How Long?

Discussion in 'Economy' started by Richard-H, Nov 21, 2008.

?

How long ago would you have had to start working to earn $67.9mil

  1. Less than a year

    1 vote(s)
    12.5%
  2. 1 - 3 years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. 3 - 5 Years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. 5 - 10 years

    1 vote(s)
    12.5%
  5. 10 - 20 years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  6. 20 - 50 years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  7. 50 - 100 years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  8. 100 - 500 years

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  9. 500 - 1000 years

    5 vote(s)
    62.5%
  10. Moses & I woulda been buddies

    1 vote(s)
    12.5%
  1. Richard-H
    Offline

    Richard-H Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    2,285
    Thanks Received:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +510
    The link below points to an article saying that a single CEO recieved a

    67.9 MILLIONS DOLLAR CHRISTMAS BONUS LAST YEAR!

    Goldman Sachs CEO gets $67.9 million bonus - MarketWatch

    How long ago would you have had to start working, at your present salary, to earn that much money?
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2008
  2. random3434
    Offline

    random3434 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Messages:
    25,903
    Thanks Received:
    7,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +7,194
    Who said 5-10 years? :confused:









    (and do you want my phone number lol!) ;)
     
  3. Richard-H
    Offline

    Richard-H Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    2,285
    Thanks Received:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +510
    Ho! Ho! Ho!

    and this ain't a Christmas greeting!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,749
    Thanks Received:
    4,491
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,070
    You know, what private companies do with their money is no one's business but for the stockholders.

    Employees who don't like that CEO's get fat bonuses don't have to work there. Stockholders who don't like the bonuses can sell their stock or not buy it in he first place.

    In fact if stockholders protested by a major sell off of shares in companies that give bonuses they feel are exorbitant, you would probably see some changes in the practice.
     
  5. Richard-H
    Offline

    Richard-H Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    2,285
    Thanks Received:
    385
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Ratings:
    +510

    First of all, these are not private companies, these are publicly traded companies. The government has the responsibility to monitor and set standards for publicly traded companies.

    Secondly, the Executives are not the owners, but people who have been given the management authority for the company. Excessive compensation is an extreme abuse of that authority.

    Thirdly, if you think that employees have any choice in where or whether they work, you're out of your mind. Employee compensation for those below management level has been held so low for so long that the vast majority of Americans are completely economically disempowered, are in debt up to their gizzers, and have no choice whatsoever in if or where they work.

    We have been reduced to slaves that get bartered for by the elite.

    (BTW, nice of you to comment without answering the poll).
     
  6. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,749
    Thanks Received:
    4,491
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,070
    A publicly traded company IS a private company. Just because individuals can own shares does not make a company beholden to all people. Just to their stockholders.

    And the owners approve the bonuses so what's your point?

    An employee has the freedom to quit, move and find other employment at any time. people who spend more than they make are not the problem of their employers or anyone else. Why should I feel bad for some idiot who makes 5000 a month but spends 6000 a month?

    You are not nor have you ever been a slave. Perhaps that attitude is part of your problem.

    And as for the poll I think someone should be able to make 100 million in a day if the market will bear it.
     
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Roughly 7,348 years, 4 months and a few days.

    But to be fair, given that he might pay the full 35% income tax rate on that, that would mean I would make as much as he does in a mere 4,776.5 years.

    So obviously, a FLAT TAX is still the only fair system of taxation.

    It's just not right that that poor guy pays a greater share of his annual income than I do, is it?

    After all that CEO's firm made $3.22 Billion last quarter, while all this CEO did was give educational materials to a hundred thousand or so people worldwide during the same time.

    He's clearly worth 4,776.5 of me to mankind.

    Not more than a couple hundred thousand people could possible do what he did last quarter.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2008

Share This Page