People Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Perhaps those on remuneration committees should take a look at their own responsibilities as part of the "reasonable measures" (your view) linked to in my earlier post.

---

Are those renumeration committees solely made up of persons with affiliations to the companies, ie owners, board members, employees?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

No, but perhaps it has started an avalanche.

---

So you've seen wages start to go up since this started?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Are those renumeration committees solely made up of persons with affiliations to the companies, ie owners, board members, employees?

---

No. Non-executive directors from other companies often sit on these committees - described as "members of a ‘cosy club’" by a Parliamentary Committee (link). Lower level employees are rarely, as far as I know, involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So you've seen wages start to go up since this started?

---

:dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

No. Non-executive directors from other companies often sit on these committees - described as "members of a ‘cosy club’" by a Parliamentary Committee (link). Lower level employees are rarely, as far as I know, involved.

---

I would definitly like to see lower level employees involved with something like this. Also, I do not see the point of having directors from other companies involved. Why would they protect the best interests of a potential competitor?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

...Why would they protect the best interests of a potential competitor?

---

The argument is that they each protect their own individual interests by sitting on eachothers renumeration committees and rewarding themselves with the kind of pay increases that we see. Hence the ever widening wage gap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Last try, I promise.

What do you propose we do about it?

---

Bring in a law that sets the minimum wage in all companies to 10% of the highest earnings (wage + bonuses) in the respective company.
I bet the stock holders won't agree anymore that the CEO earns millions every year.

And don't tell us that it isn't fair to punish the poor CEOs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

A mass protest with no clear message is how you propose to change the "wealth gap"? May I suggest at least some clairity of purpose?

---

The message is clear, we need to change the huge gap.
What is unclear about it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So you've seen wages start to go up since this started?

---

Just say you were kidding when you posted the above question.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

You said FAIR share. And the only truly FAIR form of Taxation is a Flat Tax. So you did say that.

---

Come on Anthony . . . . that's you saying that, no need to go "ventriloquist' on me. :p :


:s mokin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonyvop

You said FAIR share. And the only truly FAIR form of Taxation is a Flat Tax. So you did say that.

---

On what basis would you propose to base this Flat Tax on?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Bring in a law that sets the minimum wage in all companies to 10% of the highest earnings (wage + bonuses) in the respective company.
I bet the stock holders won't agree anymore that the CEO earns millions every year.

And don't tell us that it isn't fair to punish the poor CEOs.

---

You tell me why that is fair then. Do you really think that all CEOs only put in 10% more work than the janitor? Do they really only have 10% more at risk in their company? Have they really only invested 10% more than anyone else?

And what do you suppose will happen to prices? How many companies do you suspect will flee to China and elsewhere at that point.