Why CEOs are paid too damn much

[dismal]

Are you now going to make an argument of the form "because the government should prevent 8 year olds from marrying it should also do [fill in the blank with unrelated related thing ]" or was this just pointless pedantry?

Hey, since the government should prevent 8 year olds from marrying it should also nuke China?

I am making an argument of the form 'because the government should prevent 8 year olds from marrying it is wrong to argue that "it can tell people who they can marry, it should not"'.

Pointing out that your entire statement is completely wrong is not pedantry.

If you want to withdraw your incorrect and rather foolish claim in the light of an example showing it to be deeply flawed, then just do so. Don't double down on your error by claiming that pointing it out as erroneous is 'pedantry'.

It's the fact that it's an entirely irrelevant nitpick that has nothing to do with the essence of my point that makes it pedantry.

The comment was not intended to be legalistically precise. You achieve no great victory by correcting it.

 

[bilby]

I am making an argument of the form 'because the government should prevent 8 year olds from marrying it is wrong to argue that "it can tell people who they can marry, it should not"'.

Pointing out that your entire statement is completely wrong is not pedantry.

If you want to withdraw your incorrect and rather foolish claim in the light of an example showing it to be deeply flawed, then just do so. Don't double down on your error by claiming that pointing it out as erroneous is 'pedantry'.

It's the fact that it's an entirely irrelevant nitpick that has nothing to do with the essence of my point that makes it pedantry.

The comment was not intended to be legalistically precise. You achieve no great victory by correcting it.

You made a statement that was clearly false. I can't read your mind to determine that you meant something you didn't say; But what you actually said was simply incorrect. Not legalistically; not technically; not a wee bit; not 'if viewed at a funny angle'.

You said:

The government has guns, so it can do things it should not do.

See all your threads about police abuse.

It can tell people who they can legally marry, it should not.

The last sentence is demonstrably false. I demonstrated it to be false. You even appear to agree with me that it is false - but for some reason you want to also claim that you didn't make an error.

That's truly sad.

The government can and should tell people who they can legally marry. It is one of the things governments are for.

The details of exactly what restrictions should be imposed by government are open to debate, of course. But your bald statement that "It can tell people who they can legally marry, it should not." is wrong.

 

[dismal]

Repeating it over and over doesn't make it less pedantic.

 

[bilby]

Repeating it over and over doesn't make it less pedantic.

Calling it pedantic doesn't make it so; nor does it make it any less an error.

I know you don't LIKE being wrong. Nobody does. But refusing to admit that you were wrong doesn't help.

 

[George S]

A letter written to Charles Murray from a CEO explains the theory of why CEOs are paid too much. It is the first good explanation I have seen for why executives are paid so much, even the bad ones.

"No board that isn't about to fire its CEO really wants to admit that their CEO is a less-than-average performer by paying him or her less than average. But if the lowest-paid CEO’s are always being brought up to the average, then the average increases every year. Then for the high performers to be paid well, their compensation needs to be increased, but that raises the average… and so on every year."
​

Murray closes on this thought:

"And yet there’s not the slightest chance that CEO compensation can be made a private matter."​

Though, presumably, that would be the perfect solution. If it is kept a secret how much executives are paid, then there is no runaway pay competition. So why not? Nobody except my boss gets to know how much money I make unless I brag about it, so why must the pay of executives be public information?

CEOs are not overpaid.

In general a person's salary is a function of the cost of their mistakes. A doctor, lawyer or CEO can make costly mistakes. Not so a janitor.

 

[bilby]

A letter written to Charles Murray from a CEO explains the theory of why CEOs are paid too much. It is the first good explanation I have seen for why executives are paid so much, even the bad ones.

"No board that isn't about to fire its CEO really wants to admit that their CEO is a less-than-average performer by paying him or her less than average. But if the lowest-paid CEO’s are always being brought up to the average, then the average increases every year. Then for the high performers to be paid well, their compensation needs to be increased, but that raises the average… and so on every year."
​

Murray closes on this thought:

"And yet there’s not the slightest chance that CEO compensation can be made a private matter."​

Though, presumably, that would be the perfect solution. If it is kept a secret how much executives are paid, then there is no runaway pay competition. So why not? Nobody except my boss gets to know how much money I make unless I brag about it, so why must the pay of executives be public information?

CEOs are not overpaid.

In general a person's salary is a function of the cost of their mistakes. A doctor, lawyer or CEO can make costly mistakes. Not so a janitor.

Untrue. I know of a lot of janitors and other low-paid workers who have made expensive errors.

Do you reckon this guy was highly paid?

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjOvI0TOx98[/YOUTUBE]

 

[George S]

The management mistake is obvious. They put someone into a position for which he was not qualified.

Yes a janitor can bring a school down. So can anyone.

A doctor, lawyer, etc., can make mistakes that costly daily.

 

[DBT]

A lot of highly paid executives nearly bought the world of finance crashing down in 2008. Yet very few paid any sort of penalty, collecting huge salary and bonus packages while engaged in their destructive business practices.

 

[George S]

A lot of highly paid executives nearly bought the world of finance crashing down in 2008. Yet very few paid any sort of penalty, collecting huge salary and bonus packages while engaged in their destructive business practices.

Non sequitur.
That was political. The CEOs made huge costly errors and should not have been bailed out by taxpayer -- my -- money.

In the proper course of events those banks would be bankrupt and their CEOs on bread lines.

 

[barbos]

The management mistake is obvious. They put someone into a position for which he was not qualified.

Yes a janitor can bring a school down. So can anyone.

A doctor, lawyer, etc., can make mistakes that costly daily.

I blame the engineer who designed that domino warehouse, and whoever gave him a license and management too.

 

[DBT]

A lot of highly paid executives nearly bought the world of finance crashing down in 2008. Yet very few paid any sort of penalty, collecting huge salary and bonus packages while engaged in their destructive business practices.

Non sequitur.
That was political. The CEOs made huge costly errors and should not have been bailed out by taxpayer -- my -- money.

In the proper course of events those banks would be bankrupt and their CEOs on bread lines.

Not political policy, but business practice and attitude of entitlement. Which still hasn't changed significantly and may probably cause yet another economic downturn in the near future.

 

[Axulus]

CEOs are not overpaid.

In general a person's salary is a function of the cost of their mistakes. A doctor, lawyer or CEO can make costly mistakes. Not so a janitor.

Untrue. I know of a lot of janitors and other low-paid workers who have made expensive errors.

Do you reckon this guy was highly paid?

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjOvI0TOx98[/YOUTUBE]

You are missing the forest for the trees. Who designed the warehouse to take into account possible errors and mistakes which humans are known to make? Who did the hiring? What controls were in place to prevent accidents? What controls were in place to prevent accidents from having large impacts?

 

[RavenSky]

The management mistake is obvious. They put someone into a position for which he was not qualified.

Yes a janitor can bring a school down. So can anyone.

A doctor, lawyer, etc., can make mistakes that costly daily.

I don't buy your argument but IF so, then their E&O or malpractice insurance premiums should be high - not their salaries

 

[dismal]

Repeating it over and over doesn't make it less pedantic.

Calling it pedantic doesn't make it so; nor does it make it any less an error.

I know you don't LIKE being wrong. Nobody does. But refusing to admit that you were wrong doesn't help.

I have already acknowledged it was never my intent to make a legalistically accurate statement.

The big question is why you felt it would help the discussion to bring up and constantly reiterate a nitpick about child marriage when it is abundantly clear I was making a point that had nothing to do with child marriage in a thread that had nothing to do with child marriage.

But perhaps you would like to explain to everyone how your seemingly pedantic correction has advanced the discussion about CEO pay?

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

The management mistake is obvious. They put someone into a position for which he was not qualified.

Yes a janitor can bring a school down. So can anyone.

A doctor, lawyer, etc., can make mistakes that costly daily.

There is insurance for all of these things.

aa

 

[Canard DuJour]

The management mistake is obvious. They put someone into a position for which he was not qualified.

Yes a janitor can bring a school down. So can anyone.

A doctor, lawyer, etc., can make mistakes that costly daily.

Should their mistakes therefore be kept secret? Charles Murray (who's made a career of citing evidence that doesn't support his conclusions) thinks so. That's what the thread's about.