The Highest-Paid CEOs Are The Worst Performers, New Study Says

[NobleSavage]

Across the board, the more CEOs get paid, the worse their companies do over the next three years, according to extensive new research. This is true whether they’re CEOs at the highest end of the pay spectrum or the lowest. “The more CEOs are paid, the worse the firm does over the next three years, as far as stock performance and even accounting performance,” says one of the authors of the study, Michael Cooper of the University of Utah’s David Eccles School of Business.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanad...ceos-are-the-worst-performers-new-study-says/

 

[Bronzeage]

No real surprise. A low performing CEO would be hired by a low performing Board of Directors.

 

[ksen]

With ceo pay skyrocketing, why aren't fewer of them getting hired?

I mean isn't that one of the main arguments against the minimum wage?

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Jayjay]

With ceo pay skyrocketing, why aren't fewer of them getting hired?

I mean isn't that one of the main arguments against the minimum wage?

No.

 

[ksen]

No?

Creating more unemployment isn't an anti-MW argument?

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[untermensche]

Capitalism is a game.

To take it serious is to be a fool.

 

[Jayjay]

No?

Creating more unemployment isn't an anti-MW argument?

Employers voluntarily paying more does not create unemployment, nor is it an argument against minimum wage.

 

[ksen]

so it has nothing to do with higher costs but instead employers throwing a tantrum and firing people.

that's nice.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Jayjay]

so it has nothing to do with higher costs but instead employers throwing a tantrum and firing people.

Who said anything about firing people? For example, in the recent thread about Ikea, I don't remember anyone claiming that Ikea is causing unemployment by paying the workers more, or that they would have to fire people to cover the costs.

 

[ksen]

maybe you haven't been paying close enough attention to the few MW threadnaughts we've had here.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Jayjay]

maybe you haven't been paying close enough attention to the few MW threadnaughts we've had here.

Maybe. Or maybe you are mixing up your arguments. There are numerous cases where certain employers of low-wage industries are voluntarily raising wages, and I cannot remember anyone ever arguing that this would cause unemployment. Care to give an example?

 

[ksen]

you seriously cannot remember anyone using the disemployment effect argument against the MW?

I find that extremely hard to believe.

when I'm off my phone I'll find some links if no one else has bothered yet.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[J842P]

you seriously cannot remember anyone using the disemployment effect argument against the MW?

I find that extremely hard to believe.

when I'm off my phone I'll find some links if no one else has bothered yet.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

It doesn't sound to me that you've understood the arguments in the past.

 

[ksen]

so explain it to me

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Bronzeage]

you seriously cannot remember anyone using the disemployment effect argument against the MW?

I find that extremely hard to believe.

when I'm off my phone I'll find some links if no one else has bothered yet.

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

It doesn't sound to me that you've understood the arguments in the past.

I've heard a lot of people argue that a higher minimum wage would raise unemployment, but never heard anyone argue that lowering the MW would raise employment. Nobody wants to go there.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I've heard a lot of people argue that a higher minimum wage would raise unemployment, but never heard anyone argue that lowering the MW would raise employment. Nobody wants to go there.

Lowering the minimum wage would raise employment. I went there.

 

[ksen]

u bastard

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

[Jayjay]

you seriously cannot remember anyone using the disemployment effect argument against the MW?

I find that extremely hard to believe.

I have seen that raising minimum wage causes unemployment. But I have never seen that higher wages paid voluntarily would cause unemployment, which is what you are saying if you think that high CEO pay should cause unemployment among CEOs.

 

[Bronzeage]

you seriously cannot remember anyone using the disemployment effect argument against the MW?

I find that extremely hard to believe.

I have seen that raising minimum wage causes unemployment. But I have never seen that higher wages paid voluntarily would cause unemployment, which is what you are saying if you think that high CEO pay should cause unemployment among CEOs.

There is a scene in John Le Carre's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, where Toby asks George if he's ever bought an altered photograph. He tells George, "The more you pay for it, the more you want to believe it's real."

CEO payment operates outside ordinary economic principles and inside the specialized principles of "exploitation"(the technical economic definition of the word). The board of directors, which sets the CEO's pay, wants to believe they have the right person. The more they pay, the more they want to believe it, even to the point of believing poor performance was in the face of catastrophic conditions and anyone else would have done much worse.

 

[ksen]

you seriously cannot remember anyone using the disemployment effect argument against the MW?

I find that extremely hard to believe.

I have seen that raising minimum wage causes unemployment. But I have never seen that higher wages paid voluntarily would cause unemployment, which is what you are saying if you think that high CEO pay should cause unemployment among CEOs.

You mean the Econ 101 Law of Supply and Demand that gets thrown around an awful lot doesn't apply to the CEO labor market?