Hacker News Reader

> the claim for outlandish executive pay is executives get paid like they do because they have "all the responsibility".

Seems like it might be better not to pay them such ridiculous amounts of money in the first place.

View on HN

Companies don’t generally try to spend money they don’t need to.

I have yet to see evidence that the oft-complained-about high tier executive pay in the US is artificially inflated and isn’t just market conditions pricing the work.

But "companies" aren't a conscious being by itself, they are made up of or rather steered by high tier executives right?

How would you define "artificially inflated"? I.e., inflated against what? Overpaid compared to...average worker pay, GDP, stock market gains...?

If you pay a CEO $3,000,000/year, because otherwise he would leave and get paid that at another company (making that other company more successful than your company) then you aren't "artificially inflating" his pay. You are paying him what the market demands.

I don’t disagree but I think the argument you would typically find is that the value they bring is as symmetrical with pay.

I can find someone on my parents couch who can’t be hired for $100k/yr. That doesn’t mean they are worth that much to the economy

Reply on news.ycombinator.com