You realized CEO's make that much money after a long career where they were busting their asses as juniors.
You basically made the same argument the grandparent is criticizing.
I have no problem with CEOs making lots of money. I have a problem with them making 100x more than their median employee; especially when their poorest employees aren't making a living wage.
But that's true for any job, not just CEOs. Plenty of people bust their ass and never make $250,000 like many FAANG employees. Should we cap the pay of FAANG employees to the lowest paid tech worker?
I have a problem with them making 100x more than their median employee
Why? What should the maximum multiple be? Should a CEO only make 20x the median employee? What if the company only has 10 employees? What if it has 200,000 employees, should it still be 20x?
I'm not sure I understand why a CEO's pay should be solely linked to the median wage of the employees. What's the logic behind it?
- so is CEO of Google
- CEO of Apple comes from working/lower-middle class family
- CEO of Johnson and Johnson (12th largest SP500 company) is an immigrant from Spain, coming from middle class family
etc etc etc
Middle class people aren’t the secretary to the prime minister.
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/satya-nadela-microsoft...
> so is CEO of Google
“His father also had a manufacturing plant that produced electrical components”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundar_Pichai
You’re buying the propaganda.
That sounds quite normal, actually.
But the middle class (the petit bourgeoisie) is a small, economically elite class. It is in the middle between the working class that makes up the vast majority and the even narrower haut borgeoisie — the major capitalists whose relation to the economy centers on control of capital to which rented labor is applied.
Unfortunately, people sometimes confuse the middle class with the middle income segment of the working class, which is a very different thing. (And that confusion is often deliberately exploited.)
> That sounds quite normal, actually.
?!?!
> Unfortunately, people sometimes confuse the middle class with the middle income segment of the working class, which is a very different thing. (And that confusion is often deliberately exploited.)
Oh, I see. This doesn't seem particularly helpful. People don't "sometimes" confuse those two things. The de facto agreed upon meaning of "middle class" has been "middle income segment of the working class" for at least a century at this point.
And, in any case, serving on the Planning Commission seems much closer to "Ruling Class" than "Middle Class" unless you literally believe in the illuminati.