We agree. There is an obnoxiously large gap between what CEOs and what front-line workers earn. We do believe in the free market, free enterprise, private property and ownership, but this wide gap is still offensive and does not make sense to us. If a CEO is earning 5 million dollars each year, and is the CEO of a company which has 5 million customers, then each customer has to pay $1 each year not for the product itself or for the marketing and advertising (which is implicit in all goods and services) but for the salary of one lone individual.
This, and more, is understood from reading the “Auto CEOs vs their employees” infographic. The disparity is further offensive because it is seemingly so counter-productive. If the CEO who earns 5 million each year were to earn “just” one million per year (still an extremely good salary) then the 4 million could be used to increase the profitability of the company (good for everyone involved), to hire 40 additional workers at 100k each year (still a very good salary, and good for the 40 individuals and their families), or to reduce the price of the good or service (certainly good for consumers).
Yes, there is the “trickle down” theory, in which the incomes of the wealthy eventually devolve to poorer people. However, even if this theory is correct (and it probably is, at least to some extent) then it is still not as fast and effective as simply lowering the salary of auto-maker CEOs.
Likes: There are a lot of facts and figures that can be used to support both sides of the argument.
Dislikes: Nothing. We wonder why this was not applied to banking CEOs, or to those in the financial services.