Why do American CEOs get paid so much?

Discussion in 'Budget & Taxes' started by LafayetteBis, Aug 21, 2018.

  1. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I've been on this blog proposing solutions for five years. It is one of the best on the Internet.

    Where have you been?


    You are in an "economics forum". Learn about the art/science of economics before blathering here. Or, I put you personally on Ignore. You can bore other participants.

    "Contributors" like you are a blathering waste of time in an ECONOMICS FORUM ... !
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  2. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Then propose something practical. I haven’t seen anything but complaining. And if I’m a waste of your time why bother making the effort to read or respond?

    It is psychologically interesting that you consider that putting me on ignore is some sort of punishment to me. But not really that interesting.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  3. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The Laffer curve tells us that tax rates of 0 percent and of 100 percent will BOTH ultimately bring in zero tax revenues. The latter because if companies and individuals are deprived of seed capital (and of course motivation) then they cannot continue to pay taxes or even invest which is of course more important.
    So at what rate do you think the wealthiest individuals and corporations should be taxed? 90 percent? 95 percent? 99?

    If you could answer with a real number and without a personal attack that would be great!

    I believe that simple redistribution of wealth is unhelpful as has been seen in the squandering of money by lottery winners as I believe them to be representative of the average American. Sad, yes but true.

    If there is a better example of what happens when average people receive large amounts of money I’d like to hear about it.
     
  4. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    *You would not see "something practical" if it bit your brain.

    Examples of True Value:
    *Practical is when there is a National Healthcare Service and NO MORE ERs! And as a nation our lifespan is extended from 79 to 83 years (as it exists presently in the EU)!
    *Practical is when one helluva lot more of our children get through FREE state colleges with advanced degrees that ready them for the Information Age in which we are presently engaged.

    How they above is manifested is in a multitude of ways, but brainless ners cannot possibly imagine the possibilities because they are fixated - as in a sports game - upon the WINNER. That is, the one with the most money/points.

    True Values of a Decent Society are of the kind mentioned above. Just open-your eyes and your closed mind ...
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  5. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So you refuse to answer my questions and double down on the ad hominems.

    This is what people do when challenged by provocative and specific questions when they do not wish to be held to specifics.

    How will your ideals be paid for? What is your tax rate for the wealthiest individuals and corporations that will not discourage investment? These are reasonable and practical questions.

    My economics positions are clear and I leave them open to challenge which is what good argumentation supported by warrants and counter warrants really means.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  6. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Your making an argument based upon "companies". These elements of any economy are mere Supply-side members. What is far more important is the Demand-side. Meaning the people who constitute a nation's public.

    This subtle difference escapes you because you've force-fed junk-commentary that honors the key-element of Supply-siders - that of corporate-profits. Which is why the US is a country with many grievous faults.

    And so, dumb is as dumb does. The US needs to "open its mind set" and see that the General Benefit of all members of a nation* is far, far more important than just those at the upper-end of the Wealth-scale ...

    *Twelve percent of the American population ekes out perpetually a living below the Poverty Threshold! That's about 40 million men, women and children!
    [​IMG]
     
  7. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Cheap-shot and that's all your good for!

    Read post above ... !
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  8. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You continue to avoid my questions citing general welfare.

    This is vague to me.

    What top tax rate is practical to accomplish your version of Plato’s Republic?

    Should we allow the wealthy anything?

    This to those according to their need from each according to their ability was the non sustainable element that brought down the Soviet Union.

    Is this not correct?
     
  9. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think you mean you’re and not your and you’ve been personally attacking me casually.

    I don’t feel the need to do this to you. I would rather argue warrants.
     
  10. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They are not "ideals". They are current base of all EU-countries since Uncle Sam freed them from Hitler. (And then kept his economy a Moneyed-Democracy whilst Europe was rushing ahead with a Social Democracy.

    Definition of a Social Democracy: A political, societal and economic philosophy that supports an economic democracy whereby the principles of societal-fairness and equitability are exercised within a capitalist mercantile system.
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  11. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well we’ve moved from ad hominems to non sequiturs. That is a slight improvement. Ok whatever you call them, what is your tax structure to pay for them?
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  12. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The wealthy need nothing. They can pay for everything.

    Which is not the least bit true for those Americans who live below the Poverty Threshold.

    The wealthy in Europe get what everybody else gets, for free. However, because the wealthy like privacy, they tend to go to private hospitals where they pay much higher fees. (But they don't really give-a-damn, do they.)

    They also go to the more expensive doctors and pay higher fees, but the general capacity of practicing doctors working for the government is nonetheless very good. (According to the reports I've read.)

    Today, Europe's is the most effective of Social Democracies on earth. Though it is still work-in-progress in many areas.

    The key points being - as I never tire of repeating - these:
    *Because of a National Healthcare System the average lifespan in EU is four years more than the US. Whyzat? Because a visit to my doctor here in France costs me about $20 and not $100 to $200! And all subsequent chirurgical work at a public-hospital is reimbursed to the patient by the government, which also sets their fees. There is no such thing as an "ER" in Europe.
    *EU children get into universities run by the national government by paying a fee of around $1000 a school-year. Most students are never more than about an hour from university-studies. (And, as usual, most students prefer to live in a private-apartment and not a dormitory.)
    *Who pays for the above? EU governments that are NOT wasting billions on so-called "Defense Priorities"!

    There are others benefits of a Social Democracy, but they'd likely only bore you ...
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  13. cirdellin

    cirdellin Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    2,612
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am in Europe.

    So you are in no position to tell me how things are here.

    I am also in the only country in Western Europe that still seems to place some value on speech.

    I’m mostly here because my children are here.

    I still regularly see homeless here though.

    But we are still evading.

    What Tax rate should apply to the wealthiest that would also not discourage investment?

    Why do you not want to answer this?
     
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2020
  14. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the 'wealthy need nothing, they can pay for everything', does that include taking from them, while allowing them nothing, to support the 'families below poverty threshold'.

    If that is being done, then where will philanthropy fall on your masterplan, or will that be unnecessary because you take everything from the wealthy as needs want?

    We've all seen the results of the EU's method of medicine. Parents forced to make decisions for a sick child based on the government's threat to cut them off for their lifetime from the government controlled healthcare didn't put it in a favorable light. While extreme, it showed them for what it was, rather clearly. And that's in addition to government controlled medicine could take on a very sinister light for those who may be considered 'high maintenance' (chronically ill) if demand exceeds resources.
     
    cirdellin likes this.
  15. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What you do not understand apparently is the US is not just a 50 states but a "collective of human beings" - who thus deserve to be treated equitably. Not equally, but equitably. Equitably does not mean "equally" but in a fair and impartial manner. Key-word: "impartial".

    Do you understand what philanthropy means? Look it up!

    It is an act that is personal in nature and does not submit to any law.

    You are either inventing or misinterpreting government-supported national healthcare plans. But there are some cases - damn few - where parents deny a child healthcare for religious purposes. The law says (in most developed EU-countries with national healthcare) that they have no right whatsoever to place in danger a child's life (in their care) for religious purposes.
     
  16. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Equitable on what basis? Remuneration based on input/output is rather a standard that gives value to the entity that is providing the market for the output. Otherwise, you are dealing with the collective of 'no one owns the means of out put'.

    If you take the means of philanthropy from those most likely to employ it, how will they be able to disburse what they don't have? Back to your statement of 'The wealthy need nothing, let them pay for everything' removes the very object you want to be dispersed 'equitably'. Unless, of course, you are just talking about 'stuff'.

    It had nothing to do with religious reasons, and everything to do with the NHS.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-40423371
    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-43754949

    No health system is without flaws.
     
  17. Cybred

    Cybred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2020
    Messages:
    20,140
    Likes Received:
    7,341
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This. ee8a763292a48059a3b46f5142d0dd5c465c410e.png
     
  18. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  19. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Indeed, but flaws can be corrected.

    The "flaw" of national care support-systems in the US is massive. That is, healthcare and full-education should be guarantees provided by the government.

    Why should the DoD be swallowing whole more than half the Discretionary Funding of the government? (As shown here!) Why?

    Because like fools we allowed the DoD-budget to be manipulated by various presidents because that was (and still is) a very good source of election donations.

    And the American people pay for the lack of healthcare-services as a consequence - when they should be provided by government-funding. Which is the prime reason that our lifespan is four years lower than that of the European Union.

    If not, just for what in heaven's name is taxation intended? To run our military-services? That's not good enough a reason and particularly given that the US has not been at war with its primary threat that was the USSR. That organization no longer exists since 1991 ... !

    PS: An interesting piece on the US history of fundraising for election campaigns here:
    Money In Politics Timeline.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
  20. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Agreed, but "life-span" is a damn fine number for determining the effectiveness of a national healthcare system.

    Go here to see the life-spans for the OECD-countries. Note that the US is 11th from the bottom out of 37 countries. Note also that most of the EU countries (comparable to the US) with a National Healthcare system are at the higher end of the Health-status chart ...
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
  21. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Totally irrelevant. The means of output are owned by individuals in a capitalist-system, and unless you want to go back to the days of barter (which dates from 6000BC!) that is the manner in which they will remain.

    No "one" person, individual or collection should dominate a system of exchange (of goods/services). Countries should disallow any market-system that demonstrates a preferential-selection of participants to dominate any given market for goods/services.

    Frankly, whilst I dismiss out-of-hand its wildly exaggerated cost, the US has a damn fine healthcare system. It's too damn expensive and thus does not cover all US citizens, which it should do.

    And I suggest you give consideration to this Economic Brief from the Richmond Fed here
    - excerpt:
    Which seems to underscore the thought that markets in the US are not concentrated into "the Top 3 and all the rest". But, the point is that "they can be" and it is a duty of the US national legislative overseers to assure that markets to do not congregate-and-dominate.

    Damn feeble excuse for a healthcare system that excludes a very large portion of the population because if its crazy-high pricing !

    Have a look at an independent ranking of international healthcare systems here:
    1. United Kingdom
    2. Switzerland
    3. Sweden
    4. Australia
    5. Germany
    6. The Netherlands
    7. New Zealand
    8. Norway
    9. France
    10. Canada
    11. U.S.A
    Needless to say, all of those European at the top are National Healthcare Systems ...
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2020
  22. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    While I don't support the idea of this country's military being in foreign lands, we cannot deplete out military to less than other, unfriendly nations, regardless of shoulder pats and handshakes. Trust a snake, and they are still a snake.

    Our Constitution is rather clear as to the premise of the Federal Government. They've already overstepped those bounds, but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to continue, and add more.

    I will not support the idea of a NHS. I vehemently argue private insurance, which has been permitted to become a powerful voice and for some, the final word on what services you may receive, and from where. Insurance is not healthcare, but some are completely blind to that fact. I am not completely against an expansion of State Medicare for the low/no income groups, but not for the general populace.
     
  23. Collateral Damage

    Collateral Damage Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2012
    Messages:
    10,535
    Likes Received:
    8,149
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd love to see the life span rise. I don't believe that a NHS-styled health care system would have a positive impact on country with a population size and demographic that the US has. The lack of teaching nutrition, basic food values, ability to prepare a meal, actual real health information (not sexuality and related subjects) that seems to have occurred over the last decades or so is an underlying factor. If the people don't have the information taught to them, at least the basics, they aren't usually going to search it out for themselves. People start doing research when it's usually too late - they already have a health issue.
     
  24. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The UK was the first, just after WW2, to establish a National Healthcare System (NHS) and have maintained it ever since. As mainland Europe recovered from WW2 all the rest created such systems. Today, they all have an NHS with very much the same healthcare throughout the EU because it is a criteria for entrance. (Note that the EU has a population of 446 million and the US has 328M.

    They also have very much the same system for post-secondary degrees - also at minimum cost for most and no-cost for some.

    America after WW2 was dedicated to the concept of Business Revenues because it was the key instrument for making millionaires. As I never tire of mentioning: Making billionaires or millionaires is NOT the Holy Grail of a nation.

    A nation must do what is best for the most people, and not just a "segment" ...

    I am an advocate for the capitalist system of enterprise, because I saw first-hand what Socialism did to Europe. NOTHING!

    But neither - though I am American - will I believe that the US is either the finest Healthcare System OR the best Post-secondary Educational system. Because it doesn't.

    Both of them are EXTREMELY COSTLY meaning that not all students can attend. Whereas, here in Europe, Tertiary-level education is (like the other levels) government funded! One pays barely 900€ ($1067) a year for an associates, bachelors, masters or doctorate-level degree in Europe!

    Spread the word! You are being HAD ... !
     

Share This Page