Affordable Health Care Law under review by SCOTUS

[cardboardbox]

Nobody is worth 100X more than anyone else.

If that's true, let's allow corporations to screw themselves by paying 100x to their CEOs.

[GwynnInTheHall]

If that's true, let's allow corporations to screw themselves by paying 100x to their CEOs.

Thing is, they don;t ever screw themselves, they past the cost onto consumers--We get screwed along with the other employees who would make more and rely less on public assistance to make up the difference (again screwing us)

[cardboardbox]

Thing is, they don;t ever screw themselves, they past the cost onto consumers--We get screwed along with the other employees who would make more and rely less on public assistance to make up the difference (again screwing us)

If this company passed the cost to consumers, let's stop buying their products since they now cost more than their competitors who only pay their CEOs 25x.

[GwynnInTheHall]

If this company passed the cost to consumers, let's stop buying their products since they now cost more than their competitors who only pay their CEOs 25x.

what about their employees? So now they get even more screwed and possibly lose their jobs and again, we foot the bill for their care.

Why is it so unfathomable that there is such a thing as "too Much"? I mean after all, the accumulation of wealth leads to nothing good, maybe that 's why Christ was against it.

[cardboardbox]

what about their employees? So now they get even more screwed and possibly lose their jobs and again, we foot the bill for their care.

Why is it so unfathomable that there is such a thing as "too Much"? I mean after all, the accumulation of wealth leads to nothing good, maybe that 's why Christ was against it.

let he market decide what too much is. If there is no value in paying CEOs 100x then it will stop. Maybe if everyone would stop buying iPhones, Tim Cook wouldn't have $500M in apple stock waiting to vest.

[GwynnInTheHall]

let he market decide what too much is. If there is no value in paying CEOs 100x then it will stop. Maybe if everyone would stop buying iPhones, Tim Cook wouldn't have $500M in apple stock waiting to vest.

So I pose this question : what about their employees? So now they get even more screwed and possibly lose their jobs and again, we foot the bill for their care. You ignore it.

You then default to the old chestnut of "let the market decide" which is code for, Let them eat cake.

How about addressing (answering) the question I posed. What about that company's employees......

[cardboardbox]

So I pose this question : what about their employees? So now they get even more screwed and possibly lose their jobs and again, we foot the bill for their care. You ignore it.

You then default to the old chestnut of "let the market decide" which is code for, Let them eat cake.

How about addressing (answering) the question I posed. What about that company's employees......

i guess you can keep buying this companies products if you don't want them to fail.

Look at all the people losing their jobs because of what amazon has done to retail. You guys didn't seem to care when I brought this up in that thread.

[GwynnInTheHall]

i guess you can keep buying this companies products if you don't want them to fail.

Look at all the people losing their jobs because of what amazon has done to retail. You guys didn't seem to care when I brought this up in that thread.

Just admit the obvious, you don't care one bit for the welfare of others if it costs you anything. You are also willing to profit at the expense of others. That's OK you're not alone.

[cardboardbox]

Just admit the obvious, you don't care one bit for the welfare of others if it costs you anything. You are also willing to profit at the expense of others. That's OK you're not alone.

you've made all these assumptions yourself. All I wanted to point out is that companies should be allowed to make a huge mistake by paying their CEO 100x the average worker.

[GwynnInTheHall]

you've made all these assumptions yourself. All I wanted to point out is that companies should be allowed to make a huge mistake by paying their CEO 100x the average worker.

And not have the conversation (at least not a realistic one) of ALL the ramifications of them doing so.

Again, that's ok--You just do you.

[cardboardbox]

And not have the conversation (at least not a realistic one) of ALL the ramifications of them doing so.

Again, that's ok--You just do you.

Do you think Apple would be better off paying their CEO $1 million? Do you think that savings would make them a stronger company? Yes, these CEOs are paid so much that I cant even understand how the company decided they were worth it. But OTOH, they are probably in a position to overpay to make sure they have strong leadership/management and their employees are likely better off. Who would Apple hire at $1M? Someone unproven who could lead them off a cliff and destroy their brand and company and lead to layoffs?

[GwynnInTheHall]

Do you think Apple would be better off paying their CEO $1 million? Do you think that savings would make them a stronger company? Yes, these CEOs are paid so much that I cant even understand how the company decided they were worth it. But OTOH, they are probably in a position to overpay to make sure they have strong leadership/management and their employees are likely better off. Who would Apple hire at $1M? Someone unproven who could lead them off a cliff and destroy their brand and company and lead to layoffs?

So you're ok with putting financial pressure on a company leading to ruin and layoffs, but if they reduce a CEO salary and it leads to the same thing, that's wrong or bad and NOW you're concerned?

You have one constant, you want to see or are happy with putting the most money in people's hands regardless of the collateral cost. You oppose anything that suggests spreading the wealth. And again, that's all ok and seriously--You are NOT alone.


FWIW, as much as I differ from you and dislike you positions and how you interact in here (I have many who feel the same about me) I'd NEVER assert that I or anyone else here was 100 more valuable than you. Which is what my original statement was.

[cardboardbox]

So you're ok with putting financial pressure on a company leading to ruin and layoffs, but if they reduce a CEO salary and it leads to the same thing, that's wrong or bad and NOW you're concerned?

All I said was a company should be allowed to make a mistake by paying their CEO too much. I dont think I'll affect Apple if I refuse to buy their products in protest because Tim Cook makes $150M/yr.

[GwynnInTheHall]

All I said was a company should be allowed to make a mistake by paying their CEO too much. I dont think I'll affect Apple if I refuse to buy their products in protest because Tim Cook makes $150M/yr.

So then you're ok with say--the welfare dept making a 100 million dollar a year mistake?

[cardboardbox]

So then you're ok with say--the welfare dept making a 100 million dollar a year mistake?

I dont pay taxes to Apple. Anything they screw up on is dealt with by their board and shareholders.