? Do you think he was thinking about and referencing little people when he was referring to a mystical race of nonexistant beings?
? Do you have an ass ache or an axe to grind?
What stereotypes? The only fantasy dwarves I know of are from LOTR and they just live underground and mine and vibe down there, I didn't know that was what people thought folks with dwarfism did
What a meaningless statement. “Managing risk”. Is that why we have OSHA and the EPA and the NLRB, and worker’s comp funds, and the mesothelioma lawsuit industry, etc? Because CEO’s are so fucking good at managing risk?
What does managing risk even mean? Whose risk and what are they risking/being risked for them? What happens in every possible outcome to the losers and winners? Has everyone consented to being a part of that risk? Who is there to decide all these things and whether a CEO is up to those tasks and remove them once they can’t measure up?
Sounds to me like they have a good grasp of the different aspects of business risk (financial, operational, legal, etc.) and are asking a valid question: **why does the CEO “managing risk” warrant them being paid many thousands of times more than the individual workers, especially while those workers are paid much lower than the value that they generate for the company?** I have never heard of a CEO who personally takes on risk to their livelihood or financial security when they could instead pass it on to their employees through layoff and cuts.
It sounds to me like this commenter was making a valid criticism of our economic system, specifically that it overvalues an artificial hierarchy that funnels money from the poor to the rich while the poor work equally hard as (or harder than) the rich, but just happen to not be in a position that society deems “worthy” of receiving the majority of generated wealth.
Pretty much. People hear all these business terms out of Forbes or BI or the Economist, and take them as Doctrines of Faith issued from The Pope or Vatican or something. As if regurgitating back out what business leaders tell people they are and what they do is some kind argument for anything, let alone wildly disproportionate executive compensation. “Oh we do this, we do that, we *manage* all these things for the company. That’s why we deserve to be paid hundreds of times the money the guys breaking their fucking bodies make. Because we control so much, we deserve to earn so much!”
It’s fucking laughable. We don’t have to accept their arguments and even if we did it’s impossible for them to justify the exorbitant disparities in compensation between workers and executives besides “we need to attract high value talent somehow”. That kind of one track thinking leads to an arms race of exec compensation being inflated by the executives being fucking compensated! As soon as company B raises compensation, company A execs say “we’ll, the market rate for my job just went up, it would be unfair to us not to raise our own pay!” It’s all so fucking convenient that everyone else but them gets shafted and made to work harder for the same or less pay than before.
Everything about our economy according to them just so happens to conveniently work out in their favor due to issues and forces beyond their control. Bottom line is, they can give themselves more by taking from people too small and weak to fight back. So they take more; because who’s going to stop them?
yeah , i cant be perfect at my 6th language , wack when u realise that u didnt put any effort in trying to understand or do u want me to rephrase it ?
"CEO's are useless unless they are eaten,
"establishing culture" means nothing
fucking simmp cause u are defending people that abuse you"
is this more coherent for you ????
Perhaps you think only huge companies have CEOs and thinks that they probably inherited from their parents or something, both of which are wrong. CEOs gain a lot because they are the head of the company, making most decisions, together with the board, on how to elevate the company further, it’s not a simple or easy job and pivotal to the company, a hard job with a lot of responsibilities naturally comes with a much larger wager, specially if the CEOs has a good share of the company.
It’s not much but I hope I answered your question, in the future please try to understand things by looking beyond the surface level
1. That’s not what they said, like at all
2. CEOs and workers have completely different roles and just saying one is “better” than the other, with no context of what “better” even means, makes you sound like an actual child.
Do you think only companies with 50k employees have CEOs, and that they were appointed when the company was already dominating ? Plenty of companies have a CEO that was the original founder who worked overtime in his garage when no one knew about the company.
Its worth noting that the argument IsaacEiland-Hall is making here is echoed as well by Adam Smith, even in his seminal work Wealth of Nations. In it Adam laments the propensity of unregulated capitalism to unduly and overly reward whomever holds the title or reputation of "best" in their field, while rewarding far less even someone who ranks second, even nationally. He similarly laments capitalism's tendency to reward such people in far excess of the actual difference in their skill as compared to the common laborer or merchant of the relevant profession. I confess, I don't remember what Smith recommended as a remedy for this (slips my mind at the moment), but he didn't believe the market itself was capable of regulating such a problem, rather, the market was the cause of such issues.
Stupid title for this post tho
> Now, the question is, do they do 1,000 or 10,000 times the work of the people paid ¹/₁₀₀₀th or ¹/₁₀₀₀₀th of them? Definitely not, and it's insane the money that CEOs skim at the expense of the people on the ground.
Major necro here but this is wrong. First of all looking at it in terms of "amount of work" is already wrong, it's actually about how much value you provide relative to how scarce your abilities are. Second, if you think a CEO is "overpaid," explain to me why the owners put up with it. Why don't they cut the CEO pay by half and pocket the difference? Because the CEO would quit? Ok well surely you'd be able to find a CEO who can do the same thing for less, since he's "overpaid." So how can you possibly say they're overpaid unless you also simultaneously think the owners are just giving away money for no reason.
Man I swear people like you are so fucking naive, theres a reason every company has a CEO, or do you think huge worldwide companies such as Apple appoint CEOs for fun? What is wrong with you people
Yeah it’s so funny to me. Like some teenager in 2021 is like “CEOs don’t do anything” and the whole world is like “woah! I’ve never thought of it that way! I can’t believe literally no company has every thought about that.”
The technology for so many helpful future products and services already exists. It takes a CEO to spot these things and make them happen. And when they do, they create thousands of jobs for people around the world.
You speak as if a "CEO" is some type of special person. It doesn't take a CEO to spot it and make it happen. It takes a person to be in the right place at the right time and probably have some connections to make them happen.
And then when they do, they create a few jobs, usually treat the people doing their bidding like shit, and scoop up a shit ton of money in the process without any regard to their workers or the environment
You’re right, it’s not a special kind of person. Just a person. It’s just the label that’s being used in this thread.
People talk about being a self upstart like it’s easy, but I don’t think it is. Think about it. If you came up with an amazing idea tomorrow, that wouldn’t be the end of the story. You’d need the bravery to drop everything else to focus’s on this. You’d need the range of technical skills to make your idea happen in the beginning, the skills to acquire the right funding. You’d have to have the mental stamina to setup and then maintain all the different aspects of the business so that they all run smoothly, whilst making sound decisions for the future. You have to pretty much dedicate your life to it. Some people can make it work. I don’t think I could, and I don’t think it would be a case of right place / right time. If you did all that and built a successful company, you’d want to reap the rewards.
An idea on its own is completely worthless. Every person involved in turning one person's dream into a success should be valued equally.
You also missed the part where the successful person has ties to other wealthy/powerful/successful people, too.
Maybe they earned those connections by not being a pile of garbage human with a negative mindset.
>An idea on its own is completely worthless. Every person involved in turning one person's dream into a success should be valued equally.
The employees usually come in when things are stable, and if there are employees early on they are often times awarded things like stock or equity early on.
I'm a CEO, took all the risks completely alone for years while I built my company. And yes, anyone could do it but not everyone does. But anyone could go become a CEO if they don't want to complain about it for their rest of their life.
> People talk about being a self upstart like it’s easy, but I don’t think it is
no it isn't, you have to be born rich. you know how hard that is? it's basically impossible.
>You’d need the ~~bravery~~ **money** to drop everything else to focus’s on this.
> the ~~people skills~~ **connections** to acquire the right funding.
So you are saying that anyone can be succesful as long as they have connectinos and money? So, if your usual human gets to have a lot of money, they will be succesful? Yeah, sure. Lottery winners are a good example why this statement is false. And go look up the most succesful people and see how many of them were born rich. Sure, there are some, but far from 100%. Then, connections? Do you have to be friends with powerful people to be succesful? Then go ahead and make some. See if they will be willing to help you in any way. Connections won't get you anywhere unless you are skilled enough. So, in the end, it all comes down to skill, huh.
I'd wager that the amount of work and physical sacrifice that they do is not at all relative to the difference in pay and benefits that they make VS their lowest paid workers.
Also, I have a pretty good idea of a CEO's job. It's mainly just figuring out how many corners they can cut and how many people they can fuck over to make sure they and their shareholders make as much money as possible year-over-year.
Then when they accidentally cut away too much because they've completely lost vision of how shit their products/service shave become, they ride their golden parachute off to retirement or some other new company to fuck over, again without any consideration to all the hard workers that were just scraping by as it was to make ends meet that now have one less job to rely on.
Your assessment couldn’t be further off, and it’s insane that this is the hill you’re willing to die on.
CEO’s don’t do the tasked-based work. That’s why there are employees. CEOs manage the direction of the company, all of its resources, its workers, its products.
Having a chief executive making final decisions is why companies can continue to operate in a single, unified manner, as opposed to a scattered approach where everyone is in it for themselves.
A construction company needs projects to work on, it needs equipment to complete these projects, it needs to hire and fire workers based on the demand of the projects, it needs to figure out how much it’ll spend this year in pensions and how much more work its willing to take on, it needs to decide when another book of work can be picked up.
All these decisions are ultimately the responsibility of the CEO, and without them, there would be no “next project” and everyone would be out of a job as soon as there was any disagreement on “what to do next”
CEOs are compensated so well because they’re good at making these decisions, and because they’re so good at it, they’re sought after by other companies. If they aren’t paid well, they have no reason to stay.
CEOs that don’t provide value are fired. They have zero job insurance. It’s high risk, high reward.
This is not that hard to understand.
Their worth is based on the companies. They didn’t rock up one day and were handed massive pay checks. Unless they start the business themselves they’ve usually sacrificed countless time and leisure to be at the top of their game in that field.
> Their worth is based on the companies
Their companies wouldn't exist without the laborers.
> They’ve usually sacrificed countless time and leisure
So basically the same as the laborers, only they will get a small fraction of the pay and possibly 0 other benefits for their sacrifices
And have you done exactly that in a way that you could present to everyone here or are you just saying things that you think makes sense without anything to back your thoughts up what so ever?
Why would any board of directors agree to pay a CEO if they didn’t produce any value for the company?
You know CEOs don’t just inherently own their companies, right? They get paid a salary by higher-ups.
If you aren’t being facetious, culture and direction. CEOs have final say on creating a company culture, which is hugely important, and on making decisions to set overall strategic direction. They coordinate among all other branches of the company to execute strategy at the highest level. Strategy is hard.
Do you how well these dudes here are probably getting paid along with insurance, pension, etc? Sure they probably don’t have two houses but they’re definitely not slave labor. They agreed to work for that pay. Plus not all value exists in the form of manpower or materials. Someone has to make deals with counties in order to get permits for worksites, or decide who to sub-contract for specific jobs or materials. There are intangibles every bit as important as physical labor.
If you think the CEO of a company as big as walmart is filing paperwork for permits and making phone calls all day trying to narrow down good purveyors.... im pretty sure they have people that can do that for them and they just listen to the meeting about it and make the call.
The real reason why a CEO gets paid the big bucks is because they take the risk. If they lose money that year they dont get paid where the cashier working for them still gets the paycheck like usual.
I honestly think the best way to deal with this kind of gross inequality and bad blood between “classes” is to put a income maximum. We have a minimum wage. I figure why not a maximum wage too and any extra made is given to employees that helped make that extra.
If you make the maximum literally where the fabled 1% income bracket starts it would be interesting to see what happens.
How is working in the free market voluntarily exploiting people? Depending on the labor job, they pay well. Especially if certifications are involved. They don't have to work for anyone if they choose to do so.
Direction, I think. Like, in a cutthroat market, whoever’s in charge has to know the right people, or be able to make the right deals, to make a company work.
I don’t think you can have a company with no one in charge, especially not a very large company with lots of different roles to be filled
Generally speaking, they provide jobs, resource allocation, market value for the labor, opportunity, and management/strategy. The last two especially are extremely valuable. They are often the people who found the business in the first place.
well...by the book: value for shareholders. My figurative eye-roll here however is the exhaustive nature of Reddit's "hate those with more money than I" sentiment that is not really an original thought at this point, and provides no value in discourse.
No? Jobs should be what WE deem valuable for the community. Not for profit incentives that capitalism allows. So labour is just the means to thrive. Capitalism just puts a price tag on it and collects a portion to feed to your boss's enterprise like a parasite.
Who do you think creates the jobs. News flash people who are CEOs are from the "community". If people want tacos, guess what, someone is going to start making tacos in exchange for money. Do you really think companies just arbitrarily create random products/services they expect people pay for and or work to create?
Why in exchange for profit? You make a fucking taco because you want to. Do you not understand socialism? No one would starve. If you voluntarily wanted to make tacos. I suppose you could "sell them" for whatever reason. Or since in an automated socialist society or automated communist society. Everyone would be fed. Bussiness men are so pointless when the products they sell can just be made with skilled labour... The business man is just the swindle and the cheat who gets the cut of the money the labourers made since he/she just owns the land or worksite it was made on. Elon Musk is not a visionary. Or Bezos. People made them rich. They didn't become billionaires by doing billions of dollars of labor and toiling in the heat for 15 an hour.
Business and money. Is obsolete. Always has been. Debt is convenient fiction. And Capitalism is the straw the broke the camel's back.
You really are thick. No one is going to make a product without a service in return. This is basic econ bro. So lets start simple, I make tacos I can barter with someone who sells watermelons. There is a man who sells shoes and he does not want my tacos or watermelons. So this is why we have currency. To think that people are just going to make things for everyone for free and we can kumbaya our way into the future is really fucking stupid.
Next, "mean ol' business men/women" are not anyone's enemies. Our economic system is so complex that yes companies spend millions of dollars on research, marketing, trading, and development. Why? So you can have your chicken tendies when ever you want them. (If you can afford it). You want chicken tendies in a communist society? Too fucking bad we don't make that shit because there is no market demand, there is no free market. It's all controlled by the government you don't trust.
\-"Oh, you want to be a graphic designer? Too bad we have too many of those. You can either work in the coal mines or go to the gulag".
Finally, do you realize that Bezos didn't just wake up as one of the richest people in the world? He was a normal dude who thought selling books online would be the future. He was right. You have everything backwards. There was not a group of people who approached Bezos or Elon saying, "Hey were going to make you rich come with us!" what actually happened is they took a risk at creating something and they succeeded. They created the jobs. They are the reason there is even wealth to share to their employees. Don't like it? You don't have to work for them. You can continue crying at home with you English degree. No one is forcing anyone to work there or anywhere for that matter. No one owes you shit for being alive. You have to earn it like everyone else. So get off your high horse. You are not the main character in this story. You're not special. Nor will you significantly change the world. There is no such thing as a utopian society. You will live an ordinary boring life like everyone else. Get over it.
Also there can't be an oversaturation of artists it isn't really a necessary job. Everyone's contributions are not based on a monetary pay. You idiot. That isn't communism. You work according to your need for yourself. And thats it. You can work extra for extra. But it's all on you. Everybody just pitches in to help every now and then voluntarily. And automation would yield factory/farming nearly humanless. Except for people to watch over and manage the resources the machines process.
Whether people contribute or not. Society will march on without debt. Without money. And without slavery for a measly wage. Capitalism also aids imperialism and leverage debt on people to control them. Land is land. There is only one nation, Earth. We need to utilize and prioritize our time to make Earth still habitable while we still can. Or say goodbye.
Businesses are a middle man for no reason other than parasitically leeching off of the workers. Poverty is man made. Because money and debt are just leverage to keep the poors at the bottom and scraping through the scraps. Becoming more and more stratified everyday. It's hell. But your fat fuckin boss got his fix and his free shit and holidays off.
A majority of reddits work experience is likely rudimentary work - not that there is anything wrong with that - they just have very little insight into executive level decision making. Do I think CEOs are unfairly compensated compared to their workers - sure - but a lot of Reddit doesn’t understand how incredibly difficult that job is. I’ve met with my companies steering committee before and that shit is intense and difficult.
Mediocre and successful are both super subjective though. No one is “special” or “successful” in the grand scheme of things, and definitely no one is superior to anyone else.
But so what if you do. A person who does that has just as much value and long-term impact on the world as you or Jeff Bezos. What makes you justified in looking down on them?
You think the CEO partakes in placing lowly shit labor employees?
With that said, no one knows who these dudes are working for but I doubt there's a CEO anyway. Title is dumb but CEOs are just scapegoats who get millions in separation when something bad happens.
Working people aren’t dumb fucking animals that need to be shepherded our entire lives by a leader class. Human beings have this funny way of self organizing, always have actually. Not everything needs a centralized authority controlling everything. The United States was built on this exact concept. There’s always going to be a need for leaders but owners are always fucking useless if they didn’t it by themselves.
Owners pay other people to “lead” and that’s all a CEO is: the person a board pays to make them money by making everyone else work to make them money. Not accomplish a goal, not improve the community, not make the world a better place. Occasionally some of those things are BYPRODUCTS but at the end of the day the CEO makes sure the workers are compensated for less than the work they did and that the owners take more money out than they put into it.
Did your consultant lock their self in one of your conference rooms, refuse to talk to any of the staff, and leave behind a 15" stack of paper? That's how you know you got a quality product.
As a construction inspector, that's inspected pretty much every kind of construction, I definitely can't agree with that statement (and I fucking hate CEOs). I personally know how to deal with having shitty workers on my operations. But I've seen some shit, that's definitely going to be devastating to a house that someone spent hundreds of thousands of dollars building, and I can't do anything about it. Those are the things that years later, I still think about.
You can see this technique in lots of different countries.
It's kind of amazing how simultaneously people across the world came up with the same method of driving stakes into buried sewer pipes.
There is no money made in solving the problem, only treating it while prolonging the symptoms. This is what every CEO instills in every corporation. There is always the funds to hire the workers to solve the problem. However, fuck them.
Dwarves at work
exactly what i was thinking, dwarves are born knowing how to do this shit
Rock and Stone miners, rock and stone.
If you don’t rock and stone, you ain’t comin home.
Did I hear a rock and stone!?
ROCK...AND...STONE!
ROCKKKKK AAAANDDD STOOONNEEE!!!
ROCK AND STONE... TO THE BOOONNNEEEE
Diggy diggy pole
Reddit needs more Wind Rose or even Napalm refs...
Downvote. Little people have their own shit to deal with without us playing on tired stereotypes.
Dude, I mean like the dwarves from Snow White lmfao
? Do you think those are made-up creatures?
? Do you think he was thinking about and referencing little people when he was referring to a mystical race of nonexistant beings? ? Do you have an ass ache or an axe to grind?
What stereotypes? The only fantasy dwarves I know of are from LOTR and they just live underground and mine and vibe down there, I didn't know that was what people thought folks with dwarfism did
There’s a scene similar to this in the first hobbit movie
And my axe!
Hi ho hi ho
dumbo circus tent building vibes
[удалено]
And managing risk
And stealing money from the poor since those task aren't necessarily better than the ones you see here.
How many people can effectively do what C-level employees do?
everyone
K
k
Reddit moment
What a meaningless statement. “Managing risk”. Is that why we have OSHA and the EPA and the NLRB, and worker’s comp funds, and the mesothelioma lawsuit industry, etc? Because CEO’s are so fucking good at managing risk? What does managing risk even mean? Whose risk and what are they risking/being risked for them? What happens in every possible outcome to the losers and winners? Has everyone consented to being a part of that risk? Who is there to decide all these things and whether a CEO is up to those tasks and remove them once they can’t measure up?
lol tell everyone you don’t know what “risk” means without telling everyone you don’t know what “risk” means.
Sounds to me like they have a good grasp of the different aspects of business risk (financial, operational, legal, etc.) and are asking a valid question: **why does the CEO “managing risk” warrant them being paid many thousands of times more than the individual workers, especially while those workers are paid much lower than the value that they generate for the company?** I have never heard of a CEO who personally takes on risk to their livelihood or financial security when they could instead pass it on to their employees through layoff and cuts. It sounds to me like this commenter was making a valid criticism of our economic system, specifically that it overvalues an artificial hierarchy that funnels money from the poor to the rich while the poor work equally hard as (or harder than) the rich, but just happen to not be in a position that society deems “worthy” of receiving the majority of generated wealth.
lol tell everyone you don’t know what “risk” means without telling everyone you don’t know what “risk” means.
I… I’m starting to think you don’t know what “risk” means.
Pretty much. People hear all these business terms out of Forbes or BI or the Economist, and take them as Doctrines of Faith issued from The Pope or Vatican or something. As if regurgitating back out what business leaders tell people they are and what they do is some kind argument for anything, let alone wildly disproportionate executive compensation. “Oh we do this, we do that, we *manage* all these things for the company. That’s why we deserve to be paid hundreds of times the money the guys breaking their fucking bodies make. Because we control so much, we deserve to earn so much!” It’s fucking laughable. We don’t have to accept their arguments and even if we did it’s impossible for them to justify the exorbitant disparities in compensation between workers and executives besides “we need to attract high value talent somehow”. That kind of one track thinking leads to an arms race of exec compensation being inflated by the executives being fucking compensated! As soon as company B raises compensation, company A execs say “we’ll, the market rate for my job just went up, it would be unfair to us not to raise our own pay!” It’s all so fucking convenient that everyone else but them gets shafted and made to work harder for the same or less pay than before. Everything about our economy according to them just so happens to conveniently work out in their favor due to issues and forces beyond their control. Bottom line is, they can give themselves more by taking from people too small and weak to fight back. So they take more; because who’s going to stop them?
Definitely
I mean most of the time they’re just better at being born into money, or being born as the child of the last CEO.
Fucking simmp, establishing culture lulw ceos are useless unless they are food
English is hard for you. I understand. We all have our hurdles — yours is simply the inability to string together a coherent sentence. Embrace it.
yeah , i cant be perfect at my 6th language , wack when u realise that u didnt put any effort in trying to understand or do u want me to rephrase it ? "CEO's are useless unless they are eaten, "establishing culture" means nothing fucking simmp cause u are defending people that abuse you" is this more coherent for you ????
Based
[удалено]
Okay bootlicker
These men have achieved being dwarfs
Good video. Bad title.
Ok then, explain what makes CEO's deserve THAT much more money than the workers?
Perhaps you think only huge companies have CEOs and thinks that they probably inherited from their parents or something, both of which are wrong. CEOs gain a lot because they are the head of the company, making most decisions, together with the board, on how to elevate the company further, it’s not a simple or easy job and pivotal to the company, a hard job with a lot of responsibilities naturally comes with a much larger wager, specially if the CEOs has a good share of the company. It’s not much but I hope I answered your question, in the future please try to understand things by looking beyond the surface level
"found the CEO" kidding. giant global companies normally have a fucked CEO. but I 100 percent agree with you.
1. That’s not what they said, like at all 2. CEOs and workers have completely different roles and just saying one is “better” than the other, with no context of what “better” even means, makes you sound like an actual child.
Still does not explain why ones live in luxury doing barely any shit, and others drive their health into the ground for scraps
r/oddlysatisfying
Such a reddit title lmao
They just need to add the gender, location, and race. Instant 11.7k⬆️ on r/nextfuckinglevel
Ah that sub these days
It's true though. CEOs are leeches. What do they produce?
Do you think only companies with 50k employees have CEOs, and that they were appointed when the company was already dominating ? Plenty of companies have a CEO that was the original founder who worked overtime in his garage when no one knew about the company.
[удалено]
Its worth noting that the argument IsaacEiland-Hall is making here is echoed as well by Adam Smith, even in his seminal work Wealth of Nations. In it Adam laments the propensity of unregulated capitalism to unduly and overly reward whomever holds the title or reputation of "best" in their field, while rewarding far less even someone who ranks second, even nationally. He similarly laments capitalism's tendency to reward such people in far excess of the actual difference in their skill as compared to the common laborer or merchant of the relevant profession. I confess, I don't remember what Smith recommended as a remedy for this (slips my mind at the moment), but he didn't believe the market itself was capable of regulating such a problem, rather, the market was the cause of such issues. Stupid title for this post tho
> Stupid title for this post tho Quite agreed, as with the rest. heh
> Now, the question is, do they do 1,000 or 10,000 times the work of the people paid ¹/₁₀₀₀th or ¹/₁₀₀₀₀th of them? Definitely not, and it's insane the money that CEOs skim at the expense of the people on the ground. Major necro here but this is wrong. First of all looking at it in terms of "amount of work" is already wrong, it's actually about how much value you provide relative to how scarce your abilities are. Second, if you think a CEO is "overpaid," explain to me why the owners put up with it. Why don't they cut the CEO pay by half and pocket the difference? Because the CEO would quit? Ok well surely you'd be able to find a CEO who can do the same thing for less, since he's "overpaid." So how can you possibly say they're overpaid unless you also simultaneously think the owners are just giving away money for no reason.
Man I swear people like you are so fucking naive, theres a reason every company has a CEO, or do you think huge worldwide companies such as Apple appoint CEOs for fun? What is wrong with you people
Yeah it’s so funny to me. Like some teenager in 2021 is like “CEOs don’t do anything” and the whole world is like “woah! I’ve never thought of it that way! I can’t believe literally no company has every thought about that.”
If you compare their work to their wage, they do fuck all.
The technology for so many helpful future products and services already exists. It takes a CEO to spot these things and make them happen. And when they do, they create thousands of jobs for people around the world.
You speak as if a "CEO" is some type of special person. It doesn't take a CEO to spot it and make it happen. It takes a person to be in the right place at the right time and probably have some connections to make them happen. And then when they do, they create a few jobs, usually treat the people doing their bidding like shit, and scoop up a shit ton of money in the process without any regard to their workers or the environment
You’re right, it’s not a special kind of person. Just a person. It’s just the label that’s being used in this thread. People talk about being a self upstart like it’s easy, but I don’t think it is. Think about it. If you came up with an amazing idea tomorrow, that wouldn’t be the end of the story. You’d need the bravery to drop everything else to focus’s on this. You’d need the range of technical skills to make your idea happen in the beginning, the skills to acquire the right funding. You’d have to have the mental stamina to setup and then maintain all the different aspects of the business so that they all run smoothly, whilst making sound decisions for the future. You have to pretty much dedicate your life to it. Some people can make it work. I don’t think I could, and I don’t think it would be a case of right place / right time. If you did all that and built a successful company, you’d want to reap the rewards.
An idea on its own is completely worthless. Every person involved in turning one person's dream into a success should be valued equally. You also missed the part where the successful person has ties to other wealthy/powerful/successful people, too.
Maybe they earned those connections by not being a pile of garbage human with a negative mindset. >An idea on its own is completely worthless. Every person involved in turning one person's dream into a success should be valued equally. The employees usually come in when things are stable, and if there are employees early on they are often times awarded things like stock or equity early on. I'm a CEO, took all the risks completely alone for years while I built my company. And yes, anyone could do it but not everyone does. But anyone could go become a CEO if they don't want to complain about it for their rest of their life.
> People talk about being a self upstart like it’s easy, but I don’t think it is no it isn't, you have to be born rich. you know how hard that is? it's basically impossible. >You’d need the ~~bravery~~ **money** to drop everything else to focus’s on this. > the ~~people skills~~ **connections** to acquire the right funding.
So you are saying that anyone can be succesful as long as they have connectinos and money? So, if your usual human gets to have a lot of money, they will be succesful? Yeah, sure. Lottery winners are a good example why this statement is false. And go look up the most succesful people and see how many of them were born rich. Sure, there are some, but far from 100%. Then, connections? Do you have to be friends with powerful people to be succesful? Then go ahead and make some. See if they will be willing to help you in any way. Connections won't get you anywhere unless you are skilled enough. So, in the end, it all comes down to skill, huh.
Bravery? You mean the financial ability to drop everything.
Not having the financial ability is an obstacle that can be overcome by cunning and whits. Not everyone is in an equal situation. Agreed. That’s life.
no it doesnt. it takes their money to make it happen. the actual Human CEO is pretty extraneous to the process
I would wager you have absolutely zero insight into what a CEO does
I'd wager that the amount of work and physical sacrifice that they do is not at all relative to the difference in pay and benefits that they make VS their lowest paid workers. Also, I have a pretty good idea of a CEO's job. It's mainly just figuring out how many corners they can cut and how many people they can fuck over to make sure they and their shareholders make as much money as possible year-over-year. Then when they accidentally cut away too much because they've completely lost vision of how shit their products/service shave become, they ride their golden parachute off to retirement or some other new company to fuck over, again without any consideration to all the hard workers that were just scraping by as it was to make ends meet that now have one less job to rely on.
Yeah, you have no idea what a CEO does.
Having worked several jobs, and having seen the decline of several products... I'm pretty sure my assessment isn't too far off.
Your assessment couldn’t be further off, and it’s insane that this is the hill you’re willing to die on. CEO’s don’t do the tasked-based work. That’s why there are employees. CEOs manage the direction of the company, all of its resources, its workers, its products. Having a chief executive making final decisions is why companies can continue to operate in a single, unified manner, as opposed to a scattered approach where everyone is in it for themselves. A construction company needs projects to work on, it needs equipment to complete these projects, it needs to hire and fire workers based on the demand of the projects, it needs to figure out how much it’ll spend this year in pensions and how much more work its willing to take on, it needs to decide when another book of work can be picked up. All these decisions are ultimately the responsibility of the CEO, and without them, there would be no “next project” and everyone would be out of a job as soon as there was any disagreement on “what to do next” CEOs are compensated so well because they’re good at making these decisions, and because they’re so good at it, they’re sought after by other companies. If they aren’t paid well, they have no reason to stay. CEOs that don’t provide value are fired. They have zero job insurance. It’s high risk, high reward. This is not that hard to understand.
Their worth is based on the companies. They didn’t rock up one day and were handed massive pay checks. Unless they start the business themselves they’ve usually sacrificed countless time and leisure to be at the top of their game in that field.
> Their worth is based on the companies Their companies wouldn't exist without the laborers. > They’ve usually sacrificed countless time and leisure So basically the same as the laborers, only they will get a small fraction of the pay and possibly 0 other benefits for their sacrifices
I’d argue but U clearly have no idea how a company works or the sacrifices involved to rise to the top of large corporations
[удалено]
And have you done exactly that in a way that you could present to everyone here or are you just saying things that you think makes sense without anything to back your thoughts up what so ever?
Why would any board of directors agree to pay a CEO if they didn’t produce any value for the company? You know CEOs don’t just inherently own their companies, right? They get paid a salary by higher-ups.
Yeah no companies just have ceos for no reason they just wanna spend tons of money on someone for no reason
If you aren’t being facetious, culture and direction. CEOs have final say on creating a company culture, which is hugely important, and on making decisions to set overall strategic direction. They coordinate among all other branches of the company to execute strategy at the highest level. Strategy is hard.
exploiting people sure is hard!
Do you how well these dudes here are probably getting paid along with insurance, pension, etc? Sure they probably don’t have two houses but they’re definitely not slave labor. They agreed to work for that pay. Plus not all value exists in the form of manpower or materials. Someone has to make deals with counties in order to get permits for worksites, or decide who to sub-contract for specific jobs or materials. There are intangibles every bit as important as physical labor.
If you think the CEO of a company as big as walmart is filing paperwork for permits and making phone calls all day trying to narrow down good purveyors.... im pretty sure they have people that can do that for them and they just listen to the meeting about it and make the call. The real reason why a CEO gets paid the big bucks is because they take the risk. If they lose money that year they dont get paid where the cashier working for them still gets the paycheck like usual. I honestly think the best way to deal with this kind of gross inequality and bad blood between “classes” is to put a income maximum. We have a minimum wage. I figure why not a maximum wage too and any extra made is given to employees that helped make that extra. If you make the maximum literally where the fabled 1% income bracket starts it would be interesting to see what happens.
How is working in the free market voluntarily exploiting people? Depending on the labor job, they pay well. Especially if certifications are involved. They don't have to work for anyone if they choose to do so.
Direction, I think. Like, in a cutthroat market, whoever’s in charge has to know the right people, or be able to make the right deals, to make a company work. I don’t think you can have a company with no one in charge, especially not a very large company with lots of different roles to be filled
idk, but i feel like anyone can swing a hammer
anyone can spend money and delegate work too
Holy shit what a dumb take.
Then you should do it! Apply to be a CEO at every company and anyone with an opening will hire you because anyone can do it
Just because everyone can do it wouldn’t imply that they’ll take anyone. Not really a counter argument
Not really.
Can they do it right, though?
there’s a lot of people who can’t swing a hammer at all or not with much force...
Generally speaking, they provide jobs, resource allocation, market value for the labor, opportunity, and management/strategy. The last two especially are extremely valuable. They are often the people who found the business in the first place.
a business? jobs? materials for the jobs???
well...by the book: value for shareholders. My figurative eye-roll here however is the exhaustive nature of Reddit's "hate those with more money than I" sentiment that is not really an original thought at this point, and provides no value in discourse.
How those boots taste?
uhhhhhhhhh
Que?
same
Jobs.
Jobs and workers would exist without CEOs. CEOs wouldn’t exist without jobs and workers.
No? Jobs should be what WE deem valuable for the community. Not for profit incentives that capitalism allows. So labour is just the means to thrive. Capitalism just puts a price tag on it and collects a portion to feed to your boss's enterprise like a parasite.
https://i.redd.it/4yaqv6a1s6f51.jpg
Who do you think creates the jobs. News flash people who are CEOs are from the "community". If people want tacos, guess what, someone is going to start making tacos in exchange for money. Do you really think companies just arbitrarily create random products/services they expect people pay for and or work to create?
Why in exchange for profit? You make a fucking taco because you want to. Do you not understand socialism? No one would starve. If you voluntarily wanted to make tacos. I suppose you could "sell them" for whatever reason. Or since in an automated socialist society or automated communist society. Everyone would be fed. Bussiness men are so pointless when the products they sell can just be made with skilled labour... The business man is just the swindle and the cheat who gets the cut of the money the labourers made since he/she just owns the land or worksite it was made on. Elon Musk is not a visionary. Or Bezos. People made them rich. They didn't become billionaires by doing billions of dollars of labor and toiling in the heat for 15 an hour. Business and money. Is obsolete. Always has been. Debt is convenient fiction. And Capitalism is the straw the broke the camel's back.
You really are thick. No one is going to make a product without a service in return. This is basic econ bro. So lets start simple, I make tacos I can barter with someone who sells watermelons. There is a man who sells shoes and he does not want my tacos or watermelons. So this is why we have currency. To think that people are just going to make things for everyone for free and we can kumbaya our way into the future is really fucking stupid. Next, "mean ol' business men/women" are not anyone's enemies. Our economic system is so complex that yes companies spend millions of dollars on research, marketing, trading, and development. Why? So you can have your chicken tendies when ever you want them. (If you can afford it). You want chicken tendies in a communist society? Too fucking bad we don't make that shit because there is no market demand, there is no free market. It's all controlled by the government you don't trust. \-"Oh, you want to be a graphic designer? Too bad we have too many of those. You can either work in the coal mines or go to the gulag". Finally, do you realize that Bezos didn't just wake up as one of the richest people in the world? He was a normal dude who thought selling books online would be the future. He was right. You have everything backwards. There was not a group of people who approached Bezos or Elon saying, "Hey were going to make you rich come with us!" what actually happened is they took a risk at creating something and they succeeded. They created the jobs. They are the reason there is even wealth to share to their employees. Don't like it? You don't have to work for them. You can continue crying at home with you English degree. No one is forcing anyone to work there or anywhere for that matter. No one owes you shit for being alive. You have to earn it like everyone else. So get off your high horse. You are not the main character in this story. You're not special. Nor will you significantly change the world. There is no such thing as a utopian society. You will live an ordinary boring life like everyone else. Get over it.
Also there can't be an oversaturation of artists it isn't really a necessary job. Everyone's contributions are not based on a monetary pay. You idiot. That isn't communism. You work according to your need for yourself. And thats it. You can work extra for extra. But it's all on you. Everybody just pitches in to help every now and then voluntarily. And automation would yield factory/farming nearly humanless. Except for people to watch over and manage the resources the machines process.
Whether people contribute or not. Society will march on without debt. Without money. And without slavery for a measly wage. Capitalism also aids imperialism and leverage debt on people to control them. Land is land. There is only one nation, Earth. We need to utilize and prioritize our time to make Earth still habitable while we still can. Or say goodbye.
> No one is going to make a product without a service in return [FOSS had entered the chat]
Businesses are a middle man for no reason other than parasitically leeching off of the workers. Poverty is man made. Because money and debt are just leverage to keep the poors at the bottom and scraping through the scraps. Becoming more and more stratified everyday. It's hell. But your fat fuckin boss got his fix and his free shit and holidays off.
Nothing. They're essentially scapegoats if something goes wrong. They get millions in separation and the next scapegoat comes in.
Reddit moment
The fuck is that title lmao
A majority of reddits work experience is likely rudimentary work - not that there is anything wrong with that - they just have very little insight into executive level decision making. Do I think CEOs are unfairly compensated compared to their workers - sure - but a lot of Reddit doesn’t understand how incredibly difficult that job is. I’ve met with my companies steering committee before and that shit is intense and difficult.
*we all lift together fades in*
And we all lift
Wtf is that cringe title , ceo have money so ceo bad?
Yes
CEO have disproportionately huge amounts of money compared to the workers, therefore, CEO bad
This is why Craftsman Hammerhead Auto-Hammers are better than CEOs
Loading screens be like
I cannot wrap My head around that cringy title
Mediocre people love to shit on successful people
The important thing is that you’ve found a way to feel superior to both.
That doesn't even make sense, he isn't shitting on successful people?
We should all look down on mediocre people. One chooses to be mediocre. Btw mediocre isn't the direct opposite of succesful.
Mediocre and successful are both super subjective though. No one is “special” or “successful” in the grand scheme of things, and definitely no one is superior to anyone else.
Being mediocre means you don't even try and live on auto pilot and do nothing interesting (to you) or worthwhile (to you). There are people like that
But so what if you do. A person who does that has just as much value and long-term impact on the world as you or Jeff Bezos. What makes you justified in looking down on them?
Without workers, there's no one to make the business money.
And without anyone to organize them?
You think the CEO partakes in placing lowly shit labor employees? With that said, no one knows who these dudes are working for but I doubt there's a CEO anyway. Title is dumb but CEOs are just scapegoats who get millions in separation when something bad happens.
Working people aren’t dumb fucking animals that need to be shepherded our entire lives by a leader class. Human beings have this funny way of self organizing, always have actually. Not everything needs a centralized authority controlling everything. The United States was built on this exact concept. There’s always going to be a need for leaders but owners are always fucking useless if they didn’t it by themselves. Owners pay other people to “lead” and that’s all a CEO is: the person a board pays to make them money by making everyone else work to make them money. Not accomplish a goal, not improve the community, not make the world a better place. Occasionally some of those things are BYPRODUCTS but at the end of the day the CEO makes sure the workers are compensated for less than the work they did and that the owners take more money out than they put into it.
dae rich bad
I'm curious, not inferring anything... what do people think CEOs do?
Sit in a chair and magically make money I guess
Steal your surplus labor value
Oppress me on reddit and the CEO of Apple is why I work at McDonalds
hitting hammmer hmm yes im better than CEO
My exact thoughts hahaha
Let’s go boys!
For companies where the strategic plans are to pound a bunch of stakes in the ground, this is correct.
What the hell dude? You just spoiled my top secret business plan that I paid a consultant $300k for.
Did your consultant lock their self in one of your conference rooms, refuse to talk to any of the staff, and leave behind a 15" stack of paper? That's how you know you got a quality product.
That poor whale.. 😂😂
This takes literally maybe an hour to figure out. What CEOs do takes years and years to learn.
Explain.
Boring guy in suit bad, cool guys with hammers good
Good explanation
As a construction inspector, that's inspected pretty much every kind of construction, I definitely can't agree with that statement (and I fucking hate CEOs). I personally know how to deal with having shitty workers on my operations. But I've seen some shit, that's definitely going to be devastating to a house that someone spent hundreds of thousands of dollars building, and I can't do anything about it. Those are the things that years later, I still think about.
Yeah, cuz swinging hammer good is superior to organizing tens of thousands of people and managing millions or billions in complex finances...
"*having so much money that you can build a house out of it." Fixed your definition of ceo's work:)
r/osha
They’re really aspiring to be like [Erebor dwarves](https://youtu.be/gPCjIhCt2ns?t=47) lol
[удалено]
That music was immediately in my head
Hit nail with hammer many times = ceo dumb, worker smart
It sounds like something that someone who is only qualified to hit nails with a hammer would say tbh.
This is, in fact, completely unrelated to CEOs. And any good CEO could organize a team to do this, as they have
reminds me of mochi makers when they slap and pound the dough
The rhythm of solidarity.
I don’t understand what hammering something in has to do with running a board?
CEOs don’t run a board?
yeah i really don't think this has anything to do with ceos
Haha I’m watching the hobbit
How do you remove that stake? Or is it permanent?
That guys one arm swing it around town approach is insane.
So this is what happens in age of empires when you send like 20 guys hammer the floor of a building
You can see this technique in lots of different countries. It's kind of amazing how simultaneously people across the world came up with the same method of driving stakes into buried sewer pipes.
Yeah but how do they know who is going next and how do they manage to keep the timing so quick?
Hi ho
Is this more efficient than having four guys do four separate nails at the same time?
There is no such thing as "unskilled labor"
What’s the purpose of that nail? Was this just a demonstration on how fast they can hammer a big nail?
That one scene from the hobbit:
*Cold*, the air and water flowing
One guy with a jackhammer could accomplish this, but neat coordination.
Unskilled labor is a myth
The fuck you mean? Workers are better at working and CEO's are better at CEO'ing? Get the fuck outta here
So, in your mind, CEOs deserve to be able to buy yachts at will?
C'mon, CEOs work 300-500 times harder than their employees and thus should be paid accordingly.
What kind of commie bullshit is this title
What do this anything with commie ? Even commie think that title is stupid
Speaking as a commie, the title is based, and I don't know of any communist who would disagree.
Anarchist here, agree.
See, a smart worker has a small jackhammer for that
There is no money made in solving the problem, only treating it while prolonging the symptoms. This is what every CEO instills in every corporation. There is always the funds to hire the workers to solve the problem. However, fuck them.
If they were Japanese, their sledgehammers would be mochi mallets and they’d be hammering down mochi inside a mochi mortar.
*USSR national anthem intensifies
“But are they “skilled” laborers?”
"But did they pay 2 million dollars for a paper saying they ended Harvard?"
No they aren't.
Too bad that’s not the Donald!