all to themselves is to make sure they cannot keep what they give to themselves. While the TMR was over 70%, the workers received 96% of the PRODUCTIVITY gains they gave the company. When the rate dropped to below 40%, the workers got less than 9% of the productivity gains, and ALL of the difference went to Management compensation (stockholder share dropped half a percent as well).

 

Everyone wants to focus on CEO v worker compensation, but that is just the tip of the Fascist iceburg that threatens to sink the Middle Class. Think: If the CEO got a 20% raise, how much did his next tier of deputies get? The lalyer below them? The 3d tier? Republicans play games and show how all the CEO pay would not make much difference if distributed to all the workers, but it's MANAGEMENT pay that has taken all the money earned from worker productivity increases, not JUST the one person at the top. Also, we're taling about PROFITS, so the cost of the machines that helped increase the productivity have already been paid for.

 

If we repeal the Reagan taxscam, the ones dividing the pie can either give the productivity gains to the Workers or the Government. They hate the workers, but they hate Government more, so the increases will once again go to those who earned it. There will be a period of adjustment as management frantically looks for ways to continue to keep it all for themeselves, so definitions of "taxable income" will need some fine tuning, but should eventually return to around the 30-1 ratio, making CEO pay closer to $1.7M/year than the current $16M/year, but no Executives will be harmed because they currently get by only consuming a tiny fraction of their income.

 

Anybody out there got a better solution?

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
608
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
598
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

598 Views
Message 18 of 137

@pc6063 wrote:

Co-ops have been around forever and have been successful forever this is just a crazy topic that really has little or no point thst  I can see.  Why argue about something we know exist and something that we know does well?


A valid question. Based on those words, if there is nothing there to talk about, why are you arguing?

 

Back to the issue. It isn't whether or not workers' co-ops exist and can work. It is the definition of workers' co-ops for example, should a CEO make 100 times the workers or 10 times or the same?  Then there is the issue of how the co-op is created - for example, is it O.K. for the government to either created it or convert an existing business to a workers' co-op?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
598
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
595
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

595 Views
Message 19 of 137

@sp362 wrote:


You are comparing apples and oranges.  Publix CEO does not make 335 times the front line workers pay, it is probably less than 100 times.  This is an old article comparing Publix CEO pay to other companies.

 

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2011-05-08/business/os-cfb-kassab-publix-ceo-paid-less-20110508_...


There is a concept that says the workers should receive ALL of the results of their efforts. Granted, that is an extreme held only by the most extreme of class warfare wagers.

 

But, what is the correct number? It is yet to be determined so what principle do you think should apply?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
595
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
610
Views

Re: Acme Widget Corp.

610 Views
Message 20 of 137

Co-ops have been around forever and have been successful forever this is just a crazy topic that really has little or no point thst  I can see.  Why argue about something we know exist and something that we know does well?

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
610
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Now until February 11, play this classic game online at AARP. Get in the game and play now.


jeopardy for aarp logo

Top Authors