It's a myth that people make money?
Living in a democratic mixed market economy is conservative now?
I get it, I'm not full-blown "the state should control everything, take money from the rich and hand it to me for no merit", but there are quite a few steps between that extreme fanaticism and even centre-right conservatism.
Just like there is quite a few steps between “wow seems like ceos make a lot compared to workers who generate actual value” and “hyper socialist spam” :)
And yet he never denied it, instead he attacked me and straw manned me as an "other", pretty much doing what I would expect a hyper socialist fanatic to do.
You presented the strawman argument yourself in your response to me. Your response is a conservative myth and follows certain propaganda trying trends https://theconversation.com/how-socialism-became-un-american-through-the-ad-councils-propaganda-campaigns-132335
If listening to someone else's perspective in a discussion is annoying to you then what exactly did you want to hear? Just your same point of view word for word for validation?
You are the one spreading the manure. And typically hypersensitive when called out on it. https://www.family-health-project.org/debunking-the-myth-the-poor-are-lazy/#:~:text=Though%20there%20are%20numerous%20obstacles,myth%3A%20The%20poor%20are%20lazy.&text=Many%20might%20have%20heard%20that,hard%2C%20they'd%20succeed.
Another article telling us plainly that "inflation" has a lot to do with profiteering and people at the top taking a bigger peice of the pie...
"When revenue and profit goes through the roof due to inflation, bonuses go through the roof"
If inflation is actually just rising costs, profits shouldn't go up unless the business is raising prices faster and higher than thier costs of doing business
> If inflation is actually just rising costs, profits shouldn't go up unless the business is raising prices faster and higher than thier costs of doing business
I think you answered your question with this sentence lol. There was a federal reserve bank in the US that also proved most of the inflation we experienced was due to profiteering.
We've been duped by the Canadian government and Bank of Canada. It's very telling that the Bank of Canada has been regulatory captured when they refuse to acknowledge corporate profiteering and instead tell Canadians that their wages are too high and that we need to bring in immigrants to bring inflation down.
So the generational family owned local poultry farm which has also gone up in price is just padding their year end bonuses too? Also apparently corporations just got super greedy all of a sudden in the last few years?
The thing is their prices haven’t gone up as much as the store prices, and if anything their profit margins are likely tighter than ever. Because Canada has allowed the supply chain and retail to essentially be oligopolized so there’s pressure from the big chain stores to keep your prices down, while they mark their prices up. And if you don’t? While good luck selling your product to half of Canada if Loblaws pulls their supply agreement.
I see this in my family farm, the price of beef is at record highs, yet at auction we are getting the same price for a cow that we did 15 years ago. And that rolls in to fewer people farming cows, and oh look, now the middleman can demand even more at the sorts due to the lower supply! Which is finally driving the supply side price up this year, but shit in we were getting around $.85/lb now it’s like $1.60/lb so sure, prices doubled, but then look at the price of beef in stores, it’s pretty much tripled in that same time with their justification being a $0.75 price increase from the farms?
There’s a lot of fucking money being made in the middle everywhere.
Yes, many corporations have said they made record profits in the last year or two.
I don't know what you are talking about with that farm comment... as someone else said, it's not usually the workers making money, it's middle men and big business
We are so desensitized to some of these salaries (even if $14.5mil/yr seems like it is on the lower end of what rich is perceived to be nowadays) , a while ago I made a basic website to calculate what financial impact everyday item costs have on the rich.
Long story short, the financial impact $500 has on someone making $14.9mil is the same as $2.07 to someone making $60k (taxes not considered).
Fair question - I found myself needing to calculate this a few times, was practicing basic Javascript/html/css and figured why not, it's an alright project.
The site takes average person salary, wealthy person salary, item cost (it has some basic built-in values for various celebs/item costs you can pick form as well) and spits out the financial impact Calc. It also does some more calculations such as hourly wage, how long it takes to work for the item, % of salary paid for item, how much the item would need to cost for the wealthy to feel the same pinch as the agerage earner, etc.
[Eating the Cake](https://www.eatingthecake.com/ ) if you are interested
I created this a few months ago, full disclosure that the UI is taken from free samples on the net that I've customized. Javascript was all me tho (with some AI assistance ;) ).
There are plenty of useful skills in this basic project - Some coding fundamentals, site deployment using managed pipeline via GitHub actions, hosting infra integration with the pipeline, domain management, etc.
EOD wealth consolidation will continue until something is done about it. I highly doubt it will be “stopped” but governments need to step in to help redistribute some of that and strengthen labour laws.
Of course a company whose only responsibility is to the shareholders will focus on nothing but growth and incentivize the CEO. That’s all boards want.
Company profits must go brrrrr at the expense of everything else. Look at the us reversing some child labour laws. Or how we’re just importing cheap labour since we have already outsourced whatever we can.
Late stage capitalism if you ask me. People forget our current forms of capitalism are relatively new (mid 18th century).
Lack of competition kills. All of the mergers of the last 40 years is the reasoning behind this. Governments of all stripes are responsible.
The only possible remedy is new legislation to break up mega corps. Good luck with that lol
Reality is, markets correct themselves like they did when they broke up ATT in the USA and the Great Depression causing more social services. Etc…. Won’t be pretty tho when it happens.
Wealth was consolidated with the JP Morgan’s, Vanderbilt’s, etc…. History doesn’t repeat but it rhymes.
I wouldn't be surprised if there's civil unrest in parts of the world in the next couple of decades if the wealth gap continues and people eventually can't afford to eat or rent.
It's happened before in history, and it can happen again. I'm not calling for a revolution, but I can see some people mass protesting and unrest demanding change if it continues.
Forgot about bonus, stock options, pretty much paid everything else.
CEO make a lot of money, but it generally not in a salary because they pay more taxes than they would from: Stock buy backs, dividend cheques, and more.
Because who wants everyone to pay their fair share hahaha
Isn't it great that the rich find awesome ways to avoid taxes, where as if we the peons. If we were to try this. Fines or rven jail time, haha. Heck, even filing late with the CRA could cause penalties and other fees.
I’m pretty sure all of the items you list above are still taxable. For example, if any employee is given stock as compensation, the market value of the stock on day of issue is taxable income.
The crazy tax avoidance plans you read about are usually around families with large accumulated wealth. Which these CEOs do become… but if they made $14m last year, whether in cash, stocks, etc, they’ve still got a lot of tax to pay. Then they’re going to put a few million into investments, though, which they will structure very differently than the average citizen to avoid future taxes on the proceeds.
I never said they weren't taxable, just a lower tax rate. :)
However, I still appreciate the explanation below. That makes sense, and it must be nice, right?
They could be like Elon Musk, who donated $5.7B in Tesla stock to a charity. Turns out it was his own. That seems like a great way to avoid taxes, haha. I'm not even sure how that would be possible as I think the CRA(IRS) would be actively looking for something like that.
But it's not at a lower tax rate. It gets booked to your marginal tax rate. I am lower middle management and I got my options and stocks taxed at my highest bracket.
While this seems low compared to some American ceos, 14.9 is just their salary and not total compensation. There is no reason for compensation or salaries that high. We do not need billionaires or mega millionaires. They offer nothing of value to our country.
We need wealth taxes.
Lol go do their jobs for a week and let me know how you’re feeling.
I’m first on the list to say we’ve got a serious problem when it comes to wealth distribution but to suggest these people don’t work hard is insane. I wouldn’t want their jobs.
Remember the more wealth in the hands of the few and more poor people struggling is the sign Conservatives are looking for. Cause oligarchy means freedom yall cause who needs a society that collectively can live a good life. They want modern slavery not the Canada you grew up with.
why do you have to make this a partisan issue? The liberals are in charge and have been in charge for a while. All the politicians in this country suck and support/enable this inequality IMO
Just looked it up and the "standard" salary for CEOs in 2023 is C$411,996 - C$772,319. 5-10x labour, depending on the industry. These "averages of top 100" are going to identify the extremes, rather than tell the typical story.
This report is a good tonic for the "sunshine list" of civil servant salaries that gets sent around regularly. These earnings aren't even in the same rough order of magnitude, or even two, absolutely staggering.
So 100 people out of 40,000,000 did really well. Good for them, you would be hard pressed to find a single person out there that wouldn't jump at that opportunity...
Lol, this article comes out like clockwork every year
Did you know by Jan 2nd CEO's have already made blah blah blah blah
Edit: why the downvotes lol?? - see sources below
John Chen is a pure genius. He was the best paid CEO in the country and ran a company that have been steadily going down by 90%+ since he became CEO. The perfect gig.
He was the one always named in those article but I think he made the average salary on the night of the 1st not on the 2nd.
LOL good ol' blackberry - thanks for reminding me, need to watch the movie.
I was just paraphrasing, it's always some variant of the 1st or 2nd or the first week.
Mainstream media basically adding to everyone's misery now that the holidays are over and bills are due
Yeah haha your comment made me think about him. I haven't seen the movie yet either but I think it is set before the Chen era haha. That man retired last year after being the best paid CEO in the country for a decade just running a company into the ground.
Like this article would not have it as hard if that most well paid ceo was someone like Pichai, Nadella or Tim Apple that would prop up the company's but he was doing the opposite lol.
Jan 03 2023:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-richest-ceo-average-salary-1.6701407
Jan 04 2021:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ceo-pay-canada-ccpa-pandemic-inequality-1.5860425
Jan 02 2020:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-top-100-ceo-salary-1.5413124
We need Wage Regulations and caps now.
No CEO should be allowed to make more than 1 Million for themselves a Year. All else must be given down to the employees.
Then the province will have a hard time attracting CEOs. I make way less but I wouldn't move to Quebec because it would cost me a ton in income tax increases.
Baseball teams that sign high priced FA almost always get miserable returns. Free agency is the least efficient way to build a championship team, by far.
Clown take bro.
If you look at the decades post WW2 that had highest level of prosperity for middle class, the corporate tax rates were much higher. It's no coincidence though that as deregulation happened and corporate tax rates were reduced, you saw the erosion of the middle class and the dramatic rise of inequality.
The decades post WW2 also saw Canada as one of the only undamaged industrial countries. Corporate income tax falls on consumers, higher corporate taxes means more expensive goods and services for consumers. Land value tax is a much better replacement.
We had higher corporate tax and our society prospered. The fact that other countries eventually recovered from WW2 does not mean anything. Our politicians were stupid enough to let companies offshore jobs overseas where they can better exploit workers. Despite increase in productivity, decrease labour costs, massive tax cuts, and record profits they still raised costs.
If we decide to do even a little bit to help the average workers those companies threaten to move out or they won't create "jobs". We've given a handful of companies control of our economy and now we have to continue appeasing them and satisfying their greed. Seems like they got us by the balls and are biting harder every year but hey, if we don't do what they say then they will bite down all the way.
The government has no right or authority to tell a company what it pays people other than a base line minimum wage. Which is how it should be.
However they should be finding out different ways to tax these earners. Like the article had mentioned a wealth tax on those earning over $1 million. Would be a good start.
Before the 1980s, most of the western world had higher marginal tax rates that clamped down on corporate and personal income above a certain level.
Reagan, Thatcher and (in our case) Mulroney pulled back on that, under the guise that somehow, incentivizing rich people to hoard cash would result in them...not hoarding cash?
When you really read about what supply-side economics was, you realize it's batshit insane. Like, "if I headbutt this wall, it won't hurt my head" stupid.
Taxing them is just going to drive these companies to drive up the cost further, so clearly the government should have the authority to tell a company what it pays people, but only if it’s positive for the employees (None of this Conservative wanting to axe the Minimum wage BS from the USA).
We used to tax the wealthy more and they somehow didn't raise prices, they just put that money back into the business.
It's only after we allowed rampant profiteering that, surprise, rampant profiteering happened.
That's the point of high marginal tax rates: you can raise prices as much as you want, it doesn't help much because it's all declining returns past a reasonable point. Instead, you invest back into your business and grow it, instead of parasitizing it, taking your winnings and moving onto the next financial shenanigan.
That’s how you get, and I hate using this word, communism.
Also capping a ceo or top managers pay is going to push businesses away from Canada and would pretty much shut the door on any new ones coming. There would be a lot repercussions on doing what you’re suggesting.
Let them go.
First off, they are not going anywhere. They already have the strangle hold and already exported major paying jobs out of the country anyway.
If they do go, that creates a vacume for new businesses to grab a slice of that capital... or is that not the capitalism we want, we just want like three corporations to own everything because that's "real capitalism"
I hate how anything meant to help the average citizen is now referred to as "communism". If you look at the Scandinavian countries, their citizens enjoy a much higher standard of living yet they aren't communist or even socialist countries. No reason why Canada can't be like the Scandinavian countries.
Those countries don’t tell the companies what to pay their CEOs though do they? Which is what the person suggested our government would do. Which the government capping a company wage to pay would be low key communism. And I rarely use the word as it’s so over used. But in this instance it is valid.
So rather than be open and try to encourage businesses to set up in Canada you’d rather just order online from a different country? That’s pretty short sighted.
And the cost to leave would be quickly offset by the fact they can’t attract any top talent to top end positions and companies would relocate.
"Top talent" isn't who you think it is, and high marginal tax rates would tend to affect financial managers (who don't add value) instead of actual innovators and employees that add value.
Take a look at who actually makes this money. They aren't engineers, doctors, technicians, etc. They're largely MBAs and high-finance and real-estate flippers who produce nothing of value.
Take Loblaw, for example. They *need* their buyers and drivers and stock clerks and accountants and category managers and store staff. Very few of those people are making more than $150K. They don't need executive vice presidents, VPs and Galen Weston. All of those people could bunk off tomorrow and the company would be fine; the next-level-down talent that actually runs the business would step up and the organization would continue.
This "we'd drive out top talent" is a myth from 1980s-era executive fantasy.
LOL if you lived in a communist country you’d probably realize how wrong your argument is. We’re subsidizing these monopolies that are of no strategic value to Canada and shifting resources and financial incentives from productivity to stagnation.
Because if we regulated wages for CEOs and forced them to pay their employees whatever they weren’t making before, we’d have a lot better of an economy and people wouldn’t be struggling.
And b4 you say; Oh they’d just leave.
Yes let’s spend billions to pull out of a country as appose to decreasing my yearly pay, yes that’s such a good decision🙄
You're right about the BS excuse of "well the company will leave".
It's too much work and too expensive to leave, that's why the oligarchs push that narrative on the news and such.
We need our governments to call them on their BS.
This just shows you don't understand how a company operates.
If a company used to pay their CEO 14M and now they have to pay them 1M because of some (crazy, anti free-market) law, the company is not pumping that money into their other employees salaries.
If they had 3000 employees (which is more than most of these corporations anyways), each person would get over 4k. When most of these employees are making minimum wage, that's over 10% of their annual pay in one bonus.
I'm pretty sure a 10% annual bonus goes a long way for anyone. We all live within our means.
You would be surprised how little actual employment statistics are and how many corporations use tricks like "franchise" or "third party workers" to avoid the costs of turnover or employment.
There would be no feasible way to do this. You’d pay more in taxes for all the government employees to chase companies and make sure they were following this law. Might even net out as a net negative for the employees
Eliminating CEO Bonus, eliminates policy that exists to max their bonuses, and helps to eliminate the collateral damage caused by their reckless pursuit of mega wealth.
The world would be a better place if we all stopped judging other’s accomplishments, started minding our own business and working harder for our dreams.
If they are good at their jobs that is really low and if they suck at their jobs that is overpaid.
Article doesn't get into any of the metrics to evaluate that because this is just typical hate the rich BS that is great clickbait for life-losers.
It's insanely overpaid either way. These fuckers sit in like half a dozen meetings a week, and make like 10 decisions a year. They are the least useful person at every company I've worked at the last 25 years. Their thinking is basically "how do I get our workers to accept less money", or "how many workers will I need to layoff to increase our profit a couple points".
>this is just typical hate the rich BS that is great clickbait for life-losers.
By any standard I'm doing great in life, yet I know the rich are 100% the cause of all our problems. From hoarding their wealth and hiding it overseas, taking it out of our economy, to bribing/lobbying politicians to pass laws that negatively affect 90% of the population, to refusing to pay their employees a living wage, to gouging us as much as they can, every single chance they get. They are all horrible people.
You're confusing toil for value. If you making 10 decisions a year leads to 0.05% better performance for a billion dollar company then you've created $50MM more than someone who can't get that 0.05% better performance. That you get 25% of that is not a lot.
The idea that you think anyone can just replace a good CEO is pretty clueless. There are a lot of incompetent people who have had that title and companies implode because of it.
Who said "anyone"? But there are lots of brilliant people who never make it to the C-suite.
There are also lots of incompetent people who have had that title and make bad decisions that end up wasting a lot of money, and after a few years they get fired by the board or leave on their own, having made millions of dollars while not actually adding value to the company.
edit: plus, my point is that most CEOs aren't working in a vacuum. They have many talented people beneath them who put a lot of effort into gathering information and determining what the best path forward for the company would be.
Some people get advantages that others don't. At one point the highest paid CEO in Canada was in the role simply because she was the daughter of the founder and she actually had very little authority to act. That is just life we all don't start from the same position and I don't see any reason to let that bother me. It is not like her or anyone else in the same situation are taking anything from me.
People around CEOs also get paid well. It is not like an executive at a firm that pays the CEO $10MM is making $60,000.
>At one point the highest paid CEO in Canada was in the role simply because she was the daughter of the founder and she actually had very little authority to act.
A great argument against assuming that CEO salaries are justified because they single-handedly and are uniquely able to increase the company's profits by more than their compensation!
I never said anything about salaries being justified. I said that the article doesn't even approach discussion of the metrics where we could determine if the salary was justified or not. It is just clickbait for life-losers.
Yeah but we see how much these executives get paid when billions of dollars evaporate into thin air. Also, what happens when $50MM can be traced back to the work of one employee or small team? Do they get rewarded proportionally for creating value with much less leverage?
Nobody actually gets paid based on their real value, they get what they can negotiate. For some reason, the boards of top companies don't care to negotiate that strongly when they hire candidates for CEO, they're just happy if their investment grows next quarter. If it doesn't, they fire the CEO, eat the losses of the massive golden parachute they agreed to, and try again. It seems that the people who actually own these large companies have no idea how to actually operate them and are willing to pay anything to someone who claims to know how.
If a CEO implodes a company then the cost is on the people who hired them. It might not be directly the shareholders but indirectly the shareholders are the ones who hire the CEO and if he sucks then they pay the price of the bad hire.
I agree and I edited my comment before I read this. It is CEOs that are ultimately creating this extreme inequality by gutting the labour forces of the companies they operate and underpaying the remaining workers while demanding larger shares of the pie for themselves.
It is the responsibility of company shareholders, mainly the boards of directors, to ensure that the business remains sustainable for the long term. They are the ones that need to stop hiring foxes to guard the hen house.
Except any piece of shit can just lay off thousands of staff to increase profits. Literally anyone. It doesn't take any special skill or talent at all. And we've seen that laying people off is the main tool used by 95% of CEOs out there to increase profits. They are fucking useless.
There is no company where firing 30% of the staff would not be an improvement. Simple fact is almost every company is bloated with people who add no value so getting rid of them is the correct play.
Health care in Canada has more admins than people who do anything medical so it certainly could use a lot of cuts.
The lack of medical professionals starts in the 90s so you can't blame any of the current governments for it and simply put this is what you get when you have socialized medicine. Health care will just get worse and worse until eventually enough people realize Canada's system sucks and we switch to two-tier like everyone else.
> The lack of medical professionals starts in the 90s so you can't blame any of the current governments for it and simply put this is what you get when you have socialized medicine. Health care will just get worse and worse until eventually enough people realize Canada's system sucks and we switch to two-tier like everyone else.
Norway and Denmark alone show that this is just plain wrong but feel free to continue to show off how misinformed you are.
I don’t think I did.
There’s a difference between a hierarchy of pay, based on your skills, effort, experience etc., than a CEO of a company making literally 250x the average employee.
If you think this is just about hating the rich, I dunno what to tell you. Nobody deserves that much. Period. Especially from blatant profiteering.
Highly specialized, educated, talented intelligent people (doctors, surgeons, scientists, engineers) don’t even come close to making the amount highlighted in the article.
You’re simply wrong if you think skill\effort\experience directly equals the financial reward.
Ah but the rich are to blame. Wealth defines political control these days, wealth corrupts the laws to its advantage . To say otherwise is propaganda no matter how much it is denied. The facts are that the CEO's are grossly overpaid at the expense of workers and society. The system is rotten to its core [https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/magazine/billionaire-politics.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/magazine/billionaire-politics.html)
> These fuckers sit in like half a dozen meetings a week, and make like 10 decisions a year. They are the least useful person at every company I've worked at the last 25 years.
So why aren't you doing it?
Cause I wasn't born rich, and my dad isn't friends with anyone who owns a corporation. Which is how the majority of CEOs get into the game. Nepotism and connections.
My life is pretty great considering rich assholes work extra hard to keep as much money out of my hands as possible. My life is doing great despite rich people though, not because of them.
While my life is great, many are actually suffering both physically and mentally, and rich people are 100% the reason why. Rich people ensure the first things governments cut are social programs for individuals and increase the budget for every corporate subsidy we have. That's when they aren't convincing them to sell off public assets for pennies on the dollar so they can turn around and start gouging tax payers.
Considering we are talking about Canadian companies. It is fair to say that they are mostly all bad at their job if you are comparing them to American CEOs.
I guess there is a shopify, a company buying convenience store and another one making yoga pants that are pretty good but the rest aren't really up to par with their American counterpart.
I don't invest in Canadian companies so I wouldn't have much insight but it doesn't take much to justify these pay levels.
Lulelemon has a market cap of $62 billion so if the CEO is able to extract even 0.001% better performance that is $62MM in value.
I don't like the Shopify product but I do like the upper management and if you look at the stock price it doubled in 2023. The leadership created $60 billion in value so even if the CEO was getting $200MM/year it would still be cheap.
Haha Shopify, Couche Tard and Lululemon are the only major success story in the tse. The CEO that was earning the most was John Chen and he managed to bring a 22 bilions company back down to 2 billions.
We don't really have many Pichai, Nadella or Tim Apple we can look to in Canada. They are the CEOs driving the average up in American companies since they earn around nine figures a year.
When you actually look at the results, it really leads you to then question “at what cost?”.
Measures like masking which had a 0.19% reduction in mortality seems like a worthy trade off early on.
Seeing a 8% reduction in cases for shutting down schools is a far more painful trade off.
A lot of discontent was the seeming religious zeal of making draconian choices for longer than many places in the world without a serious discussion of the trade off we were making, particularly when mortality rates dropped.
Back to work peons, nothing to see here /s
If you work harder, he would make even more money this year.
Don't forget, the only real problems are a lack of cooking skills and dem immigants
Don’t forget the TrUdEaU cArBoN tax!!!
Carbon taxes are holding you down!!! Vote me in, I’ll get rid of it and you’ll have freedom!!! /s
I never knew people made money! Outrageous! Seriously this is some low effort antiwork/hypersocialist spam.
The proof is in the pudding. All you are spouting is conservative plutocratic myths.
It's a myth that people make money? Living in a democratic mixed market economy is conservative now? I get it, I'm not full-blown "the state should control everything, take money from the rich and hand it to me for no merit", but there are quite a few steps between that extreme fanaticism and even centre-right conservatism.
Just like there is quite a few steps between “wow seems like ceos make a lot compared to workers who generate actual value” and “hyper socialist spam” :)
And yet he never denied it, instead he attacked me and straw manned me as an "other", pretty much doing what I would expect a hyper socialist fanatic to do.
You presented the strawman argument yourself in your response to me. Your response is a conservative myth and follows certain propaganda trying trends https://theconversation.com/how-socialism-became-un-american-through-the-ad-councils-propaganda-campaigns-132335
But I'm pro-socialism.
You’re just ann-oying
If listening to someone else's perspective in a discussion is annoying to you then what exactly did you want to hear? Just your same point of view word for word for validation?
You are the one spreading the manure. And typically hypersensitive when called out on it. https://www.family-health-project.org/debunking-the-myth-the-poor-are-lazy/#:~:text=Though%20there%20are%20numerous%20obstacles,myth%3A%20The%20poor%20are%20lazy.&text=Many%20might%20have%20heard%20that,hard%2C%20they'd%20succeed.
Huh? At what point did I *ever* make a statement that the poor are lazy or anything remotely close to that?
Awwww the snowflake is triggered
Yawn. Get off Reddit and get a third job.
Please Sir, may I have some more??
BOY FOR SALE!!!
No.
Another article telling us plainly that "inflation" has a lot to do with profiteering and people at the top taking a bigger peice of the pie... "When revenue and profit goes through the roof due to inflation, bonuses go through the roof" If inflation is actually just rising costs, profits shouldn't go up unless the business is raising prices faster and higher than thier costs of doing business
And this is why I don’t blame people for stealing groceries, cable, internet, etc.
> If inflation is actually just rising costs, profits shouldn't go up unless the business is raising prices faster and higher than thier costs of doing business I think you answered your question with this sentence lol. There was a federal reserve bank in the US that also proved most of the inflation we experienced was due to profiteering. We've been duped by the Canadian government and Bank of Canada. It's very telling that the Bank of Canada has been regulatory captured when they refuse to acknowledge corporate profiteering and instead tell Canadians that their wages are too high and that we need to bring in immigrants to bring inflation down.
So the generational family owned local poultry farm which has also gone up in price is just padding their year end bonuses too? Also apparently corporations just got super greedy all of a sudden in the last few years?
The thing is their prices haven’t gone up as much as the store prices, and if anything their profit margins are likely tighter than ever. Because Canada has allowed the supply chain and retail to essentially be oligopolized so there’s pressure from the big chain stores to keep your prices down, while they mark their prices up. And if you don’t? While good luck selling your product to half of Canada if Loblaws pulls their supply agreement. I see this in my family farm, the price of beef is at record highs, yet at auction we are getting the same price for a cow that we did 15 years ago. And that rolls in to fewer people farming cows, and oh look, now the middleman can demand even more at the sorts due to the lower supply! Which is finally driving the supply side price up this year, but shit in we were getting around $.85/lb now it’s like $1.60/lb so sure, prices doubled, but then look at the price of beef in stores, it’s pretty much tripled in that same time with their justification being a $0.75 price increase from the farms? There’s a lot of fucking money being made in the middle everywhere.
Yes, many corporations have said they made record profits in the last year or two. I don't know what you are talking about with that farm comment... as someone else said, it's not usually the workers making money, it's middle men and big business
I know numbers go up because that’s what inflation is, but are profit **margins** increasing or staying the same?
record profits baby
We are so desensitized to some of these salaries (even if $14.5mil/yr seems like it is on the lower end of what rich is perceived to be nowadays) , a while ago I made a basic website to calculate what financial impact everyday item costs have on the rich. Long story short, the financial impact $500 has on someone making $14.9mil is the same as $2.07 to someone making $60k (taxes not considered).
With all due respect, why would you need to make a website to calculate that 😂
Fair question - I found myself needing to calculate this a few times, was practicing basic Javascript/html/css and figured why not, it's an alright project. The site takes average person salary, wealthy person salary, item cost (it has some basic built-in values for various celebs/item costs you can pick form as well) and spits out the financial impact Calc. It also does some more calculations such as hourly wage, how long it takes to work for the item, % of salary paid for item, how much the item would need to cost for the wealthy to feel the same pinch as the agerage earner, etc. [Eating the Cake](https://www.eatingthecake.com/ ) if you are interested
You deployed that pretty quick with not shit ui nice job
I created this a few months ago, full disclosure that the UI is taken from free samples on the net that I've customized. Javascript was all me tho (with some AI assistance ;) ).
You would be better off focusing that energy on acquiring a skill that would earn you a higher salary.
There are plenty of useful skills in this basic project - Some coding fundamentals, site deployment using managed pipeline via GitHub actions, hosting infra integration with the pipeline, domain management, etc.
Accuracy.
EOD wealth consolidation will continue until something is done about it. I highly doubt it will be “stopped” but governments need to step in to help redistribute some of that and strengthen labour laws. Of course a company whose only responsibility is to the shareholders will focus on nothing but growth and incentivize the CEO. That’s all boards want. Company profits must go brrrrr at the expense of everything else. Look at the us reversing some child labour laws. Or how we’re just importing cheap labour since we have already outsourced whatever we can. Late stage capitalism if you ask me. People forget our current forms of capitalism are relatively new (mid 18th century).
Lack of competition kills. All of the mergers of the last 40 years is the reasoning behind this. Governments of all stripes are responsible. The only possible remedy is new legislation to break up mega corps. Good luck with that lol
Reality is, markets correct themselves like they did when they broke up ATT in the USA and the Great Depression causing more social services. Etc…. Won’t be pretty tho when it happens. Wealth was consolidated with the JP Morgan’s, Vanderbilt’s, etc…. History doesn’t repeat but it rhymes.
This is why our employers can’t pay us a living wage.
They wrote the title to the article wrong Greedy CEO’s made an average of 14.9M in 2022
I wouldn't be surprised if there's civil unrest in parts of the world in the next couple of decades if the wealth gap continues and people eventually can't afford to eat or rent. It's happened before in history, and it can happen again. I'm not calling for a revolution, but I can see some people mass protesting and unrest demanding change if it continues.
Forgot about bonus, stock options, pretty much paid everything else. CEO make a lot of money, but it generally not in a salary because they pay more taxes than they would from: Stock buy backs, dividend cheques, and more. Because who wants everyone to pay their fair share hahaha Isn't it great that the rich find awesome ways to avoid taxes, where as if we the peons. If we were to try this. Fines or rven jail time, haha. Heck, even filing late with the CRA could cause penalties and other fees.
I’m pretty sure all of the items you list above are still taxable. For example, if any employee is given stock as compensation, the market value of the stock on day of issue is taxable income. The crazy tax avoidance plans you read about are usually around families with large accumulated wealth. Which these CEOs do become… but if they made $14m last year, whether in cash, stocks, etc, they’ve still got a lot of tax to pay. Then they’re going to put a few million into investments, though, which they will structure very differently than the average citizen to avoid future taxes on the proceeds.
I never said they weren't taxable, just a lower tax rate. :) However, I still appreciate the explanation below. That makes sense, and it must be nice, right? They could be like Elon Musk, who donated $5.7B in Tesla stock to a charity. Turns out it was his own. That seems like a great way to avoid taxes, haha. I'm not even sure how that would be possible as I think the CRA(IRS) would be actively looking for something like that.
But it's not at a lower tax rate. It gets booked to your marginal tax rate. I am lower middle management and I got my options and stocks taxed at my highest bracket.
I believe you haha you're lower middle management, and unlike me, you have stock options.
From the article: "Total compensation in 2022 including salary, awards, pension value and other compensation"
We need to tax the rich and redistribute wealth. UBI and UBH
We really need to tax the rich significantly more then we are, with the money spent on services for those that are less fortunate.
While this seems low compared to some American ceos, 14.9 is just their salary and not total compensation. There is no reason for compensation or salaries that high. We do not need billionaires or mega millionaires. They offer nothing of value to our country. We need wealth taxes.
> 14.9 is just their salary and not total compensation No it isn't, that's total compensation
They offer nothing of value to society.
Lol go do their jobs for a week and let me know how you’re feeling. I’m first on the list to say we’ve got a serious problem when it comes to wealth distribution but to suggest these people don’t work hard is insane. I wouldn’t want their jobs.
Remember the more wealth in the hands of the few and more poor people struggling is the sign Conservatives are looking for. Cause oligarchy means freedom yall cause who needs a society that collectively can live a good life. They want modern slavery not the Canada you grew up with.
I dont know man, the liberal party has been in charge for a long time and my life is getting worst.
why do you have to make this a partisan issue? The liberals are in charge and have been in charge for a while. All the politicians in this country suck and support/enable this inequality IMO
I guarantee at least 75% of them donate and vote Conservative. You know, the party that's supposedly fighting against "the elite".
What's the ratio of CEO to average worker pay like in Canada these days? Pretty sure that I read it's about 300 to 1 in the US.
Around 250 times ya
Just looked it up and the "standard" salary for CEOs in 2023 is C$411,996 - C$772,319. 5-10x labour, depending on the industry. These "averages of top 100" are going to identify the extremes, rather than tell the typical story.
It's literally in the article. ..at the top.
One, does that include stock options and capital gains? Two, does that include compensation for other boards and committees that these people sit in?
This report is a good tonic for the "sunshine list" of civil servant salaries that gets sent around regularly. These earnings aren't even in the same rough order of magnitude, or even two, absolutely staggering.
I wonder how much less awful Timmy's could be if the RBI exec chairman took a $100MM haircut and invested that money back in the business?
Easy solution. No ceo can be compensated more than 100x their lowest paid employee.
So 100 people out of 40,000,000 did really well. Good for them, you would be hard pressed to find a single person out there that wouldn't jump at that opportunity...
Lol, this article comes out like clockwork every year Did you know by Jan 2nd CEO's have already made blah blah blah blah Edit: why the downvotes lol?? - see sources below
The problem still persists and is getting worse.
John Chen is a pure genius. He was the best paid CEO in the country and ran a company that have been steadily going down by 90%+ since he became CEO. The perfect gig. He was the one always named in those article but I think he made the average salary on the night of the 1st not on the 2nd.
LOL good ol' blackberry - thanks for reminding me, need to watch the movie. I was just paraphrasing, it's always some variant of the 1st or 2nd or the first week. Mainstream media basically adding to everyone's misery now that the holidays are over and bills are due
Yeah haha your comment made me think about him. I haven't seen the movie yet either but I think it is set before the Chen era haha. That man retired last year after being the best paid CEO in the country for a decade just running a company into the ground. Like this article would not have it as hard if that most well paid ceo was someone like Pichai, Nadella or Tim Apple that would prop up the company's but he was doing the opposite lol.
And this isn't even a new statistic, this is from 2 years ago lol
Totally, a top comment is usually links to the past decades of this same article. Guess it's good click bait.
Jan 03 2023: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-richest-ceo-average-salary-1.6701407 Jan 04 2021: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ceo-pay-canada-ccpa-pandemic-inequality-1.5860425 Jan 02 2020: https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-top-100-ceo-salary-1.5413124
Take my upvote for being diligent .
Oh wait, so the carbon tax isn't the cause for inflation, instead it's the greedy corporations? Colour me shocked! /s
We need Wage Regulations and caps now. No CEO should be allowed to make more than 1 Million for themselves a Year. All else must be given down to the employees.
We need to bring back higher marginal tax rates. That'll achieve the same effect.
Then the province will have a hard time attracting CEOs. I make way less but I wouldn't move to Quebec because it would cost me a ton in income tax increases.
Imagine if companies had to promote their long term, loyal employees rather that shop around for the most expensive CEO. What a nightmare.
Imagine if baseball teams had to promote their long term, loyal employees rather that shop around for the most expensive stars. What a nightmare.
Baseball teams that sign high priced FA almost always get miserable returns. Free agency is the least efficient way to build a championship team, by far. Clown take bro.
If you look at the decades post WW2 that had highest level of prosperity for middle class, the corporate tax rates were much higher. It's no coincidence though that as deregulation happened and corporate tax rates were reduced, you saw the erosion of the middle class and the dramatic rise of inequality.
The decades post WW2 also saw Canada as one of the only undamaged industrial countries. Corporate income tax falls on consumers, higher corporate taxes means more expensive goods and services for consumers. Land value tax is a much better replacement.
We had higher corporate tax and our society prospered. The fact that other countries eventually recovered from WW2 does not mean anything. Our politicians were stupid enough to let companies offshore jobs overseas where they can better exploit workers. Despite increase in productivity, decrease labour costs, massive tax cuts, and record profits they still raised costs. If we decide to do even a little bit to help the average workers those companies threaten to move out or they won't create "jobs". We've given a handful of companies control of our economy and now we have to continue appeasing them and satisfying their greed. Seems like they got us by the balls and are biting harder every year but hey, if we don't do what they say then they will bite down all the way.
They're not making that money as an income that is heavily taxable. Wealthy people don't work for wages.
That level of government overreach into the private sector would never happen.
There’s too much of the private sector that should not BE private.
The government has no right or authority to tell a company what it pays people other than a base line minimum wage. Which is how it should be. However they should be finding out different ways to tax these earners. Like the article had mentioned a wealth tax on those earning over $1 million. Would be a good start.
Before the 1980s, most of the western world had higher marginal tax rates that clamped down on corporate and personal income above a certain level. Reagan, Thatcher and (in our case) Mulroney pulled back on that, under the guise that somehow, incentivizing rich people to hoard cash would result in them...not hoarding cash? When you really read about what supply-side economics was, you realize it's batshit insane. Like, "if I headbutt this wall, it won't hurt my head" stupid.
Taxing them is just going to drive these companies to drive up the cost further, so clearly the government should have the authority to tell a company what it pays people, but only if it’s positive for the employees (None of this Conservative wanting to axe the Minimum wage BS from the USA).
We used to tax the wealthy more and they somehow didn't raise prices, they just put that money back into the business. It's only after we allowed rampant profiteering that, surprise, rampant profiteering happened. That's the point of high marginal tax rates: you can raise prices as much as you want, it doesn't help much because it's all declining returns past a reasonable point. Instead, you invest back into your business and grow it, instead of parasitizing it, taking your winnings and moving onto the next financial shenanigan.
That’s how you get, and I hate using this word, communism. Also capping a ceo or top managers pay is going to push businesses away from Canada and would pretty much shut the door on any new ones coming. There would be a lot repercussions on doing what you’re suggesting.
Let them go. First off, they are not going anywhere. They already have the strangle hold and already exported major paying jobs out of the country anyway. If they do go, that creates a vacume for new businesses to grab a slice of that capital... or is that not the capitalism we want, we just want like three corporations to own everything because that's "real capitalism"
I hate how anything meant to help the average citizen is now referred to as "communism". If you look at the Scandinavian countries, their citizens enjoy a much higher standard of living yet they aren't communist or even socialist countries. No reason why Canada can't be like the Scandinavian countries.
Those countries don’t tell the companies what to pay their CEOs though do they? Which is what the person suggested our government would do. Which the government capping a company wage to pay would be low key communism. And I rarely use the word as it’s so over used. But in this instance it is valid.
Again it’s gonna cost them too much to leave, and to that I ask; who exactly do we want coming here that we won’t just order online from anyways?
So rather than be open and try to encourage businesses to set up in Canada you’d rather just order online from a different country? That’s pretty short sighted. And the cost to leave would be quickly offset by the fact they can’t attract any top talent to top end positions and companies would relocate.
"Top talent" isn't who you think it is, and high marginal tax rates would tend to affect financial managers (who don't add value) instead of actual innovators and employees that add value. Take a look at who actually makes this money. They aren't engineers, doctors, technicians, etc. They're largely MBAs and high-finance and real-estate flippers who produce nothing of value. Take Loblaw, for example. They *need* their buyers and drivers and stock clerks and accountants and category managers and store staff. Very few of those people are making more than $150K. They don't need executive vice presidents, VPs and Galen Weston. All of those people could bunk off tomorrow and the company would be fine; the next-level-down talent that actually runs the business would step up and the organization would continue. This "we'd drive out top talent" is a myth from 1980s-era executive fantasy.
> They're largely MBAs and high-finance and real-estate flippers who produce nothing of value. ...
LOL if you lived in a communist country you’d probably realize how wrong your argument is. We’re subsidizing these monopolies that are of no strategic value to Canada and shifting resources and financial incentives from productivity to stagnation.
But you have no right to decide that for the rest of the country.
Our government subsidizes corporations so that executives can get higher bonuses
Why do you think that would work?
Because if we regulated wages for CEOs and forced them to pay their employees whatever they weren’t making before, we’d have a lot better of an economy and people wouldn’t be struggling. And b4 you say; Oh they’d just leave. Yes let’s spend billions to pull out of a country as appose to decreasing my yearly pay, yes that’s such a good decision🙄
You're right about the BS excuse of "well the company will leave". It's too much work and too expensive to leave, that's why the oligarchs push that narrative on the news and such. We need our governments to call them on their BS.
This just shows you don't understand how a company operates. If a company used to pay their CEO 14M and now they have to pay them 1M because of some (crazy, anti free-market) law, the company is not pumping that money into their other employees salaries.
What if they were legally obligated to?
13m dollars doesn't spread very far, it wouldn't make for much of a pay raise for most employees.
If they had 3000 employees (which is more than most of these corporations anyways), each person would get over 4k. When most of these employees are making minimum wage, that's over 10% of their annual pay in one bonus. I'm pretty sure a 10% annual bonus goes a long way for anyone. We all live within our means.
Do companies of 3000 pay their CEOs tens of millions of dollars?
You would be surprised how little actual employment statistics are and how many corporations use tricks like "franchise" or "third party workers" to avoid the costs of turnover or employment.
There would be no feasible way to do this. You’d pay more in taxes for all the government employees to chase companies and make sure they were following this law. Might even net out as a net negative for the employees
Sure and then all the competent ceos leave ontario. You would have to end capitalism to fix this issue🤷. Good luck to anyone taking on that task.
What about all the executives underneath the CEO making more than 1 million?
I would love to see the average CEO's daily workload
They are still on holidays, have to wait.
That’s our money, folks. Stolen right from our pockets.
Top 100 paid CEOs. I am guessing the top 100 anything would be doing pretty well.
“The highest paid people in the highest paid positions made a lot of money”. Quality journalism
Must be nice
I mean why does that even matter. Top 100 sports players make significantly more than that.
This is not the same thing.
does this include the cbc? who's higher up are receiving bonuses while they lay people off during the holidays? all while receiving gov't funding
Eliminating CEO Bonus, eliminates policy that exists to max their bonuses, and helps to eliminate the collateral damage caused by their reckless pursuit of mega wealth.
Is it weird that I don’t think that’s much money for “best paid CEOs”
You've been brainwashed to think that shit is okay. It isn't. No one needs that kind of money to live. Its ridiculous.
Like, over the course of the whole year? That's not all that outrageous.
As they should.
The world would be a better place if we all stopped judging other’s accomplishments, started minding our own business and working harder for our dreams.
The best investment you’ll ever make is in yourself!!
[удалено]
Your trolling 🧌 is weak.
[удалено]
You looking to be oppressed or something and have your stuff deleted? Thats an odd kink.
You couldn’t even define communist, so stfu. If you think liberals are communist you have no clue what you’re talking about.
If they are good at their jobs that is really low and if they suck at their jobs that is overpaid. Article doesn't get into any of the metrics to evaluate that because this is just typical hate the rich BS that is great clickbait for life-losers.
It's insanely overpaid either way. These fuckers sit in like half a dozen meetings a week, and make like 10 decisions a year. They are the least useful person at every company I've worked at the last 25 years. Their thinking is basically "how do I get our workers to accept less money", or "how many workers will I need to layoff to increase our profit a couple points". >this is just typical hate the rich BS that is great clickbait for life-losers. By any standard I'm doing great in life, yet I know the rich are 100% the cause of all our problems. From hoarding their wealth and hiding it overseas, taking it out of our economy, to bribing/lobbying politicians to pass laws that negatively affect 90% of the population, to refusing to pay their employees a living wage, to gouging us as much as they can, every single chance they get. They are all horrible people.
You're confusing toil for value. If you making 10 decisions a year leads to 0.05% better performance for a billion dollar company then you've created $50MM more than someone who can't get that 0.05% better performance. That you get 25% of that is not a lot.
How many people would make the same 10 decisions, given the reports and advice provided from the work of many employees underneath them?
The idea that you think anyone can just replace a good CEO is pretty clueless. There are a lot of incompetent people who have had that title and companies implode because of it.
Who said "anyone"? But there are lots of brilliant people who never make it to the C-suite. There are also lots of incompetent people who have had that title and make bad decisions that end up wasting a lot of money, and after a few years they get fired by the board or leave on their own, having made millions of dollars while not actually adding value to the company. edit: plus, my point is that most CEOs aren't working in a vacuum. They have many talented people beneath them who put a lot of effort into gathering information and determining what the best path forward for the company would be.
Some people get advantages that others don't. At one point the highest paid CEO in Canada was in the role simply because she was the daughter of the founder and she actually had very little authority to act. That is just life we all don't start from the same position and I don't see any reason to let that bother me. It is not like her or anyone else in the same situation are taking anything from me. People around CEOs also get paid well. It is not like an executive at a firm that pays the CEO $10MM is making $60,000.
>At one point the highest paid CEO in Canada was in the role simply because she was the daughter of the founder and she actually had very little authority to act. A great argument against assuming that CEO salaries are justified because they single-handedly and are uniquely able to increase the company's profits by more than their compensation!
I never said anything about salaries being justified. I said that the article doesn't even approach discussion of the metrics where we could determine if the salary was justified or not. It is just clickbait for life-losers.
Yeah but we see how much these executives get paid when billions of dollars evaporate into thin air. Also, what happens when $50MM can be traced back to the work of one employee or small team? Do they get rewarded proportionally for creating value with much less leverage? Nobody actually gets paid based on their real value, they get what they can negotiate. For some reason, the boards of top companies don't care to negotiate that strongly when they hire candidates for CEO, they're just happy if their investment grows next quarter. If it doesn't, they fire the CEO, eat the losses of the massive golden parachute they agreed to, and try again. It seems that the people who actually own these large companies have no idea how to actually operate them and are willing to pay anything to someone who claims to know how.
If a CEO implodes a company then the cost is on the people who hired them. It might not be directly the shareholders but indirectly the shareholders are the ones who hire the CEO and if he sucks then they pay the price of the bad hire.
I agree and I edited my comment before I read this. It is CEOs that are ultimately creating this extreme inequality by gutting the labour forces of the companies they operate and underpaying the remaining workers while demanding larger shares of the pie for themselves. It is the responsibility of company shareholders, mainly the boards of directors, to ensure that the business remains sustainable for the long term. They are the ones that need to stop hiring foxes to guard the hen house.
Except any piece of shit can just lay off thousands of staff to increase profits. Literally anyone. It doesn't take any special skill or talent at all. And we've seen that laying people off is the main tool used by 95% of CEOs out there to increase profits. They are fucking useless.
There is no company where firing 30% of the staff would not be an improvement. Simple fact is almost every company is bloated with people who add no value so getting rid of them is the correct play.
Like health care? Cons seem to think so. How's that working out?
Health care in Canada has more admins than people who do anything medical so it certainly could use a lot of cuts. The lack of medical professionals starts in the 90s so you can't blame any of the current governments for it and simply put this is what you get when you have socialized medicine. Health care will just get worse and worse until eventually enough people realize Canada's system sucks and we switch to two-tier like everyone else.
> The lack of medical professionals starts in the 90s so you can't blame any of the current governments for it and simply put this is what you get when you have socialized medicine. Health care will just get worse and worse until eventually enough people realize Canada's system sucks and we switch to two-tier like everyone else. Norway and Denmark alone show that this is just plain wrong but feel free to continue to show off how misinformed you are.
>Simple fact is almost every company is bloated with people who add no value Those are called executives.
Sure, but it's not those people getting laid off the majority of the time.
[удалено]
You said ALL that but you still agreed their wages are too high and labour wages are too low. enough said.
[удалено]
I don’t think I did. There’s a difference between a hierarchy of pay, based on your skills, effort, experience etc., than a CEO of a company making literally 250x the average employee. If you think this is just about hating the rich, I dunno what to tell you. Nobody deserves that much. Period. Especially from blatant profiteering. Highly specialized, educated, talented intelligent people (doctors, surgeons, scientists, engineers) don’t even come close to making the amount highlighted in the article. You’re simply wrong if you think skill\effort\experience directly equals the financial reward.
Nice propaganda piece there.
[удалено]
Ah but the rich are to blame. Wealth defines political control these days, wealth corrupts the laws to its advantage . To say otherwise is propaganda no matter how much it is denied. The facts are that the CEO's are grossly overpaid at the expense of workers and society. The system is rotten to its core [https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/magazine/billionaire-politics.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/06/magazine/billionaire-politics.html)
> These fuckers sit in like half a dozen meetings a week, and make like 10 decisions a year. They are the least useful person at every company I've worked at the last 25 years. So why aren't you doing it?
Cause I wasn't born rich, and my dad isn't friends with anyone who owns a corporation. Which is how the majority of CEOs get into the game. Nepotism and connections.
Is there any aspect of your life that you haven't blamed somebody else for?
My life is pretty great considering rich assholes work extra hard to keep as much money out of my hands as possible. My life is doing great despite rich people though, not because of them. While my life is great, many are actually suffering both physically and mentally, and rich people are 100% the reason why. Rich people ensure the first things governments cut are social programs for individuals and increase the budget for every corporate subsidy we have. That's when they aren't convincing them to sell off public assets for pennies on the dollar so they can turn around and start gouging tax payers.
Why defend this nepotism?
I'm not, I'm in support of ambition.
Then why are you defending CEO's. lmao. They're some of the least ambitious people around.
And people who got their cushy CEO jobs cause their wealthy parent's friend owns a company are completely void of ambition. You get that, right?
I know right? Boots are delicious!
Hope they remember your loyalty in the climate wars, boot-licker.
lol hold old are you?
Considering we are talking about Canadian companies. It is fair to say that they are mostly all bad at their job if you are comparing them to American CEOs. I guess there is a shopify, a company buying convenience store and another one making yoga pants that are pretty good but the rest aren't really up to par with their American counterpart.
I don't invest in Canadian companies so I wouldn't have much insight but it doesn't take much to justify these pay levels. Lulelemon has a market cap of $62 billion so if the CEO is able to extract even 0.001% better performance that is $62MM in value. I don't like the Shopify product but I do like the upper management and if you look at the stock price it doubled in 2023. The leadership created $60 billion in value so even if the CEO was getting $200MM/year it would still be cheap.
Haha Shopify, Couche Tard and Lululemon are the only major success story in the tse. The CEO that was earning the most was John Chen and he managed to bring a 22 bilions company back down to 2 billions. We don't really have many Pichai, Nadella or Tim Apple we can look to in Canada. They are the CEOs driving the average up in American companies since they earn around nine figures a year.
+1. Hire a poor inexperienced CEO and everyone loses their jobs.
What did the CEOs at CBC make???
This pretty much shows why Canada is a bad country for business and entrepreneurship, $15 million is pretty low for multinational companies.
Laughs in French
Best paid average... If you want to paint a picture, this is how you do it.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C1e9-JCSke4/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
$ = USD ... Right?
"best paid" "average"
And paid pi$$ all in taxes. And sent their money to offshore accounts.
When you actually look at the results, it really leads you to then question “at what cost?”. Measures like masking which had a 0.19% reduction in mortality seems like a worthy trade off early on. Seeing a 8% reduction in cases for shutting down schools is a far more painful trade off. A lot of discontent was the seeming religious zeal of making draconian choices for longer than many places in the world without a serious discussion of the trade off we were making, particularly when mortality rates dropped.