Quote:
Originally Posted by graciegirl
I don't understand some posters are so against big companies and big business.
Big business can buy things in bulk and lower operating costs. Big business is able to do what small business can't do; save consumers money and operate at a number of locations. Why do people on the political left malign this type of business operations over and over. It just looks to me like they are jealous of the big bucks that CEO's make.
Business is business. So many posters expect a business to hand over an advantage, like handing the football to the opposing team.
WHY is it WRONG for a CEO to make big bucks?? WHAT does giving to charity have anything to do with this discussion?
It just sounds like people talking who have always been employed by the government or a school or a non profit.
I really don't understand why people constantly post on Facebook things that put down large corporations. I have unfriended several people because I grow tired of hearing it.
Not all big business are ethical, but not all big business is unethical. It is the same with people of modest means. When you are running a company you use plans to make the company expand, increase profit and employ more people and make more money for yourself. That is how it works.
If a person is successful and makes a lot of money working for large corporations or running large corporation does not mean he or she is not conscious or helpful of others. Nor does it mean that a person of modest means is kind and helpful of others.
AND ED. We all know Rags is Bucco. He has discussed this. There are other posters on here with two screen names too.
|
I can't tell for sure, but you seem to be scolding me, so I'll respond. So are you saying that someone who has only been employed by government, school, or non profit can't understand these economic issues like you? BTW I was employed by schools for fourteen years but spent 25 years working for mega corporations FWIW. I NEVER stated CEOS on the whole were overpaid, I said some of them seemed to get paid a lot even though they are not producing. The point of the article I linked was that the ratio of CEO comp to average employee comp has skyrocketed over the last twenty years, I left it to the reader to judge if that was good or bad. As far as the study only covering 350 companies there are two points that would make sense to me, 1. Those companies employ a massive amount of the workforce, and 2. The data is readily available on those companies. For those that say all companies should be used to get a ratio of five to one, I would point out the following.
There are over 27.7 million companies operating in the U.S.
21.7 M of those companies have no employees ( more than 75% have no ratio)
Of the remaining 6 M, 3.7 M have 1-4 employees, and 1 M have 5-9 employees.
In other words the vast majority of businesses are eithe sole proprietors with zero employees or mom and pop businesses with fewer than ten employees, which really don't have a CEO.
Statistics about Business Size (including Small Business) from the U.S. Census Bureau
The only conclusion that I drew from the study I linked was that since the average worker has lost buying power over the last twenty years, maybe the average workers comp should be rising commensurately with the CEOs when these corporations succeed.
Also, unfriending people on Facebook because they share certain things that don't fit your worldview is troubling to me. I have friends of all persuasions, some of whom post things I find disgusting, but have never unfriended them. I like to see what everyone is talking about whether I agree or disagree.