- Sep 4, 2005
- 24,714
- 14,596
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Yes.
When those different investment firms and banks caused the massive recession in 2008, guess what happened? They gave themselves bonuses. This was followed by a massive bailout on the backs of the middle class, and they gave themselves bonuses with that money too.
I didn't say that "none of them do that"...I asked, do most get that lavish golden parachute?...and the bigger question, do most abuse it?
From what I'm seeing, you'd be hard pressed to find a CEO with a lavish 7 or 8-figure golden parachute outside of the fortune 500 list...you'll find even fewer who abuse them. (their original intent was to protect executives in cases of unplanned mergers, etc...)
Here's some fun facts about CEOs
There are ~400,000 of them in the US
Only 8% of them have 7-figure+ salaries (the overwhelming majority make between 100k - 500k)
57% started the company
According to Fortune magazine, only 38% of them have any sort of "change in control" compensation package in their contract...and of them, only 9% have one that exceeds their yearly salary.
How many of them were crooked and abused bailouts and parachute clauses in the events you describe...15, 20 maybe?
You're basing this notion of "CEO=corrupt,greedy,carefree - Employee=hardworking,exploited,abused" on how a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of CEOs conduct themselves.
Interesting fact...France (the country everyone in this thread is suggesting we should be more like "France can do it, why can't we?") seems to be the biggest offender in terms of this practice.
the highest "change-in-control benefits" have been for French executives, as of 2006 according to a study by the Hay Group human resource management firm. French executives receive roughly the double of their salary and bonus in their golden parachute.
That's why I was asking, are you talking about the norms, or the outliers...if you're talking outliers, then sure, you're bound to find an example that fits your narrative...if you're talking norms, then no...most CEOs aren't behaving (or making as much as) Richard Syron or Charles Prince. Most CEOs take a lot of personal risk, spend a lot of time away from their family, and have a large level of accountability and liability.
That's slavery.
Slavery is when you force someone to work against their will for nothing...
That's not what's occurring here...to say that's the case is to trivialize what a horrible thing real slavery actually is.
Upvote
0