Should there be a maximum wage, as in percent earnings a CEO can make more than the company's average wage?

Question

~Eddie L; HSD-O~ (below) Based on their performance, congress owes me big time... good point!

Jeff M (below) Agreed. Unfortunately the water is now tainted and the road to it has been booby trapped by corporate lobbyists.

Ken C (below) Correct. They are tied to the stock, NOT the employees. Therefore they fire thousands of employees to increase quarterly earnings. They don't care about long term effects. this is why many Japanese products out perform US products hands down.

Answer 1

You mean by order of the government? No. If stockholders decide they want to do that then it is fine.

Answer 2

90% of an Executives wage is tied to the performance of the stock on the company.
When you hear a CEO geting a $70,000,000 income, that would usually consist of $7,000,000 in Salary and $63,000,000 woth of Stock Options. The value of those options is come to under a formula known as the "Balck/Sholes value (The two Economists )
Needless to say, if the stock does not go up in value, that $63,000,000 = exactly $0.
Also, as a Stock Option, it is always taxed at the Highest Income Tax possible, as by definition it always has to be considered Short Term, upon cashing them in.

Chi-Good answer....But you really think layoffs are the reason we can't make a decent affordable car in this country? Or corporate profits? Maybe some or part.
Unions, ane another HUGE part of the problem too.
Should we base employees compensation on Stock Performance???

Answer 3

I find it interesting that some people worry about the salaries of the CEO of some of our larger corps.but at the same time they don't find anything wrong with a sports figure being paid more in a year than we could make in a life time. If one wants to complain about being over paid then go after the politicians in DC.

Answer 4

earnings caps? No. besides the shown fact that they seem to artwork in the activities worldwide. individuals thrive on opposition. I see the stronger subject with our tax device. the prosperous pays extreme priced lawyer's and accountant's and shall we not forget approximately lobbyists to verify they save what they make, that's the place I see the subject. Our device needs to cut back off the tax breaks thoroughly after someone makes say $5 million a 365 days. enable them to pay the completed volume on what's left. that would go away them plenty to invest or donate to a third worldwide united states in the event that they choose for. A single person in this united states pays a minimum of 35% of their pay in taxes. Our government needs to maintain our money right here in u.s.. end giving different worldwide places like Israel 50 million a 365 days (or in spite of they supply them, that's adequate to pay for the detrimental to have childcare for years so as that they are in a position to artwork and pay taxes). that's not merely Israel we supply plenty money away to different worldwide places and why, to maintain worldwide peace, to maintain their worldwide places in the eco-friendly? I even have not something against those worldwide places and desire they thrive merely like us, yet why could or not that's on the backs persons? Why, as quickly as we play worldwide police besides (which i don't consider). One final factor, the detrimental have a great sort of possibilities to attend college there are maximum of furnish their isn't any excuse for not attending different than for their ecosystem and the choose for to pass. that's persons that have mother and father that artwork, those midsection type young ones that could desire to combat teeth and nail to get there. A relatives that makes $50 - 60,000 a 365 days, that's just about impossible for them to attend.

Answer 5

No, I don't think the government should go that far, but in saying that, I do believe there's something wrong when an CEO gets a 400 million $ retirement package while another person's pension plan gets raided or gets laid off just before retirement. I don't think we should just sit on our hands and say "oh well that's business". I know that's the stance a lot of corporations would like you to take.

Answer 6

I cannot seem to put my finger on the Article in the Constitution where the Federal Government was given the authority to dictate wages or otherwise interfere in the process of a legal private contractual agreement.

Answer 7

The boards of directors make the decisions regarding CEO salaries but I think that shareholders are beginning to wake up to the excesses and are starting to request more input.

Answer 8

Technically, CEOs earn salaries, bonuses, and other forms of compensation that are not wages, FWIW.

CEOs are hired like other employees. There are good CEOs and great CEOs and not-so-good CEOs, and if your company wants a great one, they have to pay a lot, because there really aren't many people out there with the kind of leadership skills and overwhelming drive and hubris it takes to run a big corporation.

Answer 9

When I was young I worked in variuos low paying jobs. When I wised up I did what it took to better myself. In America people are free to do the same. If we create an environment where everyone has the same opportunity then it's up to the individual. "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink" comes to mind.

Answer 10

These CEO's, such as Tyco and Enron, will be dealt with in due time, as will all corrupt "captains of industry". None of these could drive their wealth through a needle's eye.

Answer 11

In Japan they make 2-2.5 x the average worker bee. I think a CEO should get a percentage of what the company makes.