Should salaries be capped?

  • Thread starter Thread starter consumedconvert
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

consumedconvert

Guest
Here’s a novel idea culled straight (more or less) from Distributist theory:

Would it be morally superior to cap the total compensation of CEOs and other top execs? Say, to $1 mil annually?

Consider the modern delimma. We here time and again of companies losing money, laying of workers, and CEOs getting multi-million dollar bonuses. If you capped total compensation and required any excess income to be either donated to a charity of one’s choice, re-invested in the company, or used for a government program of your choice, everyone (except the CEO) would benefit. Charities would see a big boost; the government would receive a slight increase in income; shareholders would benefit; employees would work in a much more equitable situation; and in any case, no one would be laid off to pay for the bosses’ new beachfront houses. And I think, after considerable self-sacrifice, corporate-types could learn to live with $1 mil a year :rolleyes:

What do you think?
 
consumedconvert said:
Here’s a novel idea culled straight (more or less) from Distributist theory:

Would it be morally superior to cap the total compensation of CEOs and other top execs? Say, to $1 mil annually?

Consider the modern delimma. We here time and again of companies losing money, laying of workers, and CEOs getting multi-million dollar bonuses. If you capped total compensation and required any excess income to be either donated to a charity of one’s choice, re-invested in the company, or used for a government program of your choice, everyone (except the CEO) would benefit. Charities would see a big boost; the government would receive a slight increase in income; shareholders would benefit; employees would work in a much more equitable situation; and in any case, no one would be laid off to pay for the bosses’ new beachfront houses. And I think, after considerable self-sacrifice, corporate-types could learn to live with $1 mil a year :rolleyes:

What do you think?
Click to expand...
Not gonna work in practice (what species are you talking about here?* Homo sapiens*?), greed motivates people to innovate. But your argument is rejected by most people here who side with the conservatives. I think most people on Catholic Answers are against heavy taxation on the upper brackets so do not expect sympathy with your proposal.

I wouldn’t want to stop innovation. But if CEOs (let’s say from a drug company) can live with such a minute salary, I think they should allocate their money for more R&D instead of an opulent lifestyle.

I also do not want to use the “e” word, but I think Peter Singer has a realistic proposal compared to the aforementioned one: genetically engineer everyone to be altruistic (and intelligent, healthy, less competitive).
 
Sounds good to me…I was reading somewhere that the average salary in France is something like 40k (euros) and sarkozy, the president, just got a raise to 350k. Not exact figures but you get the idea…so I’m all for it.

Unless I’m the CEO. 😛

Think about it like this. Lets say a CEO is making 250 Million/Yr if he just got a severance package and what have you. If he only took 1 million (which is more than enough in my opinion) he could afford to double the salaries of 6,225 more people who are making 40k a year.
Thats a lot of happy people.
 
consumedconvert said:
Here’s a novel idea culled straight (more or less) from Distributist theory:

Would it be morally superior to cap the total compensation of CEOs and other top execs? Say, to $1 mil annually?

Consider the modern delimma. We here time and again of companies losing money, laying of workers, and CEOs getting multi-million dollar bonuses. If you capped total compensation and required any excess income to be either donated to a charity of one’s choice, re-invested in the company, or used for a government program of your choice, everyone (except the CEO) would benefit. Charities would see a big boost; the government would receive a slight increase in income; shareholders would benefit; employees would work in a much more equitable situation; and in any case, no one would be laid off to pay for the bosses’ new beachfront houses. And I think, after considerable self-sacrifice, corporate-types could learn to live with $1 mil a year :rolleyes:

What do you think?
Click to expand...
I somewhat agree, but in a sales envinronment, there would be some sales people making nearly that, depending on the industry. A CEO should make a bit more than $1mm annually…however, if they are let go, they don’t get to take oodles of money with them…I agree, that is terrible. I remember when US Air had to restructure shortly after 9/11 and the former CEO walked off with a BUNDLE. And they laid off the workers? I don’t get that. Oh, yeah, wait…it’s called greed.:rolleyes:
 
whatevergirl said:
I somewhat agree, but in a sales envinronment, there would be some sales people making nearly that, depending on the industry. A CEO should make a bit more than $1mm annually…however, if they are let go, they don’t get to take oodles of money with them…I agree, that is terrible. I remember when US Air had to restructure shortly after 9/11 and the former CEO walked off with a BUNDLE. And they laid off the workers? I don’t get that. Oh, yeah, wait…it’s called greed.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I agree.

I also think that professional athletes make way, way too much money. Put a cap on them, too.
 
40.png
mommyof4:
I agree.

I also think that professional athletes make way, way too much money. Put a cap on them, too.

LOL! No doubt! It is insane what they make…and how ‘important’ these athletes become to their audiences.
 
40.png
mommyof4:
I agree.

I also think that professional athletes make way, way too much money. Put a cap on them, too.

I agree…take the NHL for example. A back-up goalie will make, at minimum, 250,000 a year, and plays maybe 10 games a year, the rest he sits on a bench the flies around the continent.

Compare that to a high level doctor who takes probably 10 years of school and 10 more years of work to get to that salary but probably works 100000x harder then that goalie.
 
whatevergirl said:
LOL! No doubt! It is insane what they make…and how ‘important’ these athletes become to their audiences.
Click to expand...
I agree…take the NHL for example. A back-up goalie will make, at minimum, 250,000 a year, and plays maybe 10 games a year, the rest he sits on a bench the flies around the continent.
Click to expand...
Compare that to a high level doctor who takes probably 10 years of school and 10 more years of work to get to that salary but probably works 100000x harder then that goalie.
Click to expand...
Sports is a zero sum game (the actual competition anyway). But, it attracts a large audience and provides a perfect medium for advertisers. It is also extremely profitable for many people. You can see how one’s athletic prowess attracts people into stadiums and those people will be exposed to advertisments and other “services” such as hot dogs and other condiments at sporting events.
 
whatevergirl said:
I somewhat agree, but in a sales envinronment, there would be some sales people making nearly that, depending on the industry. A CEO should make a bit more than $1mm annually…however, if they are let go, they don’t get to take oodles of money with them…I agree, that is terrible. I remember when US Air had to restructure shortly after 9/11 and the former CEO walked off with a BUNDLE. And they laid off the workers? I don’t get that. Oh, yeah, wait…it’s called greed.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You make almost $1mil in sales? Sounds like I’m in the wrong industry! lol 😉

While we’re building utopia (in the St. Thomas More sense), let’s limit ALL total compensation to between $1 mil and $1.25 mil.

As for limiting creativity, it is certainly true that any nation that enacted such policies would see a mass exodus of wealthy, greedy people.

I sympathize almost entirely with the Distributists of the 30s, e.g. Hillaire Belloc, Chesterton, et al. But I agree, with Belloc, that any kind of restructuring of society around Distributism (or Propriotorship, as he called it) is almost impossible. But a policy here and a policy there…

Anyway, there’s nothing wrong with theorizing about a more just society. :cool:
 
consumedconvert said:
You make almost $1mil in sales? Sounds like I’m in the wrong industry! lol 😉

While we’re building utopia (in the St. Thomas More sense), let’s limit ALL total compensation to between $1 mil and $1.25 mil.

As for limiting creativity, it is certainly true that any nation that enacted such policies would see a mass exodus of wealthy, greedy people.

I sympathize almost entirely with the Distributists of the 30s, e.g. Hillaire Belloc, Chesterton, et al. But I agree, with Belloc, that any kind of restructuring of society around Distributism (or Propriotorship, as he called it) is almost impossible. But a policy here and a policy there…

Anyway, there’s nothing wrong with theorizing about a more just society. :cool:
Click to expand...
Well, remember we all live a world with John Galt (s) who do not want to help the “moochers.”

They would want to live in some isolated place in the Colorado Rockies if this proposal was actually enacted.
 
ribozyme said:
Sports is a zero sum game (the actual competition anyway). But, it attracts a large audience and provides a perfect medium for advertisers. It is also extremely profitable for many people. You can see how one’s athletic prowess attracts people into stadiums and those people will be exposed to advertisments and other “services” such as hotdogs and other condiments at sporting events.
Click to expand...
So what you are saying, is that sports brings with it more jobs…that is a good thing…indeed.

I just think the athletes make too much…but, they do put their lives on the line. In some sports, they stand to get seriously hurt…football, especially. But, their salaries are proportionate with the way the media, and the public idolize them. (sadly)
 
consumedconvert said:
You make almost $1mil in sales? Sounds like I’m in the wrong industry! lol 😉

While we’re building utopia (in the St. Thomas More sense), let’s limit ALL total compensation to between $1 mil and $1.25 mil.

As for limiting creativity, it is certainly true that any nation that enacted such policies would see a mass exodus of wealthy, greedy people.

I sympathize almost entirely with the Distributists of the 30s, e.g. Hillaire Belloc, Chesterton, et al. But I agree, with Belloc, that any kind of restructuring of society around Distributism (or Propriotorship, as he called it) is almost impossible. But a policy here and a policy there…

Anyway, there’s nothing wrong with theorizing about a more just society. :cool:
Click to expand...
LOL–not me, but a few of my coworkers do. (insurance for commercial companies–give it a whirl!) 😉

So, to have our CEO making $1 mm would seem kind of low, considering…oh wait–maybe my coworkers are making too much.:eek: lol That’s it, the cat is out of the bag. 😃
 
But…I truly wonder if we tested your theory for say two years…if that would impact the taxation laws, and if society as a whole would profit more…there would be more jobs, everyone would be profit sharing, perhaps, as the bonus pools would be a little hefiter than they are…etc…

It would be such an interesting litmus test!
 
whatevergirl said:
But…I truly wonder if we tested your theory for say two years…if that would impact the taxation laws, and if society as a whole would profit more…there would be more jobs, everyone would be profit sharing, perhaps, as the bonus pools would be a little hefiter than they are…etc…

It would be such an interesting litmus test!
Click to expand...
Oh yes, it certainly would. Capped salaries would mean a more level playing field all around. If a basketball player had eight offers, all of a million dollars, maybe he would play for his home-town team, lol…

Of course, the chance of this ever EVER getting enacted in our society are nil, since big business accounts for OH so much campaign money for politicians.

So maybe we should pool our money and buy a small Pacific island. Constitutional monarchy, perhaps. I’ll start drafting the necessary documents …😃
 
consumedconvert said:
Oh yes, it certainly would. Capped salaries would mean a more level playing field all around. If a basketball player had eight offers, all of a million dollars, maybe he would play for his home-town team, lol…

Of course, the chance of this ever EVER getting enacted in our society are nil, since big business accounts for OH so much campaign money for politicians.

So maybe we should pool our money and buy a small Pacific island. Constitutional monarchy, perhaps. I’ll start drafting the necessary documents …😃
Click to expand...
Oh, will you be the CEO?😃 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top