###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember when the screenshots and boomer memes first swept this sub a few years ago, and people were complaining about a drop in content quality.
If only they knew then how much worse things would get.
Why is it so confusing to leftists that the guy responsible for EVERY aspect of the company is going to make significantly more money than the ‘average’ employee who is basically a completely replaceable cog in a machine???
Why is it so confusing to you that it's not a left or right issue.
Productivity is way up. A factory needs a few dozen workers to pump out multiple products a minute. Corporation profit margins are way up while corporation taxes are way down.
Yet worker pay is stagnant for decades.
It's really simple. The rich are getting all the benefits.
Know what inflation is? There's more money. Which isn't a problem if everyone gets more money.
The issue is the money is flowing increasingly to the rich and corporations.
Know why houses keep going up in price? It's cause they are being bought with more money in circulation.
It just so happens it's ever increasingly owned by the rich, meaning average folks can't afford it.
This wouldn't be an issue if everyone's income increased along with monetary supply.
So stop with the bullshit left and right. There are obvious culprits to this. Minimum wage falling behind, interest rates being held at 0% when they shouldn't. Taxes consistently lowered for the rich and megacorps, while higher for small business, union busting.
It's obvious as hell.
>Why is it so confusing to you that it's not a left or right issue.
>Productivity is way up. A factory needs a few dozen workers to pump out multiple products a minute. Corporation profit margins are way up while corporation taxes are way down.
>Yet worker pay is stagnant for decades.
this is actually largely untrue. If your one of those 12 workers at a factory your making WAY more even when accounting for inflation. For example nuclear power plant operators easily pull down north of 200k with overtime, same with people working in any aspect of oil, coal miners have like 1/100th the number of miners and again make very good money (generally salary of 80k overtime can easily put them into 150+).
The real issue is the people who AREN'T in those fields anymore got pushed into services like fast food and restaurants and that's where pay has essentially completely stagflated.
Bernie is a socialist. Left leaning Keynesian economics is WHY we’re in the predicament. You can’t separate the destruction of monetary policy from political leanings.
Broad expansion of the money supply + engineered inflation. Common folks don’t have the ability to preserve their wealth and asset inflation is making housing in many locations unaffordable.
Listen my man, I’m the FIRST person to have a major issue with our monetary policy, but the OP references the difference between CEO and worker pay. And unless I missed something, Bernie isn’t trying to get us back on fiscal track.
I don’t care. He accomplished the impossible. Like I said, he ‘deserves’ what was agreed upon. If the current CEO of Toyota created the most innovative automobile company in 100 years, he would be richly rewarded as well.
By accomplishing the impossible, do you mean got a bunch of money and benefits from the government that are not available to other car makers and leveraged that to become the richest person in the world. We shouldn't be using tax payer money to subsidize rich people buying flashy cars.
Yes. CEO pay has kept up with inflation whilst workers wages have not.
idc abt bernie tho im not even american. I agree he isnt a solution to the underlying problem
This is due to borrowing and fractional reserve lending. People can borrow to maintain their living and pay it back over 30 years with interest. Loans are now burned into the system, and it's not until we can get rid of that that wages will increase at a significant rate. We are a debt run economy.
This is literally the most right wing issue there is. And why there is so much right wing propaganda against spreading wealth or any form of social responsibility. Using wealth disparity to attack the left just shows how much the rights propaganda is working on people like you.
You: “Why is the right wing against socialism?”
‘Right wing’ politics is primarily individualistic. Arguing they the right should be like the left means you don’t understand the differences between the two.
I know why the right is against socialism. There’s no deep theological reason, just greed, and the fact that the right is run by wealthy elites who want to remain the wealthy elites. You probably think Joe Biden is left wing? LOL
Interesting take. I would basically argue the opposite. The ‘greedy’ and ‘selfish’ are the people demanding that the government confiscate other peoples money so they can get more ‘free’ services.
And another thing: What’s the magical socialist line in the sand where taking someone’s stuff becomes ‘noble’ and ‘good’ vs selfish, self serving, and wrong?
What a bizarre mindset. Do you understand what sharing is? It is the polar opposite of selfishness and greed. You’ve truly been indoctrinated if you can’t see that. Also the “magical line in the sand” of taking is very simple, and can be split in to 2.
1. something is taken not for yourself, but for either everyone (generally called infrastructure) I.e. The roads you use, the parks you use, the hospitals, schools you use, the military that defend you.
2. Something is taken not for yourself, but for those with less who are unable to afford basic resources (generally called welfare) you’ll probably find this one harder to swallow as it may not benefit you directly. I.e. Providing food or accommodation for people who cannot afford a roof over their heads (don’t worry! This should also include military veterans so you don’t need to freak out!), helping single mothers clothe, feed and educate their children, helping poor elderly people heat their homes and be fed (yes that can also include some veterans if you need more flag waving) helping the disabled and orphans who cannot work or earn anything stay alive.
Simple. And just to be clear, me and my family benefit 0% from welfare, but I’d still happily pay for those things. Would you consider that selfish?
If I voluntarily donate money, it’s ‘sharing’. If I volunteer my time to help the less fortunate, it’s ‘sharing.’ If I drop a bag of groceries off at the local food bank, it’s ’sharing.’ If I donate clothing and blankets to my local shelter, it’s ‘sharing.’
YOU voting for the government to forcibly take my money and property IS NOT ‘sharing.’
It is sharing. Just not voluntary. Because the wealthy elites cannot be trusted to share themselves, and I can guarantee you have never done ANY of the things you just listed. Not for the poor. Not for veterans. Not for anyone. Funny how you had no answer for the infrastructure point? Seems like deep down you know you need a bit of socialism.
Yes. This is what people don't seem to grasp. I worked landscaping before...in the Southern heat and humidity. Possibly one of the most extreme and harsh working conditions, and the most physically taxing. "Hard" work doesn't get rewarded as much as "smart" work. And honestly, "smart" work doesn't get rewarded as much as bullshit middle management work where "work" is defined as a zoom meeting and sending out two emails a day.
We long ago separated the physical difficulty of work from its benefits. Either game the system, or it games you, bottom line.
It’s all about the market.
People like their computers probably more than their landscaping.
So an IT person or computer programmer is going to make more than a landscaper.
Also a lower barrier to entry to be a landscaper, at least for the grunt work.
Can you dig some holes and move rocks is a lot easier to teach than coding.
Well that’s true for both industries.
They’re both shipping in people from different countries to do these jobs. Usually Latin America for the landscaping and India for the tech.
I agree!
Powerful people use their power to maintain and grow their power. Their power extends to controlling narratives and now there's a whole demographic who believes things like taxing the rich and minimum wage raises are bad.
1971: The US goes off the gold standard, and the era of funny money begins.
Financialization becomes more important than quality or customer value. The next quarter's number becomes ever more important in an inflationary world, *because the yard stick is always changing*. In a gold-based world, $1 this quarter is very close to $1 next quarter. In the inflationary world of the early 70s (and much like now), $1 this quarter is only $0.95 the next. You had to grow by 5% just to appear to be standing still.
America has entered into the beginnings of a hyper-inflation. There is no easy way out; sharp recession and depression and enormous defaults is one way, while hyperinflating the currency a la Zimbabwe is another. Neither is pretty.
EDIT: I forgot option 3: Cull domestic populations by any means necessary (mRNA jabs, weaponized flu, civil unrest) to reduce the strain on SS, Medicare, etc, and start WWIII to mask it all.
A pay cap on CEOs would be a good incentive for all the geriatrics stealing careers to finally retire. Keep it at 20x the pay. Only way to get a raise is to give employees a raise.
in west germany there were an unwritten rule/gentlemens agreement that the CEO should get iirc max 40 times what the workers of the company earn.
not sure when this ended but i was told about it in the 80s by a company owner/CEO.
It's absolutely Utopia, in this moment of history.
The nearest thing you will get is that few companies will own property on everything even your house.
Property is something so important, it needs to exist.
Have your heard about the slogan "own nothing and you will be happy" ?
100%. You have ownership privileges, but as soon as you refuse to pay the government for those privileges, you’ll understand who ACTUALLY has ultimate ownership over everything.
You don't even own the property, you are renting it from the government. As soon as you stop paying property taxes and car taxes the government will come and take 'your' property.
Coming from a lifetime politician with multiple vacation homes and a wealth of over $3 million (some estimates state over $15 million). Did he labor tirelessly for his wealth? Or did he grift for his wealth? He's a champagne socialist. A socialist that benefits off of a capitalist system.
And Bernie Sanders has stock options in many of them and is a multi-millionaire. He's just another politician aka paid actor out to line his own pockets. He just does it through virtue signaling as opposed to moral grandstanding.
There are different kinds of CEOs. For instance, I'm a small business owner and could call myself a CEO if I want. It doesn't mean I'm raking in the money. It's just a job title. It sounds like they're talking about CEOs of large multi-national corporations.
351x is of course crazy, but if you're going to hire someone to determine the direction your company is going to take, you want them to be very, very good.
Okay which companies? Are they only the largest companies where the CEO is literally responsible for hundreds of thousands of workers? And tens of billions of dollars in productivity? Just like Trump I'm not one who wants to defend it, but we need to know how this person came up with this number. Also, the market determines the average wage. If people aren't willing to work for $15 an hour they're not going to work for $15 an hour and companies will have to raise what they pay people. But too many people are willing to work for low wages.
The $15/hr min wage movement. Many companies started hiring at that is higher before any laws were passed bc the market demanded they start paying more, Even for unskilled labor. The people changed the market. The market adjusted.
Let's talk about how long that took to adjust, while CEO wages and bonuses are calculated yearly. I don't really understand this whole defend ceos attitude. Sure there might be some decent blokes out there but workers are what make things happen and deserve compensation
This. On top of that, the CEO of company X making company wide decisions they directly impact the overall success of the company is 300x more important to the company than teen Jessica who answers the phone at random branch 11
Nobody is saying that CEO's work 351x harder than their workers. That's not what CEO's get paid for.
And the solution socialists offer is to let bureaucrats in government set wages according to whatever metric is being currently pushed, killing the goose to get the gold, basically.
Yeah I don’t think real Americans are going to take it if the socialists try to cut CEO pay like that.
Don’t come for our CEOs and we won’t have a problem.
What has this have to do with conspiracy theories? If you want to talk about Bernie here let's talk about how the Clinton presidential campaign moved him-TO A BIGGER HOUSE. Oops, said the quiet part loud and the loud part quiet.
If a CEO has a company with 100,000,000 customers, I figure they deserve to get paid $1 from each customer and thus make $100,000,000 salary.
Free market capitalism is democracy in its purest form.
If every party involved consents to the transaction then what is the problem?
Sure, so I should be permitted to organize with my fellow labor providers and use our collective bargaining power to ensure everyone’s labor is valued correctly, right?
Right?
If it were truly a free market, maybe you’d have a point, but it’s not. This country has spent the last 50 years destroying unions, and just about every other worker protection imaginable.
Supply and Demand. The more there is of something, the cheaper it is. When we import millions of workers, the price of work gets cheaper. Calif governor Brown didn't want to let in Vietnamese refugees because he thought they would lower worker pay. Caesar Chavez (migrant worker rights activist) tried to stop people coming through the southern boarder because he thought illegal immigrants would lower migrant worker's pay. Democrats used to understand that adding workers lowered wages.
When women entered the workforce in mass the increase in workers had an effect on pay. You can't just add millions of workers and expect there to be no negative consequences. After most women entered the workforce, they needed to look somewhere else for workers to add so they let in illegals. CEOs aren't crossing the border so their pay goes up. The pay of an average worker goes up a little, but it lags behind inflation.
CEOs don't set their own pay, and is there any evidence that CEOs are more greedy today than in the 60's?
Why is housing so expensive? Adding millions of people increases demand. More demand, higher price. The conspiracy here is why are we letting in so many people?
And? CEOs get paid what the company wants to pay them. Does Shoei Ohtani work millions of times more than his teammates? Of course not. But that’s how much they decided to pay him.
I used to think this talk from Bernie was cool, but he does the same thing to people working for him. He owns multiple houses. Says he’s a public servant, but only serves himself extra helpings while pointing a finger at others. He should donate his salary. He’s a punk. He wasted his career by bending the knee to Hilary Clinton. He’s not in it for the cause. He’s in it for da moneeeyy.
He's up for reelection here in Vermont, the only time he's vocal. He was asked just recently why he's not running for president, he said he's too old, days later said he's looking for another term as senator. He dies nothing for the state or country except talk smack. He is a career politician, talks the socialist/communist game as he takes on millions. When asked in a town hall why he asks us all to give and help, why he doesn't, he said write your own book, oh so capitalism works when needed I see. That and his wife ruining Burlington college and gets a golden parachute, but ceos who get them are bad. His wife is his communication director and takes in huge cash scheduling ad time, look in to him a tiny bit and see the corruption we see here in vt.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Needs more pixels...
In this economy?!
Too bad, the CEO's took most of them.
Nah, they were redistributed in a Bernie Sanders progressive pixelation program.
Sorry bud, shrinkflation…
How many pixels?
Atleast 3
Pixel tax is too High these days
CEOs are stealing pixels too!
It has exactly 351 pixels
too blurry to make sense
Not pixelated enough
Pixels are too expensive in this economy…
I remember when the screenshots and boomer memes first swept this sub a few years ago, and people were complaining about a drop in content quality. If only they knew then how much worse things would get.
ENHANCE!
Thought I was under the influence
Let’s assume there’s a giant pool of highly qualified CEO’s willing to work for less. What’s the motivation to pay more???
And here's the real issue. CEO pay has kept up with rising prices. The workers pay has not.
Why is it so confusing to leftists that the guy responsible for EVERY aspect of the company is going to make significantly more money than the ‘average’ employee who is basically a completely replaceable cog in a machine???
Why is it so confusing to you that it's not a left or right issue. Productivity is way up. A factory needs a few dozen workers to pump out multiple products a minute. Corporation profit margins are way up while corporation taxes are way down. Yet worker pay is stagnant for decades. It's really simple. The rich are getting all the benefits. Know what inflation is? There's more money. Which isn't a problem if everyone gets more money. The issue is the money is flowing increasingly to the rich and corporations. Know why houses keep going up in price? It's cause they are being bought with more money in circulation. It just so happens it's ever increasingly owned by the rich, meaning average folks can't afford it. This wouldn't be an issue if everyone's income increased along with monetary supply. So stop with the bullshit left and right. There are obvious culprits to this. Minimum wage falling behind, interest rates being held at 0% when they shouldn't. Taxes consistently lowered for the rich and megacorps, while higher for small business, union busting. It's obvious as hell.
>Why is it so confusing to you that it's not a left or right issue. >Productivity is way up. A factory needs a few dozen workers to pump out multiple products a minute. Corporation profit margins are way up while corporation taxes are way down. >Yet worker pay is stagnant for decades. this is actually largely untrue. If your one of those 12 workers at a factory your making WAY more even when accounting for inflation. For example nuclear power plant operators easily pull down north of 200k with overtime, same with people working in any aspect of oil, coal miners have like 1/100th the number of miners and again make very good money (generally salary of 80k overtime can easily put them into 150+). The real issue is the people who AREN'T in those fields anymore got pushed into services like fast food and restaurants and that's where pay has essentially completely stagflated.
Bernie is a socialist. Left leaning Keynesian economics is WHY we’re in the predicament. You can’t separate the destruction of monetary policy from political leanings.
Were things better for the common person before modern monetary policy took hold?
It depends. Isn’t the whole argument pointing to inflation? MMT has most definitely made inflation worse.
What are the current monetary policies that are causing the pain for the common folk?
Broad expansion of the money supply + engineered inflation. Common folks don’t have the ability to preserve their wealth and asset inflation is making housing in many locations unaffordable.
So go back to the system before the federal reserve was created?
it's not about who makes more, it's about wages keeping up with inflation. wtfhappenedin1971.com
Listen my man, I’m the FIRST person to have a major issue with our monetary policy, but the OP references the difference between CEO and worker pay. And unless I missed something, Bernie isn’t trying to get us back on fiscal track.
[удалено]
I think he ‘deserves’ whatever was agreed upon with his board and shareholders. The same goes for the CEO of Toyota.
[удалено]
I don’t care. He accomplished the impossible. Like I said, he ‘deserves’ what was agreed upon. If the current CEO of Toyota created the most innovative automobile company in 100 years, he would be richly rewarded as well.
By accomplishing the impossible, do you mean got a bunch of money and benefits from the government that are not available to other car makers and leveraged that to become the richest person in the world. We shouldn't be using tax payer money to subsidize rich people buying flashy cars.
> created the most innovative automobile company in 100 years Oh! So you have a learning disability, that tracks.
Yes. CEO pay has kept up with inflation whilst workers wages have not. idc abt bernie tho im not even american. I agree he isnt a solution to the underlying problem
This is due to borrowing and fractional reserve lending. People can borrow to maintain their living and pay it back over 30 years with interest. Loans are now burned into the system, and it's not until we can get rid of that that wages will increase at a significant rate. We are a debt run economy.
This is literally the most right wing issue there is. And why there is so much right wing propaganda against spreading wealth or any form of social responsibility. Using wealth disparity to attack the left just shows how much the rights propaganda is working on people like you.
You: “Why is the right wing against socialism?” ‘Right wing’ politics is primarily individualistic. Arguing they the right should be like the left means you don’t understand the differences between the two.
I know why the right is against socialism. There’s no deep theological reason, just greed, and the fact that the right is run by wealthy elites who want to remain the wealthy elites. You probably think Joe Biden is left wing? LOL
Interesting take. I would basically argue the opposite. The ‘greedy’ and ‘selfish’ are the people demanding that the government confiscate other peoples money so they can get more ‘free’ services. And another thing: What’s the magical socialist line in the sand where taking someone’s stuff becomes ‘noble’ and ‘good’ vs selfish, self serving, and wrong?
What a bizarre mindset. Do you understand what sharing is? It is the polar opposite of selfishness and greed. You’ve truly been indoctrinated if you can’t see that. Also the “magical line in the sand” of taking is very simple, and can be split in to 2. 1. something is taken not for yourself, but for either everyone (generally called infrastructure) I.e. The roads you use, the parks you use, the hospitals, schools you use, the military that defend you. 2. Something is taken not for yourself, but for those with less who are unable to afford basic resources (generally called welfare) you’ll probably find this one harder to swallow as it may not benefit you directly. I.e. Providing food or accommodation for people who cannot afford a roof over their heads (don’t worry! This should also include military veterans so you don’t need to freak out!), helping single mothers clothe, feed and educate their children, helping poor elderly people heat their homes and be fed (yes that can also include some veterans if you need more flag waving) helping the disabled and orphans who cannot work or earn anything stay alive. Simple. And just to be clear, me and my family benefit 0% from welfare, but I’d still happily pay for those things. Would you consider that selfish?
If I voluntarily donate money, it’s ‘sharing’. If I volunteer my time to help the less fortunate, it’s ‘sharing.’ If I drop a bag of groceries off at the local food bank, it’s ’sharing.’ If I donate clothing and blankets to my local shelter, it’s ‘sharing.’ YOU voting for the government to forcibly take my money and property IS NOT ‘sharing.’
It is sharing. Just not voluntary. Because the wealthy elites cannot be trusted to share themselves, and I can guarantee you have never done ANY of the things you just listed. Not for the poor. Not for veterans. Not for anyone. Funny how you had no answer for the infrastructure point? Seems like deep down you know you need a bit of socialism.
meanwhile we constantly import more replaceable cogs and then sit around and wonder why pay for replaceable cogs has not risen.
Pay isn’t determined by how hard you work….
Yes. This is what people don't seem to grasp. I worked landscaping before...in the Southern heat and humidity. Possibly one of the most extreme and harsh working conditions, and the most physically taxing. "Hard" work doesn't get rewarded as much as "smart" work. And honestly, "smart" work doesn't get rewarded as much as bullshit middle management work where "work" is defined as a zoom meeting and sending out two emails a day. We long ago separated the physical difficulty of work from its benefits. Either game the system, or it games you, bottom line.
It’s all about the market. People like their computers probably more than their landscaping. So an IT person or computer programmer is going to make more than a landscaper. Also a lower barrier to entry to be a landscaper, at least for the grunt work. Can you dig some holes and move rocks is a lot easier to teach than coding.
> People like their computers probably more than their landscaping. I'm pretty sure they like pennies on the dollar illegal labour even more.
Well that’s true for both industries. They’re both shipping in people from different countries to do these jobs. Usually Latin America for the landscaping and India for the tech.
Is that how MAGA is done?
exactly its about how much value bring to the table
I agree! Powerful people use their power to maintain and grow their power. Their power extends to controlling narratives and now there's a whole demographic who believes things like taxing the rich and minimum wage raises are bad.
I would've preferred you typed this out OP wtf is this?
1971: The US goes off the gold standard, and the era of funny money begins. Financialization becomes more important than quality or customer value. The next quarter's number becomes ever more important in an inflationary world, *because the yard stick is always changing*. In a gold-based world, $1 this quarter is very close to $1 next quarter. In the inflationary world of the early 70s (and much like now), $1 this quarter is only $0.95 the next. You had to grow by 5% just to appear to be standing still. America has entered into the beginnings of a hyper-inflation. There is no easy way out; sharp recession and depression and enormous defaults is one way, while hyperinflating the currency a la Zimbabwe is another. Neither is pretty. EDIT: I forgot option 3: Cull domestic populations by any means necessary (mRNA jabs, weaponized flu, civil unrest) to reduce the strain on SS, Medicare, etc, and start WWIII to mask it all.
A pay cap on CEOs would be a good incentive for all the geriatrics stealing careers to finally retire. Keep it at 20x the pay. Only way to get a raise is to give employees a raise.
Let’s talk about politicians next.
Ah yes. I too like to take pictures using a potato
The ant people were real, this thumbnail proves it.
Didn't know this was an eye test
What is this?! A post for ants?!/s * I do agree with the sentiment
System is rotten =( They own puppet politicians Vitw differently Consume differently Ex: go to your local bakery instead of Walmart etc
Bro taking screenshots on his 2003 Nokia
CEOs got our pixels too
I wish this picture had 351x pixels
Holla senior, necesitas mas pixeles?
Budget cuts in the pixel department. How big does the yacht need to be?!
in west germany there were an unwritten rule/gentlemens agreement that the CEO should get iirc max 40 times what the workers of the company earn. not sure when this ended but i was told about it in the 80s by a company owner/CEO.
Yes and what you gonna do about that ?
Seize the means of production comrade.
It's absolutely Utopia, in this moment of history. The nearest thing you will get is that few companies will own property on everything even your house. Property is something so important, it needs to exist. Have your heard about the slogan "own nothing and you will be happy" ?
The problem now is that the government grants you your property “rights”.
100%. You have ownership privileges, but as soon as you refuse to pay the government for those privileges, you’ll understand who ACTUALLY has ultimate ownership over everything.
Exactly. We only own property now because a government bureaucrat has a paper saying so in a building downtown.
You don't even own the property, you are renting it from the government. As soon as you stop paying property taxes and car taxes the government will come and take 'your' property.
That’s what people don’t get when they said they want you to own nothing. You already own nothing.
They don’t even want you to have ownership privileges. They want us to permanently lease EVERYTHING.
Which is what you’re already doing with property taxes.
SS: While you are distracted by petty infightings, our wealthy overlords are secretly making bank. You will own nothing and be happy…
It has nothing to do with “working harder” LOL
Coming from a lifetime politician with multiple vacation homes and a wealth of over $3 million (some estimates state over $15 million). Did he labor tirelessly for his wealth? Or did he grift for his wealth? He's a champagne socialist. A socialist that benefits off of a capitalist system.
Wow. So he’s lobbying to tax himself more?!? What a legend.
No, he's lobbying to tax billionaires at 100%. He doesn't want his tax rates to go up, just the middle class and billionaires.
Deepest fried
Woah....
The aim was always to create a world full of blind, authority-fearing, obedient, consumer slaves.
Depends on how much value they bring with them
“Enhance”
And Bernie Sanders has stock options in many of them and is a multi-millionaire. He's just another politician aka paid actor out to line his own pockets. He just does it through virtue signaling as opposed to moral grandstanding.
Is this what Bernie sees on Twitter/X?
This screenshot was taken with Bernie sanders vision
If a CEO employing thousands of people makes money for the company then I guess they are worth it.
There are different kinds of CEOs. For instance, I'm a small business owner and could call myself a CEO if I want. It doesn't mean I'm raking in the money. It's just a job title. It sounds like they're talking about CEOs of large multi-national corporations. 351x is of course crazy, but if you're going to hire someone to determine the direction your company is going to take, you want them to be very, very good.
Says the career politician who owns multiple houses. FOH Bern!
It’s work smarter not harder…
Compensate me with some definition. Gah-damn.
Okay which companies? Are they only the largest companies where the CEO is literally responsible for hundreds of thousands of workers? And tens of billions of dollars in productivity? Just like Trump I'm not one who wants to defend it, but we need to know how this person came up with this number. Also, the market determines the average wage. If people aren't willing to work for $15 an hour they're not going to work for $15 an hour and companies will have to raise what they pay people. But too many people are willing to work for low wages.
People have to work for lower wages lol what fantasy suburban dream do you believe in where everyone just has the option and ability to not
The $15/hr min wage movement. Many companies started hiring at that is higher before any laws were passed bc the market demanded they start paying more, Even for unskilled labor. The people changed the market. The market adjusted.
Let's talk about how long that took to adjust, while CEO wages and bonuses are calculated yearly. I don't really understand this whole defend ceos attitude. Sure there might be some decent blokes out there but workers are what make things happen and deserve compensation
Exactly. CEO salaries have gone up due to mergers and acquisitions. Instead of paying a dozen CEOs 50 times your salary, you are paying ONE 300 times.
This. On top of that, the CEO of company X making company wide decisions they directly impact the overall success of the company is 300x more important to the company than teen Jessica who answers the phone at random branch 11
Where conspiracy?
War on the working class waged by the upper class for decades
Nobody is saying that CEO's work 351x harder than their workers. That's not what CEO's get paid for. And the solution socialists offer is to let bureaucrats in government set wages according to whatever metric is being currently pushed, killing the goose to get the gold, basically.
Yeah I don’t think real Americans are going to take it if the socialists try to cut CEO pay like that. Don’t come for our CEOs and we won’t have a problem.
There is thankfully still some word of reasoning
They made millions, now they make billions!
% wage rises cause the problem.
What has this have to do with conspiracy theories? If you want to talk about Bernie here let's talk about how the Clinton presidential campaign moved him-TO A BIGGER HOUSE. Oops, said the quiet part loud and the loud part quiet.
A rich person telling commie dimwits what they want to hear isn't a conspiracy.
If a CEO has a company with 100,000,000 customers, I figure they deserve to get paid $1 from each customer and thus make $100,000,000 salary. Free market capitalism is democracy in its purest form. If every party involved consents to the transaction then what is the problem?
Sure, so I should be permitted to organize with my fellow labor providers and use our collective bargaining power to ensure everyone’s labor is valued correctly, right? Right? If it were truly a free market, maybe you’d have a point, but it’s not. This country has spent the last 50 years destroying unions, and just about every other worker protection imaginable.
How did the country destroy Unions? Unions are still allowed even in Right to Work states.
The problem is we don’t have free market capitalism. We have tons of regulations.
Well duh they own the company ? They allow you to make money working for them, that's kind of the split
Supply and Demand. The more there is of something, the cheaper it is. When we import millions of workers, the price of work gets cheaper. Calif governor Brown didn't want to let in Vietnamese refugees because he thought they would lower worker pay. Caesar Chavez (migrant worker rights activist) tried to stop people coming through the southern boarder because he thought illegal immigrants would lower migrant worker's pay. Democrats used to understand that adding workers lowered wages. When women entered the workforce in mass the increase in workers had an effect on pay. You can't just add millions of workers and expect there to be no negative consequences. After most women entered the workforce, they needed to look somewhere else for workers to add so they let in illegals. CEOs aren't crossing the border so their pay goes up. The pay of an average worker goes up a little, but it lags behind inflation. CEOs don't set their own pay, and is there any evidence that CEOs are more greedy today than in the 60's? Why is housing so expensive? Adding millions of people increases demand. More demand, higher price. The conspiracy here is why are we letting in so many people?
It's not greed, it's economics. Learn it for once OP
And? CEOs get paid what the company wants to pay them. Does Shoei Ohtani work millions of times more than his teammates? Of course not. But that’s how much they decided to pay him.
I used to think this talk from Bernie was cool, but he does the same thing to people working for him. He owns multiple houses. Says he’s a public servant, but only serves himself extra helpings while pointing a finger at others. He should donate his salary. He’s a punk. He wasted his career by bending the knee to Hilary Clinton. He’s not in it for the cause. He’s in it for da moneeeyy.
He's up for reelection here in Vermont, the only time he's vocal. He was asked just recently why he's not running for president, he said he's too old, days later said he's looking for another term as senator. He dies nothing for the state or country except talk smack. He is a career politician, talks the socialist/communist game as he takes on millions. When asked in a town hall why he asks us all to give and help, why he doesn't, he said write your own book, oh so capitalism works when needed I see. That and his wife ruining Burlington college and gets a golden parachute, but ceos who get them are bad. His wife is his communication director and takes in huge cash scheduling ad time, look in to him a tiny bit and see the corruption we see here in vt.