Here's another inconvenient study:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2014/06/16/the-highest-paid-ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/#760754d7e329
"The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says"
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
4
How rich is rich enough?
7
@Robert Happ: My experience with the rich are that they grieve deeply when they realize that someone somewhere has more than they do. They are all about keeping score. The rich will kill for another 75¢. And people keep electing them to office (then complain that the government doesn't understand working people).
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
4
All this isn't that strange.
Corporations have replaced governments, which is why so many countries (mine included) can be led by elected halfwit sock puppets.
It stands to reason that the new monarchs would reward themselves with the tribute of the peasants.
And the peasants are happy to let them have it.
9
Immigrants doing menial work in 1950s. Son earns BA and teaches HS. Grandson with a BA is now VP at major company, heading to become CEO. Working hard, building for the common good; will probably earn millions.
THIS is why the US is still a magnet for the "wretched refuse" (sic!) of the world. Why would we change ?
2
Few can become CEO of a major company no matter how hard they work. Congratulations. The median outcome is what matters, not the heartwarming exception. Surely someone studies this.
6
I once worked for a large corporation, where I was asked to draft a missive from the CEO to the troops that everyone would be tightening their belts and raises would likely be limited. Several months later, the proxy was filed and it showed the top five people getting double-digit annual increases.
This type of story is not new.
80
This “cult of personality” is part and parcel of America’s belief in big business, corporations, as the engine of everything good. And rather than dig a little deeper, it’s easier to believe in the magic of CEOs.
26
Hey, Mark Hurd did a fine job looting and crippling Hewlett Packard! Maybe the Oracle board expects he'll do the same for them.
6
An income cap of $3 million / year. Anything beyond that is taxed 100% and goes back into the public pot until everyone is fed, housed, educated and employed with healthcare. Until our infrastructure is strong. Until our environment is clean. Until our diseases have been cured.
Inane and naive, but you get the idea. Absolutely obscene and unacceptable that people are being paid tens of millions of dollars per year while so many of our people are so compromised, with education and human services so insufficient.
82
@James
70% would work if there was a reason, say to eliminate the National Debt.
70% on Income of any and all types over $10 million annually until the National Debt is a Surplus of 10% of the amount that the Debt was when the 70% rate takes effect.
After three years of Surpluses then the rate drops to 50% for three year then it drops to 30% for 3 years and as long as the Surpluses continue the rate drops to 20% UNLESS THOSE SURPLUSES COME BACK and then the rate shoots back up to 70% for a minimum of 3 years and the decreases take another 6 years minimum.
High net worth individuals would be angry but they would work hard to make sure Congreases eliminated that Debt.
12
Whose money is it? Certainly not these mediocrities. Shareholders need to rise up and take control of these ridiculous mini-kingdoms.
9
@GMooG
True.
It belongs to the people who do all the work.
5
What is incomprehensible is that David Zaslav’s pay has increased exponentially, while his company’s performance has fallen every year for five years running. He is literally failing, up—into the stratosphere.
And how on earth is the CEO of Discovery paid more than Bob Iger and Tim Cook?!
Companies like Amazon that pay no corporate taxes; CEO’s whose pay outstrips an average worker’s by multiple factors of ten, all while they attenuate work forces to keep the wealth in the hands of the feudal few... it is all so shameless; grossly distorted; and wrong.
181
@Daphne Even more lurid: divide Zaslav’s pay and he makes $500K a day. A DAY! He makes more in ONE DAY than his average salaried worker makes in 6 YEARS...
34
@Sammy Azalea Invest it in what, exactly? Stock buybacks, by and large. Further enriching those companies and themselves but hardly radiating investment out into the greater economy—or even raising the wages of their own employees (look at DSC, for example: they’ve cut lots of employees as their CEO becomes a robber-baron enriched). But appreciate your Trump University Econ 101 take.
8
@Daphne >to keep the wealth in the hands of the feudal few.
Who invest it so that pseudo-educated fools can buy cheap computers and spread their ignorance.
3
Yes, these numbers are ridiculous, but also bear in mind that much of the compensation is in the form of company stock that vests over time. It's a way of making sure the CEO remains personally very invested in the fate of the company. And the soaring value of that equity is tied to the overall flood of money into the stock market these days. This is what happens when the wealthy gets tax cuts: they don't put that money back into the economy, they put it into companies that pay it out to executives or sit on the cash.
13
@Sammy Azalea You're failing to engage the point that the companies "sit on the cash". Not every company does something productive with the money pouring in from shareholders. The argument that these investments are resulting in boosts to the economy in the form of spending, new hires, etc. isn't panning out. Look at Apple. The most they do with their cash is buy up patents.
5
@JKR >This is what happens when the wealthy gets tax cuts: they don't put that money back into the economy, they put it into companies that pay it out to executives or sit on the cash.
You Pragmatically evade identifying the continuing effects. The money is directly invested or saved in banks which invest it. It does not go to Unca Scrooge who swims in his money vault. Rationalizing the hatred of capitalism causes self-willed stupidity and drooling.
2
Where is Donald Trump on this list? We can't know for sure (yet--but coming soon!) I couldn't say it better than did Michael Cohen: "Donald Trump is a man who ran for office to make his brand great, not to make our country great. He had no desire or intention to lead this nation –only to market himself and to build his wealth and power. Mr. Trump would
often say, this campaign was going to be the “greatest infomercial in political history.” David
6
I worked for a small publicly traded company where the CEO took the company stock from $30 to under $1. They had to do a reverse 3 to 1 split in order to keep from getting de-listed.
The General Manager tried to oust the CEO for obvious reasons.
However, the board was made up of all the CEO’s friends. They would come in once a quarter for a fancy dinner and hear a few presentations and go out in NY for an expensive dinner.
The CEO was not ousted after outside “independent” review. They concluded he did well “in tough times.” The “independent” reviewer later had a consulting contract with our company for $200 k (that we didn’t have.)
We had layoffs once. 150 people let go. The next night the CEO went to dinner and expenses a $200 bottle of wine. (HR person told me this.)
This is how corporate America works.
338
@M.
Yep, exactly, boards of directors are interlocking, the CEO of company A is on the board of B, the CEO of B is on the board of company A, and it is all "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours". CEO almost runs the company in to the ground (Home Depot is a classic example), and they get fired and walk away, not in disgrace with their box in their hands, but with hundreds of millions in pay and likely will have another job soon. It is the peter principle, people rising to their level of incompetence, and having unlimited compensation for decent performance, and almost unlimited for poor performance.
Meanwhile, if you mention excess CEO pay, if you mention the income and wealth of the top .5%, you get "oh, there you go again, engaging in class warfare"..meanwhile, the suppression of worker pay in this country, which is in fact class warfare, is "business efficiency"
107
@M.
The way these CEO's treat workers reminds me of a gag used by Buster Keaton, and in the movie "Around the World in Eighty Days", where in order to make the train or ship go faster, the rest of the vessel is cannibalized and thrown into the boiler. It's unsustainable and shortsighted, but no different than a CEO whose compensation is only determined by quarterly profits, where labor costs are considered a millstone but their "genius" is invaluable.
52
@M.
That doesn't really make sense. The board of directors is elected by the shareholders and assuming the shareholders aren't try to lose all their money, they would oust the board and the CEO.
1
So the CEO of a $514,000,000 (Fortune 500 @ #1) company should be paid the same as the CEO of a $6,000,000 company (@ #500)? Would the same principle apply to pro athletes? Say the star pitcher for a WS championship team and the closer for a winless Class A farm team?
I think this article would be more complete if the executive pay for each company was compared with the statistics of all their employees (if at all possible).
This would paint a better picture of whether these colossal bonuses (not terrible in of itself) were being paid despite other workers not receiving similar benefits - or worse, being underpaid.
1
The only thing more obscene than these stupefying amounts of money being drained out of the economy into the pockets of the already hyper-wealthy... is the Orwellian language used by board to justify such insane packages.
And then combine this madness with earlier articles in the Times about how the offspring of the wealthy perceive themselves as far more competent than they really are. One can only imagine what the future will bring. Oh, yeah. It was already in a movie: “Idiocracy”
We are going backwards in time where the fiefdoms are for the rich and we are their serfs! And some folk think this is a good thing.
here is my “proof” that CEOs are grossly overpaid: i have no data supporting this, but i imagine all CEOs in the US combined make significantly more money than all trash collectors taken together in the US. hence, if compensation was directly related to contribution to society, that would mean that CEOs as a whole contribute more to society than trash collectors as a whole.
imagine if all trash collectors in the US went on strike for a month. the results would not be pretty —the US would literally sink in its own trash.
now, imagine if all the CEOs in the US went on strike for a month. based on the money they make, it would follow that the effects on the US would be devastating.
but, would anybody even notice if all the CEOs went on strike for a month, even for a year? my guess is not. hence, as a whole class, they contribute less to society than trash collectors as a whole do, and if compensation was fair, they should get paid less (as a whole) than them.
1
Elon Musk is draining the equity from Telsa. Bondholders and shareholders beware.
2
There are four D words to describe this. Disturbing, dysfunctional, deviant and dangerous. Congratulations to American Capitalism. It achieved all four "D"s pretty quickly.
1
If “compensation” is money or shares actually paid, then this article makes clear that Elon Musk was NOT paid more than $2 billion. I hate to say it, but this is a pretty good example of a fake premise, if not fake news, at least concerning Musk.
2
It's up to the OWNERS (shareholders) of each of these companies to determine CEO pay. It's not up to the government. It's not up to us. Don't like it? Then don't buy their stock and/or their products. It's really that simple. The company owners clearly think the pay rate is justified. And so the rest of us should mind our own business. It's not for the rest of us to tell an employer/employee to set pay rates. That's for the employer/employee to determine together, based on the market value of the employee's skills relative to what the owners (shareholders) and employee think the employee brings to the company in return.
1
I have always had trouble measuring increases in percentage rather than absolute terms, as this understates the disparity between the top and the rest.
You say that the average private sector worker received an increase of 3.2% representing $0.84 per hour. The CEOs' incomes increased at almost double that rate with a median increase of $1.1 million. Based on a 2000 hour working year, the CEOs had an increase of $550 per hour, which is some 655 times greater than the increase of the average worker. It is by this ratio that the disparity increased - not "almost double".
6
I find it interesting that the claim that one man or woman ‘worked hard’ for a single year, would allow generations of offspring to never work at all.
5
I am somewhat amazed by the preponderance in the comments to this news item of dismay, shock, rage etc. After all, these CEOs are just living your American Dream. The American Dream has always been, is today, and unless something transformative happens which is highly unlikely, all about making money, making it as quickly as possible and of course above all else keep making it.
1
@J. David Burch. Proportion counts.
2
American business places all its bets on CEOs and none on workers. as if workers added nothing to a company's quality or success. Workers treated this way punch in and punch out and don't go out of their way to help the company do better. It's off-kilter in a way that hurts everyone. It's not like this everywhere; German corporations are required to have worker reps on the board. But here in America we wait for the "free market" to help workers (anything else being "socialism") while CEOs have all the power, make all the rules through donations to Congress, so workers will make $7.25 minimum wage forever.
5
The best gig is still hedge fund management. It matters not wether your clients make or lose money, your fees are fixed. And since you have billions to play with,, those fees add up. In a bad year you can still make a 100 mill. More than enough to donate big bucks to both political parties, for which you are rewarded a special tax rate in the low 20 percent range, exact same as some making 50k. How sweet it is!
7
Then, thanks to Citizens United, these executives take their small fortunes and elect a fellow businessman like Donald Trump to high office, vastly outweighing the influence and voices of average citizens with their political donations.
7
Why do economists wonder why wages are so stagnant?
8
Can you imagine a world where all this was true? What it would be like? It's just unfathomable to think what would happen. Great novels and plays could be written about the generations-long run up to the formation of such a society, and of the crises and the fallout that would necessarily precipitate.
5
What no one is talking about is the quasi-RICO - yes, racketeering - criminally, that is being conducted by the exec mgmts of scores of household name blue chips via buybacks. How? In the proxies filed of a huge % of S&P 500 companies, you’ll notice an odd trend in executive comp, now frequently tied to a mix of metrics, namely eps growth, ROIC & ROE. Now, many/most blue chips use either ROIC (return on invested capital) or ROE (return on equity), and at least one other metric to calculate exec comp. An absolutely revered top CEO actually bragged on CNBC 2 years ago that his comp is heavily tied to ROE, so as not to be affected by accounting gimmicks. So where’s the RICO? Right in front of you! Metrics such as ROIC & ROE (and of course, EPS growth) are share count dependent. When you buyback shares, you goose EPS - but you knew that already. But did you also know it significantly gooses ROIC and ROE? Buying back shares reduces the equity base, which is the denominator! Many of your most admired CEOs would, could, can and will get at least SOME bonus merely by buying back stock, whether or not the company fails to hit revenue, ebitda or other growth targets. Its why most low-growth blue chips are buying back stock SO aggressively at valuations their companies have NEVER historically traded at mid or late cycle! Smell the coffee, folks! We are being fleeced. Whirlpool actually had a slide in their Analyst Day presentation this week touting how their exec comp is tied to ROIC!
7
@Paul B.While ROE would be affected by a buyback the CEO’s compensation might not be. It’s not like anything you’re saying is some big secret so any reasonably competent board should already know about it and be controlling for it in the compensation scheme. That’s not to say they are, of course.
Using your logic, the Stop & Shop union in New England is also a racketeer organization. They conspired to extort money from the corporate parent by costing 250 stores more than $100,000,000 in list sales and even shut down 50 of them.
This is how revolutions are born.
14
Toyota is the largest company in Japan and the largest manufacturer of cars in the world with $20B of annual profits.
The CEO of Toyota is paid $3M a year and he is not complaining that he is underpaid.
45
Greed has been a destructive force from the the origins of humanity.
We will never learn.
16
I noticed that Musk's compensation was all options. If so what does the $2.3B represent? Is the the total price of stock, or the difference between what he paid and what the price is. If that is the total price of the stock, then what did Musk pay for the stock? I know the times doesn't like Musk, since the Times is anti-ev, but shouldn't you tell us what he actually received. Describing his compensation as options is not all that elucidating. What was his actual gain, and if it was 2.3 billion then surely he actually had to pay 10 billion as an investment to purchase those options. Doesn't his investment mean something?
The times does many hit jobs on Musk, but never anything about any number of the other highly compensated CEOs in the list published. From a reader interest point of view if you want to find villains you'd think analyzing the mental stability of Adelson might be more appropriate than Musk's.
5
@Chris
His salary is $1.00 a year and he has stock options granted that would be worth $2.3 billion over time. He is betting he will be successful in the next decade or two, I’m all in on TSLA.
6
@Blank, as far as I understand, it will cost 2.3 billion if Tesla valuation reaches 650 billion. Is it right? So actual value is 20 times less. Also it is granted over multiple years, so putting it as a compensation is at least dishonest.
Even if he got 2.3 billion in cash, if there is anyone in the world I wish to end up with that money is Musk.
6
Wow, that's a tad sycophantic. Musk seems like a loose cannon most of the time, and is almost certainly destined to go the way of Uber's founder Travis K.
The Romanovs and the Bourbons had immense incomes. Where are they now.
5
@Richard Schumacher
The Rothschilds and the Rockefellers ain’t hurting.
5
@Richard Schumacher
True, but they also had huge expenses, since THEY WERE the state and had to pay for many things beyond their personal luxuries. That is why, despite their enormous incomes, mostly from peasant labor, they were usually broke. Their problems really began when they were crimped financially by representative assemblies. Of course, with Trump and the GOP, our rep. assembly is mere window dressing.
1
@Dan Shiells & Blank: The lessons here include: don't be heads of state, and be sufficiently nice to the Little People.
Alas, studies have consistently shown that stockholder brag and boast about their CEO being the highest paid in the field. I call it The Mega-Church Preacher Effect, because in those cases the flock will happily enrich their shepherd and boast about his wealth. This explains why they like to be called "sheep."
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
8
@Rev. E. M. Camarena, PhD
I'm buying what you are selling since you are Rev. and PhD
Thanks for the insight
This is a significant factor in rising inequality. CEOs in the 1970s made something like 20 times the average worker’s salary, now they might make 320 times! Why is this ok with people? Hello? Shareholders? Are these people really ~16 times as valuable as they were? I think not.
17
@Clean The Swamp Shareholders don’t really get a say in the matter - which is why this problem exists in the first place.
1
The biggest problem is the people who decide on the pay are CEOs of other companies because most directors are CEOs of other companies, so they are giving each other raises.
15
The vision of the guillotine in the horizon doesn't look blurred anymore. But the ruling class think that they will be protected by the militarized police they have been carefully building up. Will see who prevails at the end.
12
@Pablo Cuevas - If the working class decided to skip Christmas one year and forgo all of the buying it would have more of an effect than firing a canon at close range.
5
The serfs are very passive and fearful. There will be no consequence for this theft. The cults have them well under control.
11
The more stories I read like this, the more often I walk around the house singing the Marseillaise.
14
The first thing a new CEO does is to begin stacking the board with friends. Most boards are in the pocket of the CEO and one hand washes the other.
9
All this while exploitation of working people is embraced as an American miracle by our corporate ruling class running the government.
Exploitation of workers should be illegal.
6
Ever wondered why it's so easy to buy a company's stock, but so difficult to buy the same company's bond. Therein lies the malaise. A stockholder is a nobody ---- as John Q. Stockholder, you have absolutely no influence over the company. It can pay its CEO whatever it likes, and in turn the CEO can do whatever favors that are necessary in return.
All Congress needs to do is to mandate that a public company's bond issue is freely available in the market, and watch the fun unfold. John Q. Bondholder will still be insignificant, but can now lay claim in bankruptcy court. No pretending that insignificant people are actually owners. The only stockholders to swindle then would be the ones doing the Casino thing.
4
@GMooG
Do me a favor. Go to your brokerage account, and from your bond screener try to find a bond issue for each of your stock holdings. I rest my case.
And don't get me started on the yields. Sorry, I don't see bad bond yields as a self-evident truth in a market economy.
The fact that stocks yield more than bonds has now become a self fulfilling prophecy. Why bother raising money through repayment commitments, when you can get free money from folks, all while calling them owners!
@TK
"Ever wondered why it's so easy to buy a company's stock, but so difficult to buy the same company's bond?"
No, because that isn't true.
5
@GMooG The transaction costs are definitely higher and there’s less trade volume but yeah @TK’s argument makes no sense.
I had a friend worked in the Tesla factory in Fremont, CA.
He said Elon Musk was regularly in LA trying to go on dates with movie stars and disappearing for long periods of time when the company needed him. Then he'd turn around and tell the news outlets he was sleeping in the factory. Musk then disabled the safety controls on the assembly line and my friend was injured and fired then given mediocre workers comp as a consolation prize.
Remember that "genius" Steve Jobs. Guy didn't even know basic coding. Literally was strutting around as if he invented a lot of the stuff when he had NOTHING to do with their invention.
Frauds have been CEOs for years and used savvy political lobbying to maintain power.
12
they mostly rely on personal charisma to win converts.
4
another flawed analysis Annual executive compensation comparisons should be based on salary and bonus. Gains from capital accumulation plan, including stock options and restricted stock awards are treated separately with measures spread over the award period,
including stock gains in an annual comparison skews the results to meaningless
2
Corporate directors sitting on boards are immensely CORRUPT. They are destroying the USA.
13
This isn't complicated. They should all be paid so they earn millions if their companies outperform their peers. Disney is up about 50% in five years; Comcast is up 40%; CBS down 25%, Viacom is flat; and Discovery off 33%. Pay Eisner, say, $50m (to chose a big number), Roberts $35m, Moonves and Dauman $500k, and Zaslav $0. The problem is all the cats are fat, ALL of them. It's heads I win, tails you lose. Start with the Boards, for awarding these pay packages. They all sit on each other's Board and you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours.
4
@LongTimeFirstTime
So answer me this: If stock price rises are so fundamental, why don't they just get, say, 2% of the increased market value of the stock?
I hope smart readers already know that stock prices are not fundamental. They reflect the past and future wishes more than future performance.
5
This the ME generation in action.
3
Its disguised feudalism and nobility class. You have to pay to play at a top college or simply be a legacy student. Then they higher you because of your pedigree and social connections that your parents money bought you.
9
CEO's are not entrepreneurs, they don't make important scientific discoveries, and they don't save lives. If the compensation packages they received were one tenth of the present amount they would still be engaged in legalized theft. What boggles my mind is what kind of internal propriety and values a person must possess that would allow them to accept that level of payment. What they are doing is so obviously obscene, they have to be very sick people.
17
Talking about a failed economy.
9
If anybody tries to correct this discrepancy, it will be branded ‘class warfare’
10
Meanwhile, I was one of the tens of thousands of teachers nationwide who went out on strike in the last 12 months, to force the Powers That Be to recognize our work, our worth and our importance. The money is there to fund public schools and public services better and to raise the wages of the lowest paid workers, but as we see, there is no will.
27
@Carol M
Many of my neighbors joined me in voting YES on EE already !
TOXIC GREED is killing America.
11
@Darkler: One edit... "Toxic greed IS America." Where do you think this nation got its land - and the labor to cultivate it?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
9
CEOs are capitalism's biggest SCAMMERS.
9
It's nice to know that one side effect of a higher percentage of women in CEO positions is that they, too, can be overpaid. The CEO of IBM, Virginia Rometty, has been paid about $70M for the past three years from what I can tell while the stock has gone nowhere in a bull market in that time. She is a big winner, at least.
7
The job of CEO should be the first one to be automated. It's the most straightforward and applicable to algorithms that can input market data and generate an unbiased decision. So of course we're dedicating all our resources to automating burger flipping...
9
Anyone doubt that we have an oligarchy? Imagine IF these people PAID their FAIR SHARE of TAXES?!
American kids could ALL have a world class education.
ALL Americans could HAVE healthcare.
NASA would be FULLY funded to do research, explore our galaxy, etc.
Our infrastructure would be the envy of the world as it was back when Eisenhower was president and ALL paid taxes!
Americans could earn a fair and JUST wage!
Our Middle Class would be robust!
These ideas aren’t socialism....it WAS REALITY in America once upon a time...before CORPORATE GREED.
25
How does one (or the government) decide “fair share” as it applies to income tax rates? Does a CEO who is paid 200x the salary of a minimum wage worker truly use 200x the public services? Are they and their family 200x the burden on public infrastructure? Who’s child is a greater cost for taxpayers, the wealthy couple who buy their kid a seat at USC or the kid from queens (me) who might attend CUNY? Who uses more public facilities this holiday weekend, the power couple and their two kids at their house on Parsonage Lane in Sagaponack or the auto mechanic for the local Chevy dealer and their four kids at Jones Beach?
1
Yet another reminder that the robber barons aren't confined to the history books. Quite the contrary.
The second coming of the Gilded Age has reinforced and expanded upon structural inequality between the top one-tenth of 1% and the workforce that allows the richest of the rich to multiply their obscene levels of wealth while gobbling up the bounty of cynical tax cuts tailored to their insatiable appetites.
Moral of the story: Greed never goes out of style. It only gets worse.
11
The utterly outlandish amounts of money provided to these CEOS is a travesty. It is evidence of such diabolical greed and the failure of our democratic Republic to fiercely preserve and protect justice, fairness, and efforts to improve the lives of others. We must elect leaders who have the moral courage to build community and to find common ground so that all shall rise.
7
Workers are sheep and CEOs and boards of directors know it. People are too glued to their phone and Netflix to ponder the ramifications of the guy or gal at the top raking in all the dough. I say “rake” but in this case I suppose bulldozing is more fitting. This is why there is a shrinking middle class; you can’t earn a decent wage because that guy is getting all the money. Average workers buy in to the sick Republican election campaigns and there’s no way to reign in these compensation practices by means of laws or the courts.
7
@Diane The number of those CEOs relative to the middle class population is so small that even if you expropriated all their wealth & distributed it to the middle class that's likely not enough to notably raise living standards, which are driven by global competition and convergence of living standards between developed & developing nations. The reluctance to accept that solutions aren't that easy just makes it harder to propose small fixes, like hiking tax rates on CEO level pay, removing tax loopholes, etc.
3
@george eliot - For a while, three men in my county had about as much combined wealth as the lower half or third of the country. I can't remember and don't feel like Googling it but I am referring to Bill Gates, Paul Allen, and Jeff Bezos. Mr. Allen has passed away (R.I.P.) and Bezos just went through a divorce which has changed these figures a bit but every time I see some old schizophrenic woman sleeping on the concrete wrapped in garbage bags to keep out the rain (R.I.P. Alice) it boggles the mind.
@george
I find that hard to believe.
You know why compensation packages are rising at a record rate? That huge Tax Cut that benefited corporations A LOT, was spent almost entirely on stock buybacks to juice up earnings and stock prices. Some on worker pay and tooling but the vast majority went to stock buybacks, and have been since interest rates hit 0%.
That Tax Cut was an abomination!
4
@Chris Patrick Augustine To myself: I don't care what this zeitgeist (collective consciousness) of ignorance thinks; I will continue to express my indignation at foolishness and my logic of economics and of reality no matter what!
I've never been popular so I say again as I did at 12 year's of age: 'Who Cares!'
None of theses people are worth this kind of money. It's outright fraud and there are no unions left to fight for what the average workers deserves. Eventually this house of cards is going to fall.
11
@kerri Unions were just a selfish and short-sighted with their unrealistic demands in the 70s & 80s when companies weren't making any profits.
2
@george eliot
Unions agreed to many very slim wage increases over the last 40 years while CEO average pay went from 25 times the worker average pay to 325 times the worker average pay.
You are just flat out wrong.
1
In the late 1960s, JK Galbraith warned about the negative impact of CEO pay disconnected from traditional models of profit maximization and market-based, rational decision making. Like Homer's Cassandra, Galbraith had a gift for seeing the future (from economics to Vietnam) _ and the curse to be ignored. At the time, CEOs made (mostly in straight salary) roughly 20 times what the average worker made. By 2000, it was 400 times. I can't even imagine what it is now.
12
Maybe Tesla wouldn't be in such a financial mess if they didn't pay Musk a $2.3 billion salary. I'll bet if they had plowed in all but $20 million back into the company, it would be doing better and Musk could still live like an entitled 1%er with a $20 million dollar salary.
11
@Libby try reading the article. That’s not his salary.
4
@Karen. It doesn’t matter how you define it. It’s obscene under any circumstances. His companies have yet to turn a profit. His auto company can’t produce. He’s the Trump of the tech world.
3
@Wesley Brooks
His stock options are worthless unless the company succeeds. Meanwhile he earns $1.00 a year.
1
Good executives can improve businesses but none of them offer advantages that even closely approximate their pay relative to the rest of the employees in firms, today. Their pay just reflects their ability to sell themselves to the owners and boards of directors, who all seem to be doing the same in the firms for which they are executives.
9
@Casual Observer...In most cases they are chairmen of the board of directors and the directors that are alleged to sit in judgment are their carefully selected friends. It does not in anyway represent capitalism, but is a feudal system based on take whatever you can get .
12
Elon Musk's annual salary is $1.00, not 2.3 billion. 2.3 billion is closer to the worth of his Tesla stock, not his salary.
6
@John
The $2.4 billion is the value of his stock options IF they are ‘in the money’ when they are granted. If the stock goes down over time he will get nothing. If the value goes up over time he will be richer than he already is.
He was a founder of PayPal so he ain’t gonna be hurting in any case.
Print this article and save it. Might come in handy after we peasantry storm and take The Bastille.
23
Why dont you put that nice histogram chart in perspective by adding middle class income examples at the bottom. What, is it like couple of pixels across?
7
@Wyatt
Have to get the electron microscopes out for the readers to see them.
2
Sharecroppers and Street-cleaners are people too!
6
But you're all OK with celebrities & musicians making hundreds of millions of dollars a year?
3
@Tamar.... There is a huge difference. Celebrities, musicians, and athletes sell tickets. Their value can be measured by the number of fans that come in the door; ...or not. The same can not be said for CEOs. In most corporations if the CEO would take a 6 month vacation, the executive secretary could continue to administer corporate business and nobody could tell the difference.
14
@Tamar
Only a few celebrities make hundred of millions a year.
7
@Tamar
As Babe Ruth said, when asked how it was he made more than the President, "I had a better year than he did."
4
And which of these companies has had the most tax grants and benefits?
8
These corporate boards, shareholders and ceos should be ashamed of themselves. This entire story is sordid from beginning to end. 542,000 Americans were paid $7.42/hour, maybe by some of these companies. Income inequality is the number one problem in the world today - it is the source of so many of our other issues. I hope these people have some shame and do the right thing, take a pay cut and give their workers the money.
8
At what point do we begin the revolution? Sign me up.
26
@Kayemtee - Revolution is simple. We all wait until Black Friday and convert to Judaism for the Christmas season. Hanukkah does not involve fighting in the WalMart over a t.v. to give to someone to celebrate the birth of the Messiah. And if no one goes shopping for the season the stocks fall and the CEO's will start to sweat bullets. Let them eat cake, the biggliest chocolate cake ever (wave small hands).
I'm reasonably sure the Messiah would approve.
1
Sounds like many commenters believe these CEOs are on par with Steve Miller’s song “Take the Money and Run” but aren’t going away....
1
Considering the extremes of a situation is sometimes helpful. At one far end of this road, one guy in the world is paid $10 trillion a year; everybody else works for him and they are paid nothing, except maybe room and board. Obviously we would never get to that end of the road, but just how far down it do we want to go? How much techno-age feudalism can a society withstand?
8
Disgusting!
Greed, greed, and more greed!
10
The executive pay is not justified by their productivity. They negotiate these compensation packages with conditions that even allow rewards when the businesses are facing insolvency. Part of the reason is that boards tend to be made up of executives who negotiate their compensation packages similarly.
12
There’s something terribly wrong it’s a disparity in wealth in this country. Uncheck capitalism is disaster.
10
@LAM...Hello. It is not capitalism. If capitalism were functioning CEOs salary would be price competitive. What you are looking at is a feudal system.
14
Not one of these people -- not a one -- is worth a thin dime compared to the teachers struggling to raise their kids while educating ours, the scientists fighting uphill against a tide of anti-science rhetoric to cure diseases, the researchers battling climate change deniers in their efforts to save our planet, or any one of the billions of other people whose necks their standing on in pursuit of a buck.
How many lives could be saved and how much misery could be eased if even a fraction of these ultra-rich leeches gave back half their salaries?
34
Somehow many people herein think it’s easy to be a CEO and their wages must be raided to give to those who do not have the ability to be a CEO.
On a smaller scale, try running a small business with, say, six employees. Scale the inherent responsibilities up to a large corporation like Lockheed Martin, for example, with tens of thousands of employees and perhaps you’ll appreciate the magnificent job their CEO, Marillyn Hewson, has done for over six years.
Worth. Every. Penny.
A company with 10's of thousands of employees has 1000's of managers that do the bulk of running the company. The entire role of CEO is an outdated concept in itself.
16
@EGD
You understand nothing about corporate structure.
4
Uhhhh, is it just me or does it sound like this guy definitely works in Lockheed PR?
6
This isn't complicated. Tenure for CEOs at big corporations has been falling. It was 6 years at the end of 2013 and 5 years at the end of 2017. This is the result of shareholder activism aimed at forcing underperforming CEOs out. In other words, being CEO of a public company has become a riskier job, and one of the consequences of adding risk to a job is that, all other things being equal, compensation must go up to compensate for the added risk.
4
Ultimately CEO pay is what it is because the extremely wealthy own our political parties and politicians. Those latter create the rules for their patrons that allow and even promote this completely unjustifiable and outlandish abuse of decency within our political/economic system.
Be clear, this is Not free market pricing. It is exactly the reverse. It is crony capitalist financial elite monopoly manipulation of politics to allow this travesty to not only happen, but to accelerate.
There is only one peaceful path to ending this abuse. That path is to End systemic political corruption by the financial elite. Biden won't do it. Harris won't do it. ORourke wont do it. Don't bother mentioning a republican who won't do it.
There are two candidates who have forcefully said they will Restore Democracy by ending corporate corruption of politics. Warren and Sanders. If The travesty of CEO pay and ALL the other dysfunction and inequality it represents bothers you, there is a choice of who to vote for to end it. Make that choice. It will be very popular.
Obviously they can't end corruption as a matter of law without congress. But they both will call out the corruption of congress from the bully pulpit and whip Voters nationally to vote to end the power of, and corruption by, the financial elite. So that in 2022 or 2024 we could see a congress and a president committed to a government that actually represents the real interests of the people, for a change.
22
@trebor Bravo! Excellent commentary.
3
And yet it's just been reported that half of American families would struggle to pay an unexpected $400 bill. What's wrong with this picture?
22
@David
Nothing at all.
In fact, I don’t see how the two are linked.
@EDG when Americans don’t earn fair and just wages, they can’t keep up with the cost of living. Corporate greed is a huge problem!
3
Have to be a fool to own stock in this losing co.
No profit. Sales always miss targets. Fool of a boss exaggerates, gets trouble with SEC and others.
Just ridiculous pay for him.
3
Lighten up -- $2.3 billion a year is a bargain for a genius like Elon Musk. Telsa share price less than six months ago (Dec 9): $379.49. Close today: $190.63. Only a 50% drop. Plus he gives great advice on how to rescue kids trapped in underwater caves and slandering those who manage to do the impossible.
14
@Richard Burkholder Tesla and SpaceX do the supposedly impossible on a regular basis. And Musk doesn’t get that pay unless Tesla succeeds immensely going forward. Try again.
2
@Karen So he wins regardless of how far TESLA's share price collapses. Got it. I feel his pain.
@Karen "This week, Morgan Stanley put a worst-case of $10 per share on Tesla. A day later, Citigroup said the stock could fall to $36 per share". Go for it if you want. I'll take a pass.
If voters had not been foolish enough to believe in the absurd "trickle down theory," they would have spared themselves of self-inflicted robbery.
15
EXCELLENT comment, thank you!
1
Another excellent list for me to use in making purchasing decisions of those I don't want to support with my business.
Cancelled Netflix, Amazon and other accounts after list was published of non-tax paying corporations.
Am now adding obscene executive compensation to consideration of who I do business with.
The whole tax system and compensation structure in the US is just grossly out of whack with reality for most of us. And there's no stopping it unless consumers stop buying into it.
If there's a price to be paid in terms of market share and profits that convinces corporations to stop avoiding taxes and showering titans with this kind of money, perhaps something will change.
You don't NEED a Tesla or anything else on this list. And life is fine with Netflix and Amazon, too.
8
@KKW - I take the same approach when I can. I would never go into a Starbucks because there are sooooo many little coffee shops trying to make a living and buy their first NBA team.
I did that recently and had to bite my lip when the little shop across from the Starbucks I avoided turned out to be a "bikini barista" stand. Imagine your ex-wife on your wedding night dressed up like Cher in a video in front of the battleship Missouri - now picture that woman leaning out the window and asking in a sultry voice, "would you like cream...or sugar with your coffee?"
And her coffee was so much better than Howard's:)
As long as this continues, there isn't much hope for us as a species.
15
This insane CEO pay exemplifies "the only way to make it in the U.S. is to deprive others of a fair wage and benefits package." What CEO could actually be worth 125,000,000? Why do the directors agree to such huge executive packages? Is it because these directors may only have to meet once per month for a large annual pay themselves? That themselves are on the gravy train? Why isn't there more shareholder outrage? Without any end in sight, the race to the bottom continues..
11
"Mr. Zaslav also failed to get all of a 2014 package originally valued at $145 million; the award actually paid out $65 million."
I would love to fail to the tune of $65 million.
12
@D Price He actually failed to the tune of $80 million, which is the money he didn't get.
2
tmThe answer is progressive income tax, not simply because the rich have more money. We expect more taxes from the rich because their income is - in large part - due to their good fortune of working in the USA.
Don't think redistribution of wealth. Think fairness in the returns from our common investment in creating and maintaining the American money-making machine. It is a machine built by all of us. A progressive tax system allows the rich the fun and glitz of working where they choose while distributing a share of their income, built on the great nation that we share, to their partners and shareholders in the USA.
To understand this, try to imagine the huge salaries, bonuses, and retirement packages, common to the wealthiest in the US, being received in Bhutan, Chad, or Paraguay. The super-wealth in the USA exists because the USA provides the means for super opportunity for property, industry, and for the protection of wealth, accumulated by investment in it.
8
@Douglas
Give that the top 20% of US households already pay 70% all all federal taxes, I would say we already have a progressive system. And much more progressive than almost all European countries.
The author seems to not understand basic accounting/finance. Elon Musk has a potential to earn a huge set of stock options. He hasn't earned, they're not awarded, and at the rate they're going, it might be several years out of the 10 year period before he achieves the first set of goals. While the reward might be a little high, Musk is certainly risking his time & fortune to achieve them. That's what capitalism should be.
5
@Jon Read the share price numbers I posted above. Dec 9: $379.48 intra day. Today's close: $190.63. Regulator troubles also. "The reward might be a little high"? Yeah. Yuh think?
6
As much as CEO’s deserve to be well compensated only in America is the amount obscene. The disparity in wage increases between CEO’s and the rank and file would lessen if the same % pay increase was given across the board. After all, while the CEO leads the company, it is the rank and file that actually does the work. No CEO will be successful without the working men and women who carry out the mission.
17
Let stock holders [who are presumably the owners of the corporation] have a direct BINDING vote on CEO and top exec total compensation.
7
@david They already do.
Some stock holders have an ADVISORY vote but not a BINDING vote on compensation.
1
I'm certainly pleased to hear that it's not difficult being a CEO today, as we've always encouraged each of our children to aim for the top rung in their respective corporations. Our only concern was that achieving that goal, or simply coming close to it, would involve too much time away from their families.
1
Yes, the salaries seem outrageous and astounding. But I would disagree that it's easy to become or be a CEO. A lot of time, a lot of personal and family sacrifice is made to get to that position. And a lot will continue to be. Plus, today's CEO doesn't stay in that position for 30 years - he's in and out pretty quickly and he may or may not get another CEO job.
The salary inflation for these top earners is ridiculous, but I also wouldn't want their lives. Some of their toys, perhaps, but not their lives. They trade a lot of "life/living" for all the "stuff".
2
@India - :)) You make it sound like Jeff Bezos is dragging a cross right behind the Messiah.
The French, Russian, Chinese, and Cuban revolutions, among others, were all preceded by absolutely obscene disparities between the "elites" and the "commoners." Yes, I appreciate how violent those revolutions were, but that's the point. Things move slowly until the "tipping point." At its present rate, I'd give our system less than fifty years before people finally scream "Enough!" and decide to go the "tumbrels and guillotine" route.
11
This phrasing isn’t exactly fair considering Elon Musk risked his own initial capital to start his company.
5
@J
How much now is at risk put up by s'holders?
3
@J
Along with a lot of tax dollars.
I would like to know how much government business these companies do and how much they benefit from government.
I would also like to know how much taxes these executives paid.
The rest is between these companies and their owners, the shareholders.
6
I don't see the issue here. If you want to be a CEO, go found a company and build it up from the ground. Or stay at a company for several decades and consistently make correct, high impact decisions
But that actually requires effort unlike complaining about how much other people make.
4
I see a big issue there. Such pay created the class of people who have no idea of society needs. On top of that they have oversized political influence to protect the laws that benefit them, that makes difficulty for other people to start their own companies and achieve success. In some ways, this creates same problem as monopolies.
17
@yulia
Money and politics is completely orthogonal to CEO pay.
Performance is not related to executive pay. Tesla will almost certainly go bankrupt but Musk is making an obscene salary as an executive. And don’t forget Carly Fiorina et. al.
5
Just imagine if Switzerland voted *for* its 12:1 CEO:serf pay bill in 2013.
Just imagine if we then followed that Sane move.
We'd have a non-crazy economy, not a carmaker likely to pay Musk billions for "pedo guy" twits and breaking SEC laws.
14
@SR
Tell me again the names of all those big, unique, innovative companies in Switzerland that employ lots of people and create new products & technologies that make life better? Yeah, I can't think of any either.
2
@GMooG
Roche, which owns Genentech, arguably the most innovative pharma/biotech company on Earth.
Novartis
UBS bank.
I'm sure there's many others I'm just too lazy to look it up.
2
You aren't even addressing Larry Ellison of Oracle who is on the Board of Tesla makes. Might want to have a look at that.
3
And compare that to states who have no minimum wage: Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, New Hampshire. Keep them poor and prey on the poor souls who live there. Georgia and Wyoming at $5,15. Some are around $7. How can you live with that kind of $$$? Unless you change the system, democracy can not work. It is not working....
18
Top corporation pay is totally absurd. No one's work is deserving of the ridiculous wages over 100 million dollars or more. These are the same people who think paying workers a living wage is out of the question. Shamefully greedy
32
These salaries are disgusting! How can any CEO receive this much in good conscience? How can any CEO even spend this much? I really don’t understand the greed.
72
@Bonnie dont underestimate such expenses as property tax; all good and fine that one can easily afford that house but... the superyacht actually needs a 24/7 crew to keep the chrome from rusting... I learned this long ago when I bought a fancy car. I paid cash but EVERYTHING tires, insurance, registration was more expensive the rich get fleeced as no other...
1
@Bonnie-If workers' salaries were even a fraction of what they should be, the minimum wage would be $33 per hour not $7.25; which is the case in 21 states. The rest of the states don't pay much better. These are not wages people can live on without working overtime or several jobs.
https://www.laborlawcenter.com/state-minimum-wage-rates/
6
How to remove value from the economy and juice Trump's vanity project, the overinflated economy, in one easy step.
Sadly, Democrats, who normally rescue the economy from Republican's willingness to steal everything that isn't bolted down, won't be able to fix this one when it crashes.
Stupid and dangerous ...
Just like blaming victims and promoting hate, giveaways to the ultra rich (see, Walmart's employees who need government help to survive while the Walton family makes billions) are dangerous.
The planet will give us an increasing reality check. Are we really this stupid? I fear so.
7
The headline of this article is misleading and uninformative. Elon Musk's "package" is a contract for specific deliverable milestones that the company must achieve before he receives any of that. While the article mentions that later in the text, the implication is that he received that amount of compensation in 2018, which is, of course, not at all true.
Please improve your credibility by not overplaying topic heading and assume that your readership is actually reading the articles.
11
Yesterday, I was listening to a report on NPR about the 5G network and the cost of building it out and that the consumer in rural areas would have to ay 3-5x from a city dweller.
We just accept "it is so expensive to build out" without ever, ever asking about CEO compensation and other executive compensation. What if we took John Legere's salary and those other senior staff at T-Mobile and brought it to down to 1970's level?
Alas, reporters never ask.
How is it not possible that CEO compensation is NOT called into question - direct questions about it to CEOs and companies and boards?
It would be rude? Impolite? Uncouth? Bad form?
I'll tell you what bad form is - the 99 who work their butts off every day to pay CEO compensation.
11
It's amazing to me that a huckster like musk, who wants to 'colonize' outer space, is the top earner by far. Isn't there anyone with some scientific knowledge on his board of directors?
Musk's proposals are totally unrealistic to someone who knows about the impossibility of another planet being exactly like Earth. Where would the water come from, for instance?
5
@Stanley Gomez agreed on some of your Musk commentary, but the article doesn't fully explain that he hasn't received any of the $2.3B and that he might not reach the goals to earn it for years. Meaning you'd take that amount once awarded & divide it by the number of years it took him to earn it.
1
I love this kind of articles. It's a debatable topic. The situation is similar in Perú.
4
Always get a kick out of that Discovery Channel guy Zazlov making this annual CEO bonanza list.
Fun fact: whether you watch it or not, if you're a traditional cable TV subscriber, $1/month of your service fee goes to Discovery Channel.
Great deal for Zazlov, for sure.
2
Why must anyone who works with a board of directors be awarded compensation 100-500 times that earned by the peons who produce and sell the products? Who are performing the real work, here?
There's no reasonable excuse for inordinate wealth when the employees can barely purchase their own homes near their work places.
Will any of these "filthy" rich oligarchs ever share the wealth and provide free housing for the homeless, interest free loans for employee house purchases (within their price ranges), and an equitable share of bonuses provided to the exec levels?
Is any human being---other than book authors, composers, others paid with royalties--- worth more than $800K/year? What do business execs do for their compensation? Are they God? No!
11
A few massive companywide strikes should do the trick. Americans are sick of supporting fat cat CEOs and will only be getting increasingly more intollerant of it as more and more full time workers enter the ranks of the working poor.
6
After the year in which Facebook helps to increase nationalism, allows Russian trolls to influence our elections and distributes untold amounts of fake news, Zuckerberg not only doesn’t get fired, but he gets a 148% raise through perks? When will our government finally step in and work for the everyday Americans?
2
For anyone curious about compensation at the NY Times, you can find it here: https://www1.salary.com/New-York-Times-Co-Cl-A-Executive-Salaries.html. Mark Thompson,
President and Chief Executive Officer was paid a total compensation of $6,132,813. I wonder how this compares to the average for the staff.
7
If a CEO is going to be paid millions, then if the company does anything illegal, they should be held legally responsible. It’s insane to be earning that much while risking nothing.
11
It's easy to be a CEO? So anyone can do it? That's an absurd headline. If we want to have a debate about the morality of paying people tons of money to run giant companies, fine, but let's not make it equivalent to being a grill cook.
4
Meanwhile... middle class wages have remained flat since the 1970's!
8
The fact that a number of those listed (Chipotle for example) had median employee salaries of under $30k is down right disgusting. Slick marketing campaigns can't cover over the fact that these companies have redistributed wealth upward at a shocking pace.
10
Obscene salary amounts.
What you are also seeing are the obscene profits these companies make off We the People. Without those billions in yearly profits they'd not so casually give hundreds of millions of our dollars to a CEO.
These companies, as well as their CEOs, are the Takers.
5
The characterization of Musk's compensation package is totally unfair! Unlike virtually every one of the other CEO's, if Tesla shares don't reach levels at least four times the value of the company's stock, he gets nothing! Not a penny! Well, that's not true: he get his annual salary of $1!
In order to get the $2.3 Billion "value", the company will have to reach a value of $650 billion, TWENTY TIMES the current value! And he must jump through some elusive hoops in terms of profitability/so-called Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA); 2018 EBITDA was $1.67 Billion, and in order to qualify for the first level of compensation, the market value of the company must be $100 billion (three times current levels) AND EBITDA of $20 billion (the revenue goal which it will easily achieve in 2019 although it is unlikely that the stock will triple to $600/share before year end. So for the new package, there will be no compensation this year. The next level is $3 billion of EBITDA and $35 billion in revenue. That is also very unlikely to be met this year 2019. The next tranche for 2020 is $55 billion in revenue and $4.5 billion in EBITDA, and it is also unlikely to achieve this level in 2020. Is it fair to assume that money which MAY be paid in 2030 should be considered 2018 compensation? The best case scenario still leaves Musk far behind some and in the range of others on the list.
Comments such as these have driven the stock down over 40%.
6
@Pat Patterson Am crying a river for poor Elon Musk and his shareholders.
4
Capitalism is just another word for legalized inequality. And if the modern GOP stands for anything, it's legalized inequality.
8
@Chicago Guy
Legalized inequality (i.e. capitalism) is oppression, exploitation, and slavery of the many by the few.
1
the game ‘Monopoly’ ends when 1 player owns all property
8
Absolutely ridiculous. Corporations should be required to increase worker pay by a certain percentage that is tied to the increase of CEO and other Executives' pay increases.
9
This is disgraceful.
When is enough...enough?
When most of America struggles to pay the basics, and many Americans don’t have extra to treat their kids to a movie and ice cream, a CEO is buying their 5th property, only for it to remain vacant most of the year...
Shame on these people making multiples of millions...shame on the Boards of these companies allowing such huge pay raises for just 1 person...
It would be amazing to see a CEO forgo his yearly bonus for 1 year and spread it around to the lowest paid workers on his team and give salary bumps to middle management etc.
9
CEO compensation is humanity at it lowest.
9
And people wonder why the country is such a mess. The last 40 years of cater-to-the-rich politics has added up to a country where too many are left out, while too few grow fatter and fatter with wealth. Of course, the system stops working at some point.
12
Though I am interested, I cannot read this article. Nothing new here I am sure. Just Execs getting too much and workers getting too little. Will my reading this article have any effect other just annoy me at the start of a holiday weekend on a beautiful day in New York.
6
Bezos gets taxes breaks everywhere, Musk cant sell his cars everywere because of gas contracts with other car companys (detroit). Also if the goverment would have allowed him to power P.R. (witch would have taken a month ballpark) with his tech. he would have made more and really messed with the gas and electricity companies. Stop trying to paint Musk as a bad man he is just not in bed with your bosses. and wont sell his tech. to other companies.
1
in re "recent efforts to restrain executive pay," do you REALLY think that mere! y disclosing pay packages constitutes restraint? Restraint is setting limits!
6
I have said it once and will say it again, only in America.
1
Warren has a plan for them. All in for Warren.
9
I consider this represents a type of predatory sociopathic continuum in another extreme form. The illusion all have equal rights, chances of success and created their success comes from the same sales book Trump wrote. There's nothing wrong with money in and of itself. When it becomes this out of balance it's like any other addiction. There's never going to be enough. Someone who's addicted will do anything to fill the need. It doesn't matter if it ruins the planet and kills the entire human race.
4
Capitalism run Amok. Period.
CEOs can't do it alone and the disparity (not to mention tax loopholes, etc.) is literally killing the US.
We blame China for trade deficits, but we closed up shop here and sent the work overseas.
We blame China for stealing intellectual property, but WE gave them the blueprints.
Warren Buffett stated his secretary paid in more taxes.
The US is toast.
6
and the CEO's were rewarded richly for shipping that work (and much of the equipment) overseas. then we are blamed for their decisions.
And thank you for mentioning US companies giving away intellectual property. While China MIGHT be demanding that now, it feels like blaming China for this is being used to make us forget who voluntarily gave away their technology (Saint Jack Welch, are your ears burning?).
2
Capitalism = The only socio-economic system where one person can own everything.
Now, some people think that's great. You know who? The people that already own 85% of everything.
These days, Capitalism is just another term for "The Age of Plunderers".
BTW: Capitalism also = permanent inequality, law of the jungle, survival of the richest, dog eat dog, greed is good, who cares about you I've got mine.
5
If you're working 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year at minimum wage earning $14,500 annually then your employer would need over $600,000 in 10 yr treasuries @ their current rate of ~2.39% to pay just your wages.
Business invests in skilled and motivated employees.
Many workers are financially illiterate because they have not invested in themselves. Hourly employees put themselves at risk by not diversifying their potential income sources, they lack options because they have not gained employable skills.
Those who are educated/trained, self employed and/or have placed themselves in a position where they are financially secure are usually not the ones looking towards government digging deeper in to their pockets.
Slapping a tax on earnings over some arbitrary number won't solve anything other than perhaps temporarily easing some small fraction of government debt, and likely motivating the highly compensated to go to another country.
The solution is more complex than 'tax the rich' and just might take some real hard work, late nights studying and yes a bit of luck.
@MrT So, blame the working poor because it's their fault? What socio-economic group are you in?
5
@juniper
I have a severe disability and busted butt to acquire an engineering degree post injury.
There are options for the motivated who have sufficient cognitive function.
I don't have a lot of empathy for able bodied people not able to figure out how to support themselves.
1
Oh and what did those companies do with their windfall tax breaks?
9
The vast majority of workers are overworked, underpaid, scared and burnt out.
There’s no economic justification to explain why CEO’s exponentially outpace their workers in pay and compensation.
9
Elon Musk IS Tesla - indeed, he owns most of it. What should we expect him to pay himself? At least he is worth it.
The rest of the CEOs listed are overpriced hacks that could easily be replaced with an underling at 100th the cost or 1000th the cost with an import - i.e. a highly educated immigrant - isn't trump looking to bring in highly educated immigrants to take over the most overpaid jobs in America?
When one of these overpriced stable geniuses run a company into the ground, how is it they never end up on the street like everyone that worked at the joint, but end up even wealthier leading another company into the ground or leading a country into the ground?
4
CEO pay is approved by boards who are often made up of other CEOs. It’s a cycle of self-interest and status quo. Congressional efforts to curb obscene pay means nothing in our system of market capitalism.
I would love a story about great CEOs that don’t take home these obscene pay days. Are there any out there?
I’m sorry Equilar released their list on one of the slowest days of the year. It will get buried over the long weekend.
7
As a recently retired RN who worked for 30 years at my Community Hospital,and for my husband, an electrical lineman for our utility company who is about to retire at 65,I feel we have been chumps.We both have bad shoulders,knees,and backs.We saved for our 2 son's undergrad,cost us a quarter of a million $,despite both of their very generous academic scholarships,and working summers and through school.We put the maximum into our 401Ks as soon as both boys were out of diapers.We lived simply,our sons,now young men are great,successful guys,both took care of their advanced degrees.We are happy,but the inequity is very hard to swallow.We could have been sleazy too,and been a lot richer.I sure hope the future generations can change the direction of our society.
22
From an article dated May 3:
"Last week, Tesla reported its cash balance at the end of the first quarter shrunk by $1.5 billion since December, to $2.2 billion. Musk said during a conference call that Tesla might need to raise capital again."
So, Musk gets $2.3 billion dollars for a company that, according to the CEO, needs an infusion of billions of dollars to stay afloat. Can someone explain how this works?
9
There needs to be no earnings cap on Social Security payroll tax.
19
CEOs shouldn't be legally allowed to make more than 100x the salary of their lowest paid employee. This should be a platform issue for the left, I can't believe it isn't already.
19
@Michael
Back in the "good ole days" CEO salaries were ~40x and the wealthiest were taxed at 70%+. Didn't stop them from buying large homes in gated communities, but at least the worker could pay bills and eat at the same time.
The greed is simply sickening.
10
Forget a maximum tax bracket of 70%, we need it to be 90%.
12
@UrbanRider
I agree. It should start at 70% and incrementally move it up to reach 90% after you hit $60 million or so. You can't spend some of these amounts in multiple lifetimes. It's so ridiculous and hurts the social fabric to have this outrageous inequality.
5
One person boycotting a company doesn't amount to a hill of beans, but I do it anyway - it's good for my soul.
I refuse to give any business to Amazon, among others.
We peons must rebel. And tax the CEO's, and make these companies pay federal taxes. It's unconscionable to know that Amazon didn't pay any federal taxes last year, along with many others.
12
@Pat Boice You are not alone. Cancelled any accounts with corporations that don't pay federal taxes. Including Amazon and Netflix. No WholeFoods. Am going down this list as well.
I refuse to do any business with entities or people that are this evil. They profit off everything and pay nothing to support this country. It's just sick.
1
@KKW - Good for you!
This is grand larceny, nothing less, and should be prosecuted as such. Try and argue that this level of compensation is truly earned by anyone.
15
"This is not a difficult time to be a chief executive."
This sounds like the viewpoint of someone with little to no interaction with CEOs or understanding of how complex global businesses are. The CEOs referenced here all probably work obscenely long hours, spend weeks of each year traveling around the globe, and are often under intense media and shareholder scrutiny (see Musk as exhibit A, however self-inflicted some of his issues are). To get their positions, most of them spent decades in their companies , taking senior operational roles in different areas and developing an expertise that few others have in their respective industries. They can, and often are, fired after only a few years on the job.
You can criticize the level of their pay relative to the average worker or argue they should be taxed more, but it's simply not accurate to pretend the CEO job is easy or one that anyone can do.
8
@Jackson George:
and where would any CEO be
without the multitude of people
who put his/her ideas into practice?
without all those who provide various types of means
and infrastructure, such as raw materials or roads,
for instance, required to realize ideas?
1 or 2 billion extra per year ... and rising?
given this HUGE discrepancy btw. 0.1% at the TOP and
the rest at the bottom, no wonder democracy is at stake.
13
If hard work, paying dues in the trenches, and long hours were the standard, musicians and school teachers would be billionaires, too. Gimme a break.
17
@vinny The musician equivalents of the CEOs we're talking about are people like Taylor Swift and Jay-Z, who are in fact billionaires, or close to it.
As for teachers, I believe they absolutely deserve higher pay (I would know, I'm married to one). But it takes a serious misunderstanding of basic economics to compare the salaries of millions of taxpayer-funded employees with that of a select few individuals who lead the nation's largest corporations and are primarily tasked with creating wealth for shareholders (which include, indirectly, teachers whose pensions depend on stock market returns).
1
So where is the rest of this article? Absent the part that also lets us know what the lowest paid people at these companies are making and what is the median income for employees at these companies, the story is woefully incomplete. I always want to know, when I see these high incomes for CEOs, how the company treats the rest of its employees. If everybody who works for a company that chooses to pay its CEO this kind of money isn’t also making more than a subsistence living, then the CEO isn’t doing an acceptable job.
16
One only needs to pay trip to your nearest t mobile store, ask an employee why he/she gets paid per hour, there you have your answer to how much the lowest wage one can make. For NYC, it’s 15$/hr.
4
@Shmoo
$15/hour is plenty for a job that can be performed by an ipad.
@Shmoo That’s part of the answer, sure. And minimum wages differ greatly around the country because Congress has been unwilling to up the national minimum wage to something actual livable. But the rest of the answer is more complex because not all companies base the majority of their workforce’s on minimum wage jobs, which is why I want to know the median income for an employee as these companies. It is not unreasonable, when presented with earnings like this, to want to know how well the CEO cares for his or her employees. In addition, the sub-head for this article says compensation at the top grew at double that of ordinary workers and then didn’t really talk about it.
I looked at the accompanying article with the pay, name, etc. listed by individual. What stood out most to me - besides, of course, the extraordinary nature of these over the top salaries, in a world where people live without food, or healthcare, etc. - is how male and white this list is. Again. Still.
A combined fewer than 20 people (at first glance - I do not pretend to have researched their genealogy, but base that number on the photos and names) appear to be female and/or people of color.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
12
Musk really needs to direct some of his salary to improve the quality of his cars. While the technology is interesting, the production quality is an order of magnitude below that of Korean and Japanese cars.
5
Musk is a really poor example.He is taking 0 salary in return of tying his fate to the company for probably another decade. That's the kind of accountability we NEED from executives.
6
So many examples of corporate greed on display. No wonder we need the Progressives such as Bernie rein in this kind of ill behavior.
I suggest that by regulation, CEO pay is bound in proportion to the average worker pay of the company - like 30x the average worker pay. That way, CEO pay can be raised only in tandem with the average worker pay raise. Top talent to guide a company for the current and future success if vital - and to attract them, isn't 30x or somewhere along those lines plenty? That's 30years or so worth of your average worker's pay.
In our version of capitalism, wages for average workers are considered an "expense" for the Top 1%, an evil expense pushing down share prices of their companies and by that their wealth. When we at last see some really small rise in wages, we hear it to be only demonized as an evil pushing down stock prices and bringing chaos to the financial markets. If so, then when are we going to raise the wages for average workers and be happy that everyone deserves a chance to succeed?
7
The value added from the last dollar spent,something I remember from my econ class. How much marginally better is a company and its products as compensation increases? Surely someone has studied this?
4
Interesting article in a voyeuristic way. Publicly traded companies are private entities that answer to their BOD, and hence the shareholders who elect them. More indirectly they answer to customers/consumers. What role would I have for example as none of these in determining compensation? The ratios are meaningless - a business that relies on a relatively small number of high tech/highly trained or skilled employees who are highly compensated isn’t a valid comparison to a company with a large workforce employing a number of low skilled employees. Other than a little titillation from peeking this article is a big “meh!”
1
And that's why Unions are so important.
6
History suggests that this will feed the fires of revolution...of some sort. It certainly gives Social Democrats some terrific talking points.
This kind of compensation is spitting in the face of the people who do the heavy lifting. At a minimum, it suggests that workers should be awarded stock to participate in this success.
Read Georgescus book.
8
Evenly distributed over the US population, the billions earned by all these CEO's would be (let's call it 10 billion for ease of calculation) : about $30 per head. Say $100 per head of the working population. Hmmmmm.
3
This begs for a 90 percent tax rate for any income over $1MM, or, a revolution where these CEO's are the first to go. How much is enough? Especially since we have a majority of "middle class" Americans who could not handle an unexpected $400 expense and so many human beings living under bridges, these "CEO's" need a "cost of living adjustment".
36
I realize that the top job requires a very special skill set, and the chance of being fired is unusually high so the job commands a risk premium. There are a few talented CEOs who do turn a company around, save it from bankruptcy, or lead it in a new direction for profit.
For most, I have difficulty with pay packages for good performance that exceed $10,000,000 even for large, complex companies. The current pay system does not recognize the contribution of the work force and confiscates profits from shareholders.
The annual meeting should be about the company as a whole, but the information circular focuses on these absurd pay packages for these princelings and the supposed justification for them. I vote against executive compensation unless it varies from year to year in line with the fortunes of the company.
10
The argument goes that CEOs are unique and paid accordingly. But let's be honest about this, would Disney or IBM go out of business if their top executive left? Of course not, there would be plenty of capable people vying for these jobs.
43
So, essentially, Income inequality is continuing to get worse. In the past when the rich get too big for their britches one of two things has happen: The Great Depression or the French Revolution.
41
I opt for the latter, starting with Jared Kushner
6
INFLATION IS RESTRICTED TO WORKING CLASS EXPENSES
Inflation is flat for the rich but terrible for the rest of us. Graphs of inflation show it flat since 1980, but inflation is out of control for homes and cars. Homes and cars are the two biggest budget expenses for working families. Homes and cars account for a much higher percentage of working family income than wealthy family income. Wealthy people can buy expensive homes and cars and without spending anywhere near the percentage of their family income that working class families do. The economy is not booming for working class families. Wages went flat in 1980 while home and auto prices soared.
Anyone can check these things. It took me five minutes to find the graphs. Tell the leadership of the Democratic Party to stop arguing about plastic bags and get after Wall Street. Give us a real progressive.
27
Thanks Donald! So much for helping the middle class.
17
@Doug. Oh, Doug, you give Doug's everywhere a bad name. Donald is the first one to actually cut the middle class taxes, compared to say, Obama, who pretended he did but definitely did not! Thanks Barack, for nothing!
1
At this point America is basically an enormous cruise ship. It looks great in the commercials, and for the very few who can afford the highest tier of VIP service it's lovely. But for everyone else accommodations are cramped, the food is gross and all the fun activities cost way too much. Oh, and don't forget that we're dumping vast amounts of sewage into the ocean as we go.
127
One could call it a Cruz ship, after hideous senator Rafael.
7
This is familiar. Just like when Obama or the democrats were in power, most of the economic gains are still going to the top. Looks like income disparity is one of those rare bipartisan issues.
7
@Al Obama was not a Democrat, but a neo-liberal, corporatist...might as well be a republican.
Bernie, who is portrayed as some crazy socialist, is the closest to a Democrat.
3
Sour grapes. Highly compensated CEO's are low hanging fruit for the socialist intelligentsia.
The numbers may seem obscene, but it is what the market will bear. These are the rock stars, the major league pitchers, the action movie Stars and Starlets. Whats the difference? Should Brad Pitt be salary restricted? If a CEO is considered over payed the company stock owners will fire them.
We are a capitalist country. A company has a right to pay their boss whatever they feel appropriate, even it seems stratospheric to the rest of us mere mortals. If and when the socialist wave sweeps through our government, lets see how quickly Robert De Niro will cough up an extra 7% of his salary because his fans thinks he gets paid too much.
7
@megachulo, "These are the rock stars, the major league pitchers, the action movie Stars and Starlets." Actually those are precisely not CEO's. (I know, I'm a CEO and of an international company, thank you.)
LeBron James, for example, actually does deserve his salary because he's the one killing himself on the court. If he was earning his salary by skimming the labor of, say, 60,000 employees making 1/4,000th of his salary (Apple), that would be something else entirely.
50
@megachulo It seems the rise in compensation for C.E.Os knows no boundaries. Income inequality is also skyrocketing for top-ranked professional athletes, movie and TV stars, Wall Street moguls and oligarchs. Socialism is exactly what capitalism needs to save it from itself.
9
On billionaires and multi-millionaires (say $100 million): There is something inherently wrong with having a net worth of $1 billion (U.S. dollars, today’s value), or even $100 million. What to do about it? First, I'd raise the estate tax on estates worth, say, more than $100 million to 50%, increasing to a maximum level of 75% that would kick in at $1 billion. Second, on annual income taxes, I'd raise marginal income tax rates to similar high levels for annual incomes over, say, $5 million (to 50%) and above $50 million (to 75%). Is this socialism? No, it's democracy.
23
Unemployment Rates
- Australia 5.0
- Canada 5.6
- Germany 3.3
- France 8.9
- UK 3.8
- US 3.6
- Japan 2.4
For the most part historic lows. Without government programs you're forcing people to work McJobs in order
to pay their bills. And you end up with an under educated workforce who become cannon fodder for carpetbaggers
like Trump.
The programs enable people to educate themselves without going into long term debt. They also help the middle class
maintain their standard of living when worker pay increases aren't keeping up with economic growth.
11
@Marcus Aurelius
I'm responding to those who suggest entitlement programs result in high unemployment because people won't bother to work if they're getting gov assistance.
Many of those countries are experiencing record low unemployment despite gov programs which encourage people to improve their lives. There's a difference between a hand out and a hand up.
1
The US has socialism for the rich and free markets for the poor.
My old economics prof used cite the 8 word theory of economics. "Ain't no free lunch. Them as has, gets".
The people on the top think they got there because they earned it. No luck involved. The people on the bottom think they are there because of bad luck, not their own poor decision making. They are both wrong.
Setting aside the tropes, The distribution of wealth is out of whack in a way that is dangerous for us all. We need to correct it. The titans of business will earn more than the rest of us due to their scarcity. But when a single, frugal mom, with one child, can't make ends meet, and that child has almost no chance at a decent future; something need to change
69
I can only hope that each of these highly compensated CEOs would be inspired by billionaire Robert F. Smith’s generous gift to select a college and pay off all the student loans of its graduating class. If ten percent of these students were in turn moved to give back to society because they were so favored, what a better world this would be.
16
I only hope that large gifts like this don't lull us into thinking that real reform isn't needed because the benevolent wealthy will save us.
11
@AMH I totally agree.
3
This is food for thought for USA citizens.
Now, the USA pension and health schemes are all tied up in sharemarket prices and are the responsibility of individual citizens who have invested their payments into the sharemarket.
Now, if you cut out the middleman like all the feeders and skimmers who deplete your individual money, like the management companies etc; and the government reverted to a free public health care system and free pension system, like New Zealand has, then as a nation you'd be better off. as all these companies know the government will bail them out if there's a crash because of citizen joe Bloggs pension and health care money being in the funds.
Win/win for government debt and citizen joe bloggs as you have a guaranteed government universal pension scheme not relying on sharemarket prices. Same for healthcare.
NZ is a far wealthier nation for being a welfare state and cutting out the middle man, because Central government pays healthcare and pensions out of central government taxation collection.
USA system creates oligarchies instead of a democracy.
Our nation is economically better off, overall, when big business doesn't have more power than government.
Our taxation is lower than the USA so there's a lot of corruption and waste in USA government. You need watchdogs to police where all the spending is going in government and police the law making legislature and who voted on what policies so the public can make informed decisions on election day.
18
We need a candidate who will run on "returning the country to pre-Reagan".
The generations coming up during his term and after have been downwardly mobile...from their trickle down transfer of wealth to the top, globalization and destruction of unions and the safety net. And it all seems to be accelerating under trump.
21
It's the Gilded Age all over again. The very wealthy did great back then-until 1929, when it all came crashing down. It could happen once more, worse than 2008-never say never.
45
It crossed my mind in reading this that how necessary are these CEO's anyway? These corporations have CFO's, Legal staff, HR departments, production managers and so on. In addition they have a board of directors making key decisions. If horizontally integrated they would not need these CEO's. Maybe then they could see their way to raising the minimum wage from the embarrassing level of $7.25 per hour.
59
@Steve
I have wondered that too. Additionally, I wonder, would it follow that an individual willing to take an eight of that compensation package be one eight as competent as the current CEO. I doubt it.
4
From what I read in the article, the metric is badly flawed. What should be being measured is how much these executives actually received last year, not what they might get based of stock performance or other factors.
That being said, like athletes CEOs are paid what the owners of the organization think they are worth. High level executives, also like high level athletes, are a fairly rare thing, so like anything, rarity drives up the price. Rather than comparing the salary of an executive to the salary of a worker, perhaps we should be comparing the total compensation of the upper level executives with the total compensation of the other employees in a company. That would give a better picture of where the company decides to spend its resources.
5
@mikecody What makes you think high level executives are rare? I'd beg to differ. Just look at Marissa Mayer as an excellent example of a supposedly high level CEO that ran a company into the ground, yet still walked away with a large, golden parachute. Most of these CEOs didn't found the companies they're working at and are ridiculously overrated. Anyone that thinks they aren't is likely an overrated, over compensated high level exec that is scared about losing any of their pay to help pay those that do the real work more.
37
@Coffeelover (from someone that is not a CEO and isn’t rolling in the dough). It is very likely I nor you could effectively run a publicly traded company to any where close to the same efficiencies those CEO could.
Take Elon Musk for example: do you have or have you had the ability to create online payment services, create a electric car company or a rocket company? The fact that his skill and talent are so limited is the reason he is highly compensated. Now, maybe others are not as talented, but they have negotiated their pay and the board (seeking the companies and employees best interest) has agreed to the CEOs pay.
If you believe your business ability is greater than most of the listed companies board members, I encourage you to try your business model and implement it in real life. Try over paying all your employees and show results. Who knows, You can be the next Amazon!
3
@Rafael Have you heard of "Zip2"? No? Well, it's where Elon got his first $20 million or so. It was a website during the dot com bubble that some idiots threw a bunch of money at because, well, it was the dot com bubble. It had such useful features as allowing advertisers in newspapers to communicate with people via fax. Truly, visionary stuff. (naturally, it no longer exists). Once Elon had a nice safety net, he tried to found an online bank, called X.com. That didn't quite pan out the way he thought it would, but from that, he stumbled backwards into what would eventually become PayPal. Now he was really set for life. From there, he had the freedom to spawn a perpetual series of pipe dreams and failed ventures, from the Boring company, which is a global laughingstock, to Tesla, which is deep in debt and has lost 60% of its value this year. Oh, and for Zip2, Elon got off the ground thanks to money from his dad. Elon isn't rich because he's a genius. He's rich because he lucked into being the beneficiary of someone else's bad investments.
4
In a nation where nearly fifty percent of households would be stressed by an unexpected emergency expense of as little as four hundred dollars, do these compensation levels make sense at any level? This constitutes theft on an absurd scale: theft from workers' wages, from consumers' prices and from shareholders' dividends. The general consensus has never viewed the redistribution of wealth as a basic responsibility of government, but how long will it be before that tide turns?
93
Let me just say: if Elon Musk would focus on getting a Tesla solar roof, battery and car in every home - instead of his fantastical pursuits of the Moon and Mars - we could make a huge leap towards saving the planet. And shareholders could justly reward him for it.
32
Would they even notice a 7% wealth tax (as Elizabeth Warren proposes)? For them, that's not even a vacation home or two. Or a small yacht.
67
CEO's compensation packages are largely set by corporate boards, who are heavily composed of... other CEO's. The boards are theoretically answering to shareholders, who are overwhelmingly dominated by the ultra-wealthy and institutional investors.
It's a big circular, incestuous party- CEO'S and other highly-wealthy individuals acting to enrich each other.
Meanwhile, the rest of us get to deal with HR departments that have no qualms about denying requests for raises when a manager wants to reward a top performer.
40
Interesting how many of them are big Democratic donors, yet the Democrats claim the GOP is the party of oligarchs and plutocrats.
Interesting too how much Elon Musk gets paid for his taxpayer-subsidized products in companies that have never made a profit.
7
I feel this is but a thumbnail of the real story. I guess I'll have to read the comment section to find out what's missing.
9
In 2016, 40.6 million people lived in poverty in the USA.
www.povertyusa.org
These CEO salaries would feed and house thousands.
20
@Barb During the Chinese Revolution, I've read that the landowners were divested of their property, given shovels, seed and a small plot. If they survived a year they were allowed to vote again!
6
Trickle down economics at its finest.
12
@Mindy. Indeed! It's obvious by now that the trickle down theory doesn't hold water.
Elon Musk's compensation is all tied to aggressive earnings and stock price growth targets. Tesla will never achieve most of those. The NYT's "consultants" mindlessly pull these figures from proxy statements without bothering to understand how the numbers are computed and what they represent. This has been a problem for years, but is now glaringly obvious because applying the methodology to this year's proxies requires that them to claim that Musk receives 20-times the compensation of the next highest paid CEO. Ask yourself, is that even possible or is mainstream media just feeding me another half-truth?
7
I find it interesting that the Republican Party loves to demonize the young democrats as being Socialists. And the GOP is all about unrestricted free enterprise. The article seems to paint a picture of the kind of income disparity which is happening in this county and is exactly the kind of thing that leads to Socialism. Its all in the history books!
9
This is disgusting. They should be ashamed.
19
Go be a CEO then if you love the pay.
2
@MiguelM I'd love to! Do you know of any companies that are hiring for the role?
1
Wonder why CEO jobs aren’t outsourced as well? Top notch Japanese CEO’s only earn about 15 times above the average employee salary I’ve read, and are every bit as competent as these multi-millionaire CEO slugs here in the USA! The immense savings are then, evidently, passed on to the shareholders and/or reinvested in the company...
38
Simply obscene.
8
Must be nice
5
So this must be how ‘the tax cuts will pay for themselves.’ No rational person would dare call it ‘populism.’
Yet at this point in American history, millions of foolish working class voters apparently do just that.
8
One year’s salary of just ONE of these people will end starvation deaths the world over.
4
@Vandana
let's do some simple math.
1.3 billion people live in extreme poverty - under $1.90 a day.
take elon musk's supposed payout of 2.2 billion, and upon distributing that equally across all 1.3 billion people, each person would now have an additional $1.69. This would elevate this group of 1.3 billion people to just poverty status, for one day. Does not take into account distribution costs of the 2.2 billion dollars across the global.
"one year's salary of just ONE of these people will end starvation deaths the world over" is plain false.
3
@clueless cynic
That may be, but it would certainly help those who got the little bit extra! Years ago there was a Broadway hit called the "Pajama Game." One of the songs was about workers in a factory getting a raise. It was called "7 and 1/2 cents." "Doesn't mean a hell of a lot" but it does add up!
2
@clueless cynic your "robust" argument seems based on the "reasoning" that a chance at life is no better than death itself.
Most starving people live on less than 0.07 cents a day, NOT $1.90
1.90 dollars is actually luxurious living for the said group.
1
How's that panning out for minimum wage workers in the USA. Minimum wage in Australia is approx. $20 an hour and in NZ approx. $17 an hour. Government also pays accommodation benefits, family support payments, and many other types of supplements to low paid workers in Australia and New Zealand. In NZ our free government pension scheme for all citizens 65 years and over is more than what a minimum wage is in USA. Even billionaires get National Superannuation as it's not asset or income tested.
14
The CEO pay raises are approved by the board of directors, elected by share holders.
If you or I are not share holders, then the CEO pay raises are none of our business.
@SteveMunday It is if the company's employees are so underpaid that some can't survive without public benefits.
11
@NCSense Still not our problem. The employees are responsible for their own livelihood.
@SteveMunday
Steve,
If you think the way shareholders "elect" directors to corporate boards in any way resembles a democratic process or even a "best for the bottom line" process, I've got a bridge over the East River in New York to sell you.
3
So if we were to tax Elon Musk at a 90% rate, he would have to live on an annual salary of only $230 million. And taxed a the same rate, the poor people who are earning $108 would have to live on a mere $10.8 million.
The fact that 10% of what they annually earn would be a huge fortune to most of us only goes to show that we live in a crass oligarchy. According to Federal Reserve Governor Lael Brainard, a $400 financial setback would be somewhere between disastrous and catastrophic for one-third of American adults.
If a 90% income tax on those who earn more than, say, $10 million each year were to change American life as we know it, maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing.
19
@Bill almost all of elon musk's salary is a stock option. It is not worth the paper it's printed or the hard disk it's kept on till Tesla hits some extremely difficult milestones. Right now his actual salary is the median salary that Tesla pays.
The fact that a CEO has to be incentivized to do there job shows how poor the work ethic is among the wealthy.
22
@adrianne Louder, please, for the people in the back.
3
With the income inequality at its highest ever in our "richest" nation - and in all the rich nations of the world - is it any wonder that people are voting for such as Donald Trump, Brexit, and right wing dictator types - hoping against hope for some improvement in their diminishing wage packets? Clearly, there needs to be a correction, and the sooner the better. Class warfare isn't pretty, but neither is civil war.
9
@Ellen
Germans voted for Hitler because he promised to improve their broken economy. Look where that got them, to say nothing of what it did to the rest of the world!
1
@Susan in Maine
Yes, "broken economies"/vast income inequality can create dangerous conditions, with unpredictable outcomes. Let's hope we can elect some FDR sorts of leaders to work on evening things out. When three billionaires collectivly have as much wealth as the "bottom" 50% of the people, it's a real uh-oh moment, or should be.
3
If the federal minimum wage had kept up with CEO salaries/perks/benefits since the 1980s, it would be $33/hour instead of $7.25. (Counterpunch News)
53
@Ellen. Yet people are fighting an increase to $15 an hour.
11
@mdl
Now we know one big reason wages have been stagnant since the 1980s - the tippy- tops have been hogging ever bigger pieces of the pie.
12
From the NY Times, January 23, 2018:
"Mr. Musk will be paid only if he reaches a series of jaw-dropping milestones based on the company’s market value and operations. Otherwise, he will be paid nothing."
So what's wrong with incentivizing a CEO to create shareholder value? If Elon and Tesla succeeds, he gets paid and so do shareholders. If not, he receives nothing.
If anything this should be a template for all CEO's moving forward. It's based entirely on merit. Imagine if our politicians were paid the same way?!
4
What about the people who actually MAKE the cars? You added the shareholders in there, I see, but didn’t say anything about the people whose labor actually designs and manufactures the cars and their components.
Elon Musk isn’t going to make any targets at all himself—but the people who design and make the cars and components might. THAT is the problem with this inequality.
6
@Kristen B
"What about the people who actually MAKE the cars?"
They are free to leave anytime, and take a higher paying job. Nobody forces anybody to work anywhere.
3
@GMooG
Not that easy. Moving costs money and if most of these workers don't even have enough to cover a $400 emergency, how are they to go elsewhere. And most of the jobs being advertised pay little, if any, over minimum wage. And, yes, the economy and life situations often force people to take what is available.
1
I'll bet they don't have trouble paying medical bills, saving for retirement or getting their kids through college (even if they have to bribe someone to do it). Yet, it's these folks who got the big tax break from the Republicans and Trump, while the working stiffs and their spouses often have to work two jobs to make ends meet. The wealthy stay that way by buying Congress and state legislatures who pass laws suppressing employee rights. Workers deserve better, but if the majority won't vote that way, it won't change.
33
Time to raise the rate on the top income tax bracket, limit ways to hide income, and extend Social Security taxes to ALL earned income.
11
CEO's are the poster child for their company, and not to mention targets for anything that goes wrong, especially with public companies. The rank and file, basically have a 9-5 job, not losing any sleep about their company/employer. That's the difference, hence order of magnitude on pay difference. Order of magnitude difference already exists, Attorneys that get paid 20 x more then a fast food clerk... There is an obvious difference in responsibility which carries a price tag. There is a multiplier for everything..... That's how you get there.... 100 x more sounds cheap for that enormous role and responsibility.
2
CEO pay is egregious.
By all accounts, you are also saying that the “lowly” fast food clerk is worth $7.25/hour.
Point is, if companies (and their Boards) have no problem paying their CEO millions and millions...they should t have a problem with all boats rising on the tide and pay the lowest person on the chain a livable salary.
7
@Cromwell You have it completely backwards. CEOs sleep soundly, knowing that they are set for life, no matter what. The rank and file toss and turn, knowing that if the company goes under and they lose their jobs, they might not be able to eat or have a place to live. That's exactly the problem. The compensation is going to the people who are taking the LEAST risk and having the least incentive to actually perform.
4
It's mind-boggling that the CEO of a company that has never made a profit can be compensated as Musk is, especially when he has caused trouble with the SEC. No one is worth this kind of money, especially not someone whose company has yet to turn a profit. Besides, perhaps if he weren't so greedy, the company would show a profit.
3
@Barbara If you read the story, he doesn’t get the $2 billion-plus unless the company’s valuation swells enormously.
2
@Victor Sasson
Yes, I know, but it's still ridiculous, and as the story mentions, how much incentive is this money to him compared to his holdings. Nonetheless, no one is worth so much money.
Many CEOs of large public companies have severance packages that are almost as generous as their comp packages. If a CEO fails and leaves the company, his or her family will be set for generations. The same is true if the CEO succeeds spectacularly and stays with the company. Often, there are few if any negative consequences for failure.
16
"Mr. Zaslav also failed to get all of a 2014 package originally valued at $145 million; the award actually paid out $65 million."
Asolutely heartbreaking. I wish I had that problem.
12
I’ve worked under many CEOs. In general, there’s nothing special about them and a high percentage are pretty incompetent but saved by their employees. It is largely a myth that they should be highly compensated for their talents. I suspect almost all companies would function just fine with a CEO who earns a measly 500k per year
88
You’re exactly right. Most of these guys could be replaced by someone making a 100th of the compensation and there’d be no noticeable changes. It is especially galling when those receiving these packagers are waking into an already well established company. It is one thing to pay someone who launches a company that becomes successful, it is something else to pay someone a massive amount to step into a position that many recent MBA grads could perform.
18
@Elljay
$500,000 a year? That is way too much for them.
5
I get queasy when I hear about how these people provide jobs. No, it's the low-paid workers who provide jobs - and nine-figure paychecks and lifestyles to these wonderful folks.
No workers, no businesses. Ask yourself this: if the people who make the burgers and fries at McDonalds don't show up for work, do you think the doors will open that day. If the CEO doesn't show up, business as usual.
Don't get me started on risk-taking by business owners. As the Times piece on the Trump family showed, because of banking and bankruptcy laws, there is no risk to starting a business.
Also, what's so tough about being a CEO? Profits go down you simply cut costs by firing people. There's a free Wharton class for you folks.
86
@James J Not only do you cut people but then you give yourself a bonus or 33% increase in salary as a CEO of one company I worked for did. According to him, he deserved more compensation for cutting expenses.
These high earning CEOs are raping the companies the control they control to death.
10
Jeff Storey, the CEO, of Centurylink, came from Level 3, which Centurylink acquired. Level 3 was rarely profitable despite being the largest CLEC for years since dereg in 1996. Storey made more in 2018 than the CEO of AT&T, which is substantially larger and more profitable for more quarters than any company Storey ever worked for. So, why are Centurylink shareholders paying Storey so much?
9
It is absurd to pay so much to people of dubious value, passing the costs to stockholders and consumers. But it is usually better than investing in an old fashioned pyramid scheme. CEOs have become the royalty in this monarchical system, making investors vassals and peasants.
8
So a number of CEOs make more in a week than most Americans will make in a lifetime of 40 hours a week for 50 years.
30
Capitalism is good but it has been distorted to give a select few all the rewards
10
But Tesla actually made a couple of hundred million last year in profit.
Oh wait, first quarter 2019 losses were over 700 million.
Well that settles it, pay the CEO x14 of last year’s total company profit.
6
Elon deserves a raise, he's doing the Lord's work, saving the planet.
The other C.E.O.'s, not so much...
6
If Musk was doing the lord’s work, he wouldn’t need to keep that much money for himself. Let’s all be adults when viewing the behavior of these people.
5
Conservatives love to point out how "socialism" doesn't work, pointing to the numerous failed South American countries that have had an economic collapse (while conveniently calling European style socialism "welfare state capitalism").
But by this point anyone that still believes trickle down economics does anything other than line the pockets of people who already have money is either a (probably rich) liar or hasn't paid attention.
24
It would be a public service if The Times were to publish a list like this---only larger and more comprehensive---yearly, so that people who still have a shred of dignity and fair play as part of their world view would know what companies NOT to patronize. For example, I've been looking for a mobile phone carrier, and now I at least know that I can eliminate T-Mobile from my list. Thank you, NYT, for this information. BTW, what is Oracle, and how can I best ignore them?
3
There is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for someone to be making this kind of money. None. No amount of "talent", no amount of "risk", no amount of education justifies this travesty. It is simply a way to steel from others, legally. It needs to stop and if corporations do not, they will end up with another French revolution on their hands. You would think these people are smart enough to avoid this fate, but their greed blinds them to the risks.
13
@Pat
Especially since a CEO has been paid 1 year's worth of salary, all risk is gone. They are set for life. The salaries only make sense if the CEO is subject to ritual Mayan-style sacrifice when there is an earning miss or after a defined number of years.
4
But how much do these overpaid ceo's pay in taxes? They should all be paid in stock.
2
What a bunch of narcissists! Tax the rich tax the republicans and their voters and supporters tax the CEOs and corporations out of existence immediatley no matter where they hide or live or work.
5
And thanks to the idiotic Trump tax cuts, almost all, if not all of these folks, take home more of their salary than ever before. Our country struggles with how to raise the standard of living, reduce poverty, and ensure basic healthcare and services for its citizens. Let these titans of industry get paid, but for heavens sake, tax them.
7
The most replaceable job in any corporation is CEO.
7
@Gabel try and get rid of the conductor at a symphony and see how much music they make.
1
I could have tweeted random SEC violations as well as called someone a pedo and gotten sued for libel for far less money than Tesla paid Musk last year. Just saying.
5
Disturbing, obscene and immoral .
7
I used to work for Discovery. Zaslav has been at the top of this list for a decade and Discovery Communications is terrible. When I worked there, the stock price was $88 and the CFO was targeting 120. It never got close and has been going down since. They moved the HQ to NYC. Leaving Silver Spring MD where it had been founded. How can this guy keep getting compensated to the tune over $120M? The stock price is $27! What a joke.
213
Wealth hoarding is no different than hoarding cats or expired coupons. It's a form of mental illness; trying to fill a deep void of the soul. It would be sad if it weren't so damaging.
23
Washington Post, 2014---"The pay gap between CEOs and workers is much worse than you realize.”
"Harvard study--- Americans believe CEOs make roughly 30 times what the average worker makes. when in actuality they make more than 350 times the average worker.
"Americans drastically underestimated the gap in actual incomes between CEOs and unskilled workers," the study says.
The gap between Americans' perception and reality is the most among any of the 16 countries where researchers measured perceived and actual pay inequality.
In many European countries, the salary gap between CEOs and their employees is less than half of what it is in the U.S. The CEO-worker pay ratio is about 94 to 1 in the United Kingdom, 91 to 1 in France, 71 to 1 in the Netherlands and 40 to 1 in Sweden.
'They have stronger labor unions over there, which makes a difference..'
The average Fortune 500 CEO in the U.S. makes more than $12 million per year-----that's nearly five million dollars more than top CEOs in Switzerland, where the second highest paid CEOs live, and more than twice that in Germany, where the third highest paid CEOs live."
This data and its implications should have been at the top of cable TV news, but it's ignored. Does it sound too 'anti corporate' for our media?
So American voters lack the data comparisons they should have so they make demands on their elected officials of both parties---in the land of "equality, opportunity and upward mobility for the masses."
10
Feel the Bern! Bernie 2020! Tax the rich tax the corporations and CEOs tax the republicans and their voters and supporters out of existence! Viva La Yellow Vests.
29
@republicans r a disease.
A bit extreme no? Who will run the companies? The Government? No thank you, Chavez tried that and you had mobs in the streets fighting over toilet paper.
1
The march of the Oligarchs
12
Obscene.
16
Elon Musk, Liberal Extraordinaire, takes 2.3B and his Tesla is near dead.
Way to go pal.
7
@AutumnLeaf It is because Tesla is " near dead " as you say that he feels he must rob " the Tesla bank account " They have no shame and they laugh in every else's faces that the system lets them do this.
2
Did you read the story? He won’t be collecting a dime, for the reason you cited.
1
*sigh* This argument is getting so tired. Yes, let's keep bashing CEO's. The ones who take all the risk and who put their careers and reputations on the line. Companies that do well under the current leadership, like Disney, also reap benefits for the SHAREHOLDERS many of whom are EMPLOYEES. You people need to stop listening to millionaires like Bernie Sander - the minimum wage in his state, (VT), is $10.78 vs Disney, one of the first companies to pay $15/hour wage. And Abigail Disney, who is no expert on anything as she flies around in her private jet.
1
@BO: What risk? They get huge pay-outs when they leave, even under not-so-good circumstances.
8
@BO I know your comment will get lost, but I really pray those that need to read this do so. Too many people don't understand your point.
2
@BO,
Robert Iger, CEO of Disney is a "Hired Hand" who happens to make $65 million a year in the game. He took no risk. Abigail Eisner did not take any risk but her Uncle did by starting the company. She was lucky by birth god bless her. At least try to understand what a CEO represents. It's simply amazing to hear people say "CEOs took all the risk go start your own company".
6
Senior leaders get paid a lot of money, often ludicrous amounts, and many times within circumstances that don't warrant such large payouts. However, they also shoulder immense personal and professional burdens in their roles and a drawn from a very narrow pool of people who are both able and (perhaps more importantly) willing to bear the risks and responsibilities of leadership. A closely related but perhaps more frightening issue is that the personality profile of someone who can survive the corporate meat grinder and rise to these ranks is often rife with Dark Triad characteristics. How easy would it be to find people who are willing to work 80 hour weeks, never see their families, assume responsibility for billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of employees, and remain altruistic and well-adjusted? We increase the prize to broaden the talent pool and attract more of the able that are willing, but in turn select for those motivated by power and greed. Perhaps an argument aligned with the recent NYT op-eds that favor breaking up monopolies--the stakes are too high for individuals to control, and we're selecting for some of the worst personalities to be in charge of rolling the dice.
5
@Liz cry me a river...
3
Reading this makes me proud to be an American.
1
@John Doe I hope this is a joke
4
@PPP, a really sick one too. Sometimes I stop feeling like trying to care anymore when I read of this obscenity.
3
Come on! These people are the best of the best of the best.
Can you imagine the competition to get a spot that pays a $100 million plus a year (or billion?)?
The competition may not be fair. It may not be clean. But the competition is there.
Let these guys rake in the moolah they so deservedly deserve. Just desserts! Or maybe just dessert.
4
Seems rough to call out Musk, when his comp is very much based on performance, unlike most CEO's and he IS the company.
Without him, Tesla begins circling the drain.
3
@MTS
Did you see their stock price today? Tesla is doing a good job circling the drain with Musk.
1
@MTS
Tesla is already halfway to the sewage treatment plant. The company won't survive competition with companies that actually know how to make cars. Musk's mistake was to decide he had to make cars, when putting the same resources into better battery technology would accomplish the same goal.
Overwhelmingly white and male. Nothing changes.
9
So many middle aged + white men in this list. When will that change?
8
@L I'd rather be a sane POC who spends my time with my family and kids, doing what we love than to be a crazy middle aged white man that lives on corporate jet going from board meeting to board meeting until they die.
3
Disgusting. The richest country in the world has no safety net to provide basic health and education for its citizens, instead gouging them at every step for survival in this society. Greed has been worshiped to the point of absurdity, and the rich have purchased tax policy that makes them richer instead of assisting the very society that enabled their success.
34
Gods, indeed.
1
It's disingenuous for you to include Elon Musk (the founder of Tesla) in this list, because of course he deserves to be compensated for *starting the company*.
1
“It’s never been easier to be a CEO.” Only the most inept need apply.
Do nothing inventive, constructive, strategic, or worthwhile.
Use company profits to buy back shares of your own company, hence, temporarily lifting the stock price.
Get a bonus.
Do they really teach this stuff in business school or did I just see a bunch of clowns get out of that small car?
Hard tell, actually.
8
@PC And don't forget: hire consultants to do the actual thinking for you--which is the SAME advice they give to other companies so that you're all doing the same thing!
16
Seems to me that the USA is veering more towards being like Communist China than a Democracy. USA and China have the highest numbers of millionaires and billionaires in the world.
It's disgusting that the USA set a minimum wage in some states at $7 an hour considering the cost of living in western world nations. Shame on you.
19
Reality Check the pay may be rising but in reality the value of money is falling faster then rise in pay so rich actually gotton poorer. What does that mean for us deplorables were real losers.
This is so disgusting, it makes me nauseous.
13
Many are true idiots
5
Even more lurid: divide Zaslav’s pay and he makes $500K a day. A DAY! He makes more in ONE DAY than his average salaried worker makes in 6 YEARS...
12
Why isn’t the New York Times complaining about athletes who get paid $30 million a year plus?
2
@Social
Because entertainment is a product whose price is determined by what the consumers are willing to pay in ticket prices. It is market driven. If people stop going to games, athlete pay will go down. That is not the case for CEO pay. It is a non-market-driven (i.e. rigged) system that even the owners (shareholders) of the company cannot influence.
17
@Patrick
Umm,other than government services, for which there is no competition, the price of EVERY product and service is determined by the market
1
These CEO pay stories seem to rarely if ever explain the real makeup of executive compensation. These folks get a nice salary, but never even close to what the 2nd baseman for the NY Yankees gets and then a bunch of stock options which have an “imputed” future value using the Black-Scoles formular. If the real price of the stock doesn’t go up the options have no value. If the stock price rises all the shareholders benefit, which is why the shareholders rarely complain about executive compensation. It’s only The NY Times and the other class warriors who hope to generate resentment by playing up meaningless big numbers who feign outrage
42
@James But the base salaries themselves are already a thousand times or more greater than the average worker’s salary. Such CEO salary inflation—excluding stock compensation—is a relatively recent phenomenon, and not a healthy one. And look at some of the companies these CEO’s helm: a number are backsliding but the pay is entirely incommensurate with the performance (Discovery being the most poignant example).
37
@James The shareholders do not complain, true, but an underlying question is whether the board -- and the CEO, for that matter -- should be thinking about anyone else's interests. Until corporate law imposes fudiciary duties on the board to anyone but the shareholders, these kinds of issues aren't going to change.
16
@James
I think MLB players are over compensated as a whole, but I also believe that the system is largely merit based for the guys who start and in comparison it's really hard to understand what truely unique skills most of these CEOs have to justify their bloated compensation.
15
Wow, my experience with T-Mobile was awful. But then, our president...
CEOs are more productive, thus higher pay. Justice. Economic equality is unjust and a rationalization of the mindless ,destructive hatred of independent achievement.
@Sammy Azalea Even assuming that any CEO out there achieves anything without the dedicated work of everybody under him or her (laughable), the question you're not engaging with is: ok, but how much more productive? 10,000x more productive? 100,000x?
I suspect your answer is that the market is providing the answer. But the market isn't operating in a vaccuum: if we were to define "productive" in terms of employee welfare (as Germany does, in part) and not just in the rise in share price, the metrics would be different and, I suspect, the CEO compensation would, too.
4
So these are the pockets that received the benefits of all the hard working Americans, who have not seen real income growth these last few decades.
Every time I read about the shrinking middle class or an analysis of the lack of income growth in the economy I just think... greed, greed, greed.
61
Greed, thy name is USA. And the greediest, stupidest most corrupt person is in the Oval Office. Look what we have become. I weep and rage.
4
This is the scam that keeps on giving to the 1%. You plug in your 'CEO' shill and he is an excuse to siphon untold sums to his 'Exec' buddies. All of it is purloined from the little guys who earn less than beans working for the corporate good.
The excuse is that these CEOs are 'expensive talent who guide companies...' but only guide them into the ground. End result is the money is now in MediaBaron Jr.'s pockets at the top. The high tax rates that discouraged such wealth consolidation are a thing of the past.
9
Really makes you wonder if Musk is worth 23,000 employees paid $100,000 a year.
3
This is so easy to stop. A fair progressive income tax with a rate of 90% over 10 million a year. We can never have the old tax system back because the Congress and President are so bought off by big business and big money. So it goes for we the people.
16
Was breaking down an uncles estate last night, the largest salary he ever reported to IRS was 80K, yet his net-worth became around 1.7 million. So it isn't just the CEO's that are complicit, when everyday people in this country can make something from nothing through smart investing and real estate. How great that this can happen in this country, but does it really have to be at the expense of the environment and society so much?
@Alexia,
How could you compare an uncle who never made more than 80K a year in salary to a CEO taking in $30Million a year? Someone who is 90 today and never made more than 20K a year in salary could easily be worth several million if they bought and held even utility stocks for a long lifetime. Time is your friend. I would assume your uncle was frugal and invested wisely. These CEO's are making in two weeks what your uncle worked a lifetime for.
6
@Jack
I was just making the point that American corporations, investors, and consumers are all part of the same system. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this type of opportunity doesn't exist in most Western European nations, let alone the developing world.
So, the standard now for CEO performance is largely based upon financial engineering, or how well they can manipulate share price. Not surprisingly, the massive tax give-away to corporations by the GOP almost entirely went into share buybacks, artificially inflating share prices. All of that accumulated value spent on air; and when the markets dropped, all of that value generated by the employees) evaporated (but one assumes, senior execs cashed in as much as they could).
Only a few decades ago, share buybacks were considered to be a form of illegal stock price manipulation (which it is). There are many other ways to use retained earnings - regular or special dividends, investing in new products, additional production capacity, improved technology, or, heavens forbid, employee training, benefits and pay. Allowing for buybacks is just an easy way for executives to get paid a lot, while avoiding the hard work of growing a company.
Share buybacks should be made illegal once again. Enforce the idea that corporations need to plow the value created by employees back into the company, or back to shareholders directly.
22
What could one person possibly do that's important enough to "earn" a salary in this range?
83
@KEL They aren't earning this money; they are stealing it. From the stockholders, from the employees, from the customers, from you and me. This is legalized larceny, pure and simple.
17
@KEL - It can be the difference between a company making tens of billions of dollars, or losing tens of billions. Would you rather be Apple, or GE?
Why do shareholders permit this? Wouldn't they rather split those millions among themselves?
6
"C.E.O. pay increased at almost twice the rate of ordinary wages. In 2018 — a pretty good year for the labor market — the average American private-sector worker got a 3.2 percent raise, or an extra 84 cents per hour."
It's easy to see how Trump was elected. The American workers are angry.
8
@Jacquie
Of course workers are angry, but voting for Trump is voting for rich people to pay no taxes! Angry workers need to vote for whoever is the Democratic candidate in 2020.
This ongoing display of rewarding one person over thousands of others that deserving is simply egregious. Nobody is worth the money they are being paid...the whole system is broken.
19
@T.Curley nothing broken about it. If an employee wants this type of life then let them quit and start their own company-- and of course succeed to this level.
And yet the average Joe thought in 2016 that putting one of there business tycoons in the White House was a good idea. Assuming that Trump is actually such, which is doubtful.
5
@Richard Sheinberg on of these business tycoons
The figures are obscene. The people who accept them are without conscience as are the board members who approve them. We need look. No further to figure out what is really wrong in our country.
36
Obscene. Perfect description.
8
One wonders whether there's something intrinsic in American society that causes us to pursue the most self-destructive path. We have the highest rates of incarceration, the highest rate of gun ownership, and gun deaths, the greatest disparity in wages, the worst manners, the most fervent racism and seemingly the most ardent desire to destroy the environment.
Coupled with our President, who is likely the most vile, self-interested and destructive person to ever hold the office, you really have to wonder: what's wrong with America? Why do we have this innate deathwish to always pursue the most repugnant course?
Travel to Europe. Prison sentences there are a tiny fraction of ours; people can earn a living wage and have free health insurance; guns don't clog the streets; and, above all else, the people seem infinitely less stressed out and aggressive. Two weeks in Europe and you can literally feel the stress and aggravation of American life falling away.
We choose these outcomes. We choose to pay these men (note: nearly all men) an absurd, unnecessary wage that only serves to increase class strife and drive yet one more wedge into our society. I am over it, and pray I can one day escape.
132
@Todd A Puritanical streak and substandard public education probably go a long way towards explaining how we have found ourselves in this place.
9
Just small slice of the story. Below the CEO are the other members of the C-suite, and a phalanx of executives whose predatory and hidden compensation is never called out. The Wall Street Journal has been reporting on the CEO issue for over 25 years - and the fact there's NO relationship between performance and pay. Stack your board with your buddies, sit on their boards, and the sky is the limit.
132
You need look no further for an explanation in the rise of the radical Right. Liberalism is the account of freedom in which personal liberties are primary. In conjunction with its economic express, capitalism, that means one can reap huge, outsized gains on the backs of others while paying lip-service to fake_Left bromides. If governments taxed these and theirs as they should, no radical Right
5
@Midwest
The radical Right does NOT support taxing these people as they should be taxed. In fact, they are the ones who cut taxes on the rich. So I don't understand your argument. The people on the Left are the ONLY ones who support taxes on the rich.
9
@Midwest
The radical right you talk about is responsible for this obscene growth in CEO pay, the hard right is responsible for the tax policy that gave huge tax breaks to corporations and well off individuals while raising taxes on the middle class in many cases. Basically, the hard right believes in the 19th century 'liberalism', which is basically that businesses and people should be free to earn as much money as they want, however they want, and this is the Ayn Rand backed view of the hard right. Remember, the hard right who elected Trump based on him 'fighting against the elites' embraced the tax cuts he gave to the well off, the hoi polloi of this country still believe the mantra that if we just cut taxes on the rich, they are gonna be rich, too.......meanwhile, of course, most people are still seeing modest if any gains in salary, while the rich are made even richer. The boobs can't face reality though, they keep voting for the GOP and Trump who think this is just great, and they deserve what they get.
6
No one is worth that much money and it's just a way of avoiding tax and paying a livable wage to their workers. Government should tax the highest tax bracket more so they can pay family support packages to struggling families who work full time and don't get paid a livable wage.
The government makes the laws that lets these corporations avoid paying taxes and government sets the minimum wage.
Someone with that much money doesn't spend it locally like about a thousand workers would to boost the local economy and help the economy grow.
Those companies probably would want the government to bail them out if there was a sharemarket crash, Since 2008 crash the government debt has risen since the government corporate welfare bail outs and the rich have got richer and never had to pay the bail out money back to the government when the economy picked up.
27
Compensation types mentioned within this article need to be more clearly identified. Salary compensation is much different from Stock Option compensation. One is direct compensation, the other is performance based. There is a world of difference between the two!
Salary compensation is just what it is, regardless of the company's stock price or company performance.
A stock option is normally granted at the closing price of the stock on the day the Board of Directors approves the grant, for the option to have any value the stock price must go up from that price. The Board of Directors should have a Compensation Committee who has a fiduciary obligation to the share holders of the company to ensure those shareholders are not being taken advantage of in the awarding of whatever grants-awards are approved.
Salary compensation reflects directly on the company Balance Sheet as an "Expense". Stock Option compensation does not, rather it will cause the dilution of ownership as new "Shelf Registration" shares are issued for each option share sold. Then it is just a question of how much is share ownership being diluted?
1
@Michael
Most of these salary figures you see is in stock, and these days it isn't in options, it is restricted stock options. Typical CEO cash pay (bonus+pay) for CEO's actually hasn't grown that much, it is roughly in the million dollar-million and a half range. So when you read about a hundred million dollar salary, it is 99% in stock likely.
This is bad on two grounds:
1)The stock is tax favored, the way the grants are issued by the time the CEO gets them (usually after a year), they technically have had it a year, so they pay only 15% on capital gains.
2)The worse part is this gives the CEO incentive to boost the stock price at all costs, and is one of the reasons the US is in such crisis with worker pay and wealth inequality. The stock analysts who basically decide stock prices hate labor costs, and this CEO's have tremendous pressure to limit increases in those kind of costs. Send 10,000 jobs to China, stock analysts nod,send 20,000 jobs to China, they cheer. Give your workers less than cost of living raises, they love it (stock analysts are thrilled at how little wages have gone up), give workers decent wages and they slam the stock price.
If we are going to reign this in we have to find ways to penalize shareholder management, excess pay packages like this should be hit at full tax rate with no deductions.
5
RSU's are immediately taxed upon vesting, and immediately appear on the balance sheet as shares held. RSU shares are commonly issued at a ratio of 1 for 3 or more vs Options shares. There is no way around the tax withholding's of an RSU vesting, as the vesting appears as a form of reportable compensation on their W-2 form.
I do not disagree with your thoughts on shipping jobs overseas, but in recent years those cost have been defrayed by automation. A robot is even cheaper than a human, and their quality of work is rarely in question. Then the question becomes is it better to build here, or there? Building here has advantages both in terms of public image and shortened supply chains to point of sale.
Meanwhile the people that keep the gears moving make less and less and pay more and more. Well - I’m sure this can go on for ever without bloody revolution.
185
Wasn’t there a story just this week that the average middle-class American wouldn’t be able to scrape together $400 in an emergency? Even counting credit and loans?
47
Your last sentence better be sarcasm. Print has no voice expression. Better to write EXACTLY what you mean!
2
AHHH!! Now we know part of the reason why Tesla loses tens of billions of dollars every year.
9
It’s increasingly obvious that Musk is a fraud, aided and abetted by fawning news coverage of his various cons. So of course he’s looting his company while the looting’s good.
3
The hardest part of being a CEO is becoming the CEO. The high salary is essentially back-pay for the work done behind the scenes to get there. It's the same reason NFL players make tons of money and D1 college players get nothing - the high earnings represent a validation of all the effort it took to reach the pinnacle. A D1 player who doesn't make it to the NFL will certainly have gained valuable skills, personal connections, and life lessons, but they failed to cross the final finish line, so the big expected payday ends up looking more like a mirage than a reality.
2
Wait, what does any of this have to do with how easy it is to be a CEO?
4
This is the stuff of socialist revolutions. I don't have an issue with founder/CEOs like Musk reaping outsized rewards but some of the others on the list are merely hired help. They aren't that much more valuable than other top managers at the firm.
8
@Ed
Unfortunately, all of the would be socialist revolutionaries are looking at their smartphones playing Pokeman Go instead.
This is unending unless the rest of us end it. #Greed
4
At a quick look, women 1% or fewer
1
@bharmonbriggs
I counted seven. 3.5%. Fix that and the problem would be mitigated.
2
I wish Seth Meyers and Amy Poehler were still doing SNL's Weekend Update because this needs reporting is ripe for a "Seriously???" segment. And the rich get richer....
8
As long as they don’t keep their monies under the mattress, society will benefit from their fortunes. So what is the problem?
1
Society will benefit? Sure, in a trickle-down way. You don’t see a problem with that? Either you are a billionaire yourself or worse, you root for them.
22
@PaulN Iago hated Othello’s good life.
@PaulN But a lot of these companies are effectively keeping their money under the mattress! This money would have a far greater impact on the economy's health if it were put into the hands of people who would actually go out and spend it on goods and services.
Lest I draw the ire of some of the self-described capitalists in these comments, I am not anti-capitalism! I'm an investor! But the system has its faults and inefficiencies, to be sure.
Trump was the head of a company. That told me everything I need to know about American Corporate leaders. Hubris pays well. Now there are some who actually deserve the pay but most ride a wave of corporate hubris.
4
This is disgusting.
No one is worth that amount of money---I can't believe these people even accept it.
Shameful.
15
My theory on why CEO compensation is so high: Buying off someone's conscience doesn't come cheap. It's the rare person who wouldn't do anything, say anything, believe anything, deny anything, support the most vile politician, and step on the most helpless person if they have to to keep that vast amount of money coming.
4
@Citizen-of-the-World Unfortunately, I disagree. Sociopathy is not rare in the U.S.
2
These people are looting the economy. They are Donald Trump, only a touch less narcissistic, and with better manners. Their ethic, such as it is, is take what you can because you can.
What we're seeing is that Ronald Reagan was always really a pleasant mask for Gordon Gekko. But Greed isn't actually Good; it's a malignant vice. The rest of us need to wake up from the dream of Reaganism, and defend ourselves. Put the top marginal income tax rate back at 70%, where it was pre-Reagan, apply the same marginal rate to capital gains, and institute a sensible wealth tax for the rich (most ordinary folks who own homes already pay those in the form of property taxes). Let's stop our slide into dystopia, and restore a decent society.
237
@TMSquared-Exactly; 60 top corporations paid "0" taxes in 2018 and come received rebates. Watch the rest of the Fortune 100s, 500s, 1000s to climb aboard.
Corporate tax rebates & “O” taxes
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/29/us/politics/democrats-taxes-2020.html
https://itep.org/notadime
2
This article is misleading.
“Tesla would have to reach highly ambitious milestones for Mr. Musk to receive any of (the $2.3 billion). Tesla’s market capitalization is now $35 billion. To gain all the options in the award, its market value would have to increase 18 times over, to $650 billion.”
The original compensation package for Musk was based on goals that only the space monkeys on the Tesla board could believe was ever possible. Musk was not paid this amount and never will be. The effect of this article is ultimately to distract from the real and obscene pay that so many other CEOs on this list actually received.
7
To paraphrase Bernie Sanders: “If you found a wildly successful company, you can be a billionaire, too.”
4
@American Problem is most of these folks did not found a company. They were part of the work force and hobnobbed with the right people at work to “market” themselves as “leaders”.
2
And people wonder why so many of the unemployed have dropped out of the job hunt altogether. The sheer audacity of this level of wealth inequality is enough to make anyone throw in the towel.
9
Here's the worst part:
1. The pay these greedy trolls is completely out of proportion to the value there bring.
2. When the companies tank, these no-skin-in-game hucksters get to keep all their cash.
54
@JB You're just flat-out wrong on #2. If the company tanks, so does the stock price, which means most of these compensation packages will be worth $0. The article even explains this.
3
JKR,
The corporation usually tanks after the CEO has bailed out with their Golden Parachute.
8
This is sick.
This is rotting the fabric of America.
105
There are lots of people who could do better jobs than most of these people for a quarter of their pay. And if you don't believe that you are a sucker.
The right likes to accuse the left of being a bunch of elitists. But aren't these people the true elitists? How did things get so skewed in this country?
7
Although I generally agree with your article, I would say that it is focused on the wrong issues.
Musk, for example, is being awarded a ridiculous compensation but, on the other hand, he is singularly responsible for the creation of Tesla and its original success.
Most other CEOs are mere administrators with no singular contributions of any kind.
Hurd, for example, was a failed CEO at Compaq, until his friend Ellison rescued him and gave him the CEO job.
The great majority of CEOs do nothing to justify their golden parachutes and astronomical salaries. I worked for a large software company for 30 years. Every 5 years, we would get a new CEO that would promise to greatly increase revenues. Revenue never changed. The CEO would eventually retire with a huge compensation package. Many of these CEOs were retreads without any original ideas.
The problem is with a system that rewards who you know, which is the problem I have with you placing Musk at the top of the list. He is certainly a crazy genius and his value is very difficult to measure.
You should also mention ALL boards of directors. These people make more than 1/4 million just for showing to a few meetings without any responsibility.
The Theranos board is just an extreme sample of how boards are selected and their lack of contribution to the company success:
http://fortune.com/2015/10/15/theranos-board-leadership/
17
@El Lucho Nailed it. I worked for a company where the Board was made up of the PE equity company management and our CEO. They took out millions each year while sales dropped by 90%. Employees got shafted. They walked away with their millions.
12
Glad to see that the CEO of Oracle is on the list. The US government uses Oracle software, and it was "down" from last Friday (5/17) to yesterday (5/23). Who needs to worry about Russian, Chinese, and North Korean hackers when US corporations are the US government's worst enemy?
But what do any of these people actually do? Or is it more a question of what they don't do (sink the company, bankrupt the stockholders, throw everyone else out of work)? If you manage not to do any of those things, you're a corporate genius?
Is there kind of a waterline effect here that I'm simply not getting? Trump loses a billion dollars over a ten year period and still is able to sell himself to the American public as a business genius. So these guys are above the waterline because they haven't plunged their respective companies into Enron-like collapse?
196
@crowdancer They don't really do a whole lot of things that different from most businessmen. The local baker or convenience store owner. Or the guy running a computer shop. But they do it on much larger level and they are beholden to their stockholders and their board of directors. Unlike the small business people who are beholden to their customers and their employees. They also have lobbyists in Washington who help make their jobs easier by making sure rules and regulations favor their businesses and their ways of doing business. Many of these rules and regulations stifle competition and make small business men's jobs harder.
Unlike the local businessmen these guys don't have
to care much about their customers or their employees because they are trying above all else to maximize shareholder value. That gives them even more power and makes them more money in bonuses and stock options . These guys and their boards and their share holders are in the club. And they have convinced everyone in the club that they have special talents that other people don't have.
And the club is exclusive. Many small businessmen could do what they do and do it better and for much less money but they are not in the club.
24
@William
The trouble with those small businessmen is that most of them are honest workers who care about their product and their customers and their employees. There's no money in that. You have to fire a few thousand to get rewarded by a few dozen million. (Thinking of IBM many years ago with their executive genius Lou Gerstner.)
9
Can we all agree this is completely out of hand. A 70% tax rate for income over $10 million will go a long way to fixing this.
AOC is wrong about almost everything, but she is right on this.
51
Fitzgerald is reported to have conversed with Hemingway about the rich. Fitzgerald said the rich are different from us, whereupon Hemingway sarcastically quipped "yes, they have more money". Hemingway was wrong.
This is not just about them having more money. This is a pathology -greed - which only knows one word "MORE". The ruling elite live utterly divorced from reality with no self imposed limts, all the while influencing policy and government to further enrich themselves. This ultimately not only destroys lives but perhaps eventually our survival as a species.
The rich and the ruling elites do not deserve our respect, but rather our repugnance.
130
@Sean Greed is a mental illness and should be classified as such. No person needs the kind of money that the ultra-wealthy accrue more and more of. The situation is a zero-sum game. When CEOs take home exorbitant riches, their workers take home less. This is simple math. The ultra-rich have used a portion of their wealth to buy politicians and change laws that enable them to literally steal money from others simply because they can and with no end in sight. Meanwhile, we need to be spending our collective wealth on the things that will benefit our entire global community such as mitigating climate change, improving education, housing the homeless, improving infrastructure, etc.
13
CEO's should lead by example. How do you ask the employees of a company to work hard and take modest increases when your own compensation is obscene to the point that one person could never spend all the money in 10 lifetimes. I would suspect there are lots of smart people who could be the CEO's of AT&T or Verizon and do just as good of a job. Corporate America is filled with examples of people who were longtime CEO's, very well paid and inept to the point of destroying the companies they ran, Exhibit A is General Electric.
49
The most straightforward way to address this issue is to increase the tax rate on the highest level of earnings. If the top bracket was taxed at 70% for income over a really large amount (say $20MM), then these companies would be giving the lion's share of these packages to the government, and there would be less concern about their size.
Most other methods that have been tried have relied on Directors feeling shame about the packages they give CEOs. This clearly doesn't work.
321
@Leonard Levine - The 70% figure is too low. It should be 90% like is was in the 1950's.
15
@Leonard Levine
The problem is, some CEO packages have the company picking up the master of the universe’s tax liability. THAT practice should be outlawed.
And tax them at 75% over $10 million. Also tax stock grants, and require stock be held for at least 5 years.
13
USA is run by corporations, politicians, and rich, and elites. They make laws that make what rich want legal and easy, and what poor want difficult or illegal. Outrages CEOs pay is just one example of the systemic problem that has gotten much worse since Reagan. It's not only Republicans, Democrats are partners in the crime.
With all the problems of capitalism, socialism isn't the answer. Capitalism should be regulated, and politicians and lobbyists must be restrained. The final solution depends on all of us.
36
I am sure some of them will sponsor "impact investing" to alleviate poverty and inequality. And also "give back" in the form of "philanthropy" with the same noble goal.
6
I take issue with the premise of the headline - at this level of pay, more money has no measurable effect on the personal welfare of the CEO. No single person or even family, or even some small countries need 2.3 billion a year (the government of Liechtenstein only used 1.37 bn$)
134
@Ethan Arnold
The $2.3 billion is a grant of stock options over time that only have value of Tesla stock exceeds the market.
1