Alright sickos, point of clarification: we're talking about "top CEOs" in this video, and we want to re-emphasize that. We got a lot of data from the Economic Policy Institute's annual report on executive pay, which focuses on the CEOs of the top 350 publicly traded companies in the U.S. We're talking about the leaders of the biggest and most powerful publicly traded companies in the country here, not about everyone who runs any sort of company-because those folks, of course, are hard-working Americans just trying to sell you a microwaved chicken pot pie to eat before you head over to the couch for some missionary and Monday Night Football.
Here's a link to the 2023 report for those who want to check it out, authored by one of the guests on this episode, Josh Bivens (aka "Josh Bivens"): www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2022/
You're no better than the people you complain about with your misinformation. Be the change you want to see and be honest and accurate with your reporting, not just pandering to your preconceived idea.
Just remember the the CEO of Boeing who has not made a profit in his 5years in the role, has lead the company into multiple huge lawsuits and criminal fines, caused the death of over 300 people through budget and safety cuts, and which has resulted the stock bombing, STILL got a 46% pay increase last year.
Don't forget he has a separate superannuation as well. the former CEO who was responsible for two crushes got 80M or something as far as I know-- I could be wrong tho, but anyway he got a massive retirement benefit.
My dad was a UPS man in the 70’s he told me a story of his coworker who would nickle and dime the company at every chance. He threw a fit about a shift being paid at 10 cents less than the hourly rate. My dad asked why he made such a big deal about 10 cents. He said, “if they take 10 cents a day from me every day that’s $1.20 dollars. What if they took a $1.20 from every employee in the company? That day? Who would even notice? And if you don’t notice they won’t give it back.”
Oh no they took a dollar! Get real, wage theft is a lie perpetuated by the left. No sane business person actually dose that. Sorry to say, but your dad lied to you.
This is what happens in countries like the Sudan and people make the same argument when you bring attention to it, despite it being very clearly forbidden by the main belief systems. People in charge take the small change from employee salaries or other forms of remuneration and treat it like a tip that's just expected for a gov employee to do their job, but many accept it coz at least they're doing the job when they can freely just not do it if they don't feel like it (i.e. when they're not getting generously "tipped"). Same thing happens with most construction or social projects with much of the funds going into personal accounts. When it's not stopped early it becomes a norm and deep-rooted into how the economy is structured, you begin to be forced to do the same thing to succeed and not complain about economic issues when you're not hustling as much as the other scammer are. The national dream is literally to be an unqualified manager hired through nepotism and getting overpaid lol.
1. Ask your assistant to hire a team of consultants to do all the work 2. Profit 3. If it goes well, it was your brilliant idea in the first place to ask your assistant to hire a team of consultants 4. Profit 5. If it goes badly, deny any responsibility as it was your incompetent assintant who hired the wrong team of consultants 6. Profit 7. If it goes disastrously bad, accept the severance package 8. M-M-M-M-Monster Profit 9. Apply for another company 10. Repeat step one
This is not satire. There are CEOs of large companies who have destroyed every Corp they have worked at but they continue to rise upwards, like Adam Neumann but nowhere near as flamboyant and ridio.
@@mamotalemankoe3775 yeah, but that's the fault of the investors/stockholders. They literally have the approve the compensation package in the first place.
@@2_Normal_Ted_Juniorthat requires actual hands on _management_ of the lowly hourly folks and I think most ceos assume these are made up of like, horses and talking farm animals (everyone knows horses can talk, they just _won’t_ )
the biggest pain here is that a CEOs life barely changes when their compensation goes from 100 million to 200 million. But the average joes life is unbelievably transformed when they go from making 30k per year to 60k per year
I think the law of diminishing returns applies to earning more money at the scale CEOs do. Their greed keeps them insatiable and only wanting more while chasing a high that doesn’t hit like it used to, no longer able to understand the word “enough”.
It sounds like most of these high compensations are in the form of stock/shares. That's why I won't shed a tear if (what am I talking about? I mean when) the stock market crashes.
You are definitely not a working class hero if they all lived to tell the tale. Aren’t you getting inspired by the amazing achievements of Boeing’s employee of the year, Agent 47?
@@LuisSierra42 If think that's just something they tell us. Like when an actor for a character gets replaced in the cast of a sitcom. They just pretend it's "Dan Toomey" so the illusion is upheld - but we all know
The problem we have is because Most people always taught that " you only need a good job to become rich " . These billionaires are operating on a whole other playbook that many don't even know exists.
The wisest thing that should be on everyone mind currently should be to invest in different streams of income that doesn't depend on government paycheck, especially with the current economic crisis around the world.
Even with the right technique and assets some investors would still make more than others. As an investor, you should've known that by now that nothing beats experience and that's final. Personally I had to reach out to a stock expert for guidance which is how I was able to grow my account close to $35k, withdraw my profit right before the correction and now I'm buying again.
@@GoodWorkMBwe noticed bucko thought you could slip a fast one by us mr tam doomy with ur eye brows let me guess it was a fake hat too? tim apple sends his regards
I think the real problem of having compensation tied to the stock is not that it doesn't really reflect the performance, it's that it encourage short term gains instead of long term stability
This is the overall decay eating away at our country, at product quality, at small business and the free market, at the environment, our health, and the global economy overall. Everything is set up to maximize _immediate_ *demonstrable* gains, not long term stability. They’ve equated efficiency with quality and it’s not the same thing. They’ve aligned profit and cost cutting with success, also not the same. Every corporate strategy is myopic as hell and this is why: 1. If you’ll notice, nothing really _improves_ (beyond what’s being enforced by laws) it just becomes more sellable, more profitable, requires longer and more frequent access for use. For the most part, especially in tech, products are no longer improving our lives, they are just getting “stickier” and requiring more time spent using them (attention economy: if it’s free, you’re not the customer, you’re the product (advertisers are the customer). If it’s not free, you’re the customer but you’ll only remain a customer if you think it is useful, you’ll only justify the expense if you use the product often enough to feel like it’s worth paying for, not necessarily bc it makes you more productive or improves your work) and more repeat visits TO them. We end up with less free time and more time spent staring at screens for no real increase in quality of life. 2. Assessing capital in a much shorter timeline results in what qualifies as capital being valued differently, we went from commodities with real world real time value (that could be destroyed if the goods are destroyed or go bad) being the most profitable industries to profiting more from promised value, things that represent value: things with the _potential_ to be worth something. With shortening our time to account for what has value, we can only count the immediate make believe “profit” by counting the theoretical numbers involved, not the longer term, real world _value_ being provided. 3. A lot of this shift can be traced back to the CEO of GE circa the 80s, his name was Jack and Alec Baldwin’s 30 rock character was loosely based on him. He started juicing the numbers right before every Quarterly earnings assessment so profit could be seen on paper, even if they weren’t actually making money. He did this by selling real estate, doing massive layoffs, and moving assets around so that every time it counted, shareholders saw gains and the numbers looked good. Now virtually all companies operate this way. It’s just shifting things around to suit some made up evaluation so that the rich stay happy, all the rest of us be damned.
Become CEO of a compagny, Drive output or benefice by sacrificing employees health or just cutting jobs, stocks goes up because you can write a huge (inflated) benefice at the end of the year, quite 2 years after when the compagny is still mostly alive with a huge bonus and another CEO job for another compagny. Repeat. Let the next suckers (that will be blamed) handle the now failing compagny.
One example I know of where things aren’t as bad as the US is Japan, because apparently their business philosophy puts much more priority on long term corporate sustainability and small, frequent improvements, rather than the short-sighted US philosophy of only caring about the profits or stock price of that quarter/year
For all the business folk that actually believe that the “best and brightest” end up in CEO roles, do you actually have any evidence for this? My experience is that it’s really connections, luck (rich family) and (mostly) nepotism that leads to an executive title.
i still think its so tragic elon bought his way into owning majority in tesla, kicked out the founders, and did everything in his power to make the world believe he was the one and only founder of it
3:55 The really scary thought is what if the CEOs of oil companies can affect the global price of oil. They would have a personal interest in starting global wars
What do CEOs do half the time? Ive witnessed a CEO of a massive comoany as she visited our office. She literally is always just doing visits, scripted interviews for the employees to watch later, training video clips and generally just stuff to make her and the company look good but i see almost no actual involvement in the actual company work. Also ceos who are often on trial just cannot say out loud how much they make when theyre asked. Take the Boeing CEO recently, he is asked how much he makes and he says something like "thats well disclosed, you can see it in the proxy documents" so they ask him again what is it? He has the nerve to say "its a big number sir". So they say lemme help you out its $32.8 million does that sound right so he says "yes it does". They love to dodge the answer because you can tell theyre embarrassed to say it because they know its wrong, its too much, they could pay so many more unfairly treated employees, they could pay for so much more equipment and safety technology etc with even half of that salary but they are greedy. He even says it was a 45% increase over last year then they ask him "what is it you get paid to do exactly?" And he says "i get paid to run the boeing company". Like come on! Thats not an answer. No one knows what ceos actually do, i think half the time they just play golf, take days off and then turn up to press events and company meet and greets just to look good meanwhile everyone underneath them does the actual work
@@lenardgor haha an accurate portrayal. On another note Im starting to think CEOs are just scapegoats for boards and execs in a way to divert attention off of them since it's always said that CEOs salaries are agreed by boards etc. I get we need some execs and that but when thinking about bosses it always reminds me of the scene from The Office where the staff are left without a manager for a day and Jim says something like "weirdly, when a manager doesn't come in to the office, everyone just gets on with their job". As long as we have incentives to do a good job, managers and bosses etc are often redundant. Imagine if instead of the managers having their "management" meetings in workplaces all the time, we had the whole team managing themselves and going to meetings together etc. and could actually voice their own opinions instead of managers just trying to fudge their numbers to make their team look good.
Something that's always bothered me as well, is the way that CEOs (and other high value roles) are just circulated around between big companies (not necessarily "top" companies) every few years. Doesn't really matter if they did a good job or not, but they try to maximize shareholder revenue at any and all cost, and when their ways prove to be too unsustainable they move on to be CEO at another company, and a new CEO in a similar situation take their place. Repeat every 3-5 years. And with that in mind, they mostly do things that will look good on paper short-term, like firing workers to reduce costs and bump up share price. What happens in a few years time is a problem for another CEO. There's literally no downside for them to have that mentality either. They both increase their pay, make their time as CEO look good on paper, and then bail before having to deal with the consequences and without having to take any of the blame. Often getting a pay raise in the process. If shit really hits the fan, they just glide their golden parachute over to their next grift and blame the market. Even putting this (and why it feels wrong) into words is difficult. It's like there's a secret club of elites that take care of each other and make sure they all extract as much value for themselves as possible. I mean, considering how many brilliant people exist in the world, it's very unlikely that literally no one could do a better job. Instead, the pool of CEOs is circulated among companies, and access is restricted to those with connections.
Chomsky talks about this. In particular the rotation among private boards, execs and high political positions. It's a very incestuous society "at the top" of the US and world economy.
"bail before having to deal with the consequences and without having to take any of the blame." - The Russians have a description for this, it's called "Write two letters". When you move in to the high-paying job, you write two letters, one blaming the previous guy for everything that's wrong and another letter addressed to the person who will replace you telling them to write two letters.
Don't forget that the board gets to use the CEO as the fall guy for any illegal or shitty things they do. The CEO doesn't care because they have enough money to retire after working for like 2 minutes
Revenue sharing is basically a bonus. Leftover money after shareholders and CEOs are fat and satisfied. Usually enough for a family sized pizza per employee
One thing I'm surprised you didn't touch on in the video is that not only is the CEO pay gap unfair to employees and bad for shareholders, but it's also bad for most of the public. Prices of goods and services are going up, and these companies are raising their prices "because they have to", yet somehow are still able to pay millions to their C suite and pay out huge dividends to their shareholders. You can't say that costs are rising and you need to maintain profit margins while also spending millions on bonuses and dividends. Either your CEO isn't doing as great a job (and shouldn't be getting a bonus), or you aren't making as much money as you hoped (and shouldn't be paying out dividends you don't have), or both! Either way, the cost of your product/service shouldn't be going up just because you want another yacht. "oh but inflation!" no! You're the cause for much of the inflation. Not paying your employees livable wages, then also jacking up the costs of your products and services causes inflation.
That's capitalism in a nutshell. Modern-day feudalism with window dressing that says "you too can be a rich a**hole" F**k CEOs and the Capitalist system they use to line their pockets while screwing over everyone else.
- 0:00💰 CEO pay has dramatically increased over the years, with CEOs now making significantly more than the average worker. - 3:02📈 CEOs primarily earn their income through stock-related pay, a trend that started in the nineties. - 6:02🎯 CEOs often have influence over their own compensation, as they select board members who determine their pay. - 7:01🔍 Scrutiny over executive compensation is increasing, with legal battles and proposed regulations aimed at ensuring fairness. - 8:11🔄 Changing the CEO pay structure requires systemic policy changes and a deeper understanding of shareholder interests. - 9:37💼 There's a significant gap between public perception and reality regarding CEO pay, highlighting the need for greater transparency and awareness.
No the people that get hurt are the employees, remember every time the CEO decides to layoff employees so that dividends go up for shareholders AND the CEO makes bank! Its almost never because the layoffs are really needed its because they want the large stock bump!
Way back in the day, layoffs used to be considered an embarassment for the company because it was proof of poor business management on the executive end. But ever since shareholders and CEOs noticed big green line go up when they mass fire people, suddenly, layoffs became a feature of business management rather than a symptom of poor management. Its messed up.
@@bladewolf39the pandemic and younger more get rich quick investors have made this the viable way of doing business. Pandemic offered good excuses for this and the new investor type just cares about profit right now. They invest like they are going to the cassino...
I am an undergraduate economics student in my third year and although very trivial as I am not an experienced researcher, I wrote my most recent term paper (submitted last night) about the relationship between CEO compensation and firm performance (NOT stock performance) and found little to no connection. Meaning that yes CEO comp packages are wildly oversized and firms (and society) could benefit from a change in the use of resources. Again I am not an economist and I am not claiming to be 100% right I just happened to spend a lot of time on this topic for the last few months.
Company stock isnt really a workable recource unless you sell it since its essentially just a piece of paper. Selling it usually just lowers the overal stock prices and many retirment funds and the wealth of employees that get payed in stock. Basically from your explaination your end result is the company itself (the legal entity of the company) just hordes nost of the stock and instead pays the ceo cash and every other employee cash while the few remaining shares are traded on the open market.
@@patrickbateman1660There is you room temperature IQ. If employee pay is too low nobody works and the company makes no money and stock price goes to 0 quick.
The pay of one CEO is about as much as a new factory or a new research department would cost. There's no way that dude counts for this much. It's all a scam by people who just pay themselves as much as they please.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate.. specifically single family homes.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate. Specifically single family homes.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate. Specifically single family homes.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate. Specifically single family homes.
Great stuff. Pay consultants are a big part of the problem too. Board: "We would only employ a CEO that is one of the best. Therefore we must pay our CEO in line with the best." Consultant: "This is what a top quartile CEO is paid, so you must pay more than that." Rinse, repeat, keep cranking up the averages. (Reality, by definition, most CEOs are about average, and half are below median ability.)
Honestly, why do high earning CEOs even want to work anymore. Like once you reached your first $100 million, or even just $10 million why not just retire, spend time with family, travel the world, volunteer at your church or community. Why would you want the stress of sleepless nights to drive a company and its shareholders?
@@CaptainBenjamins of course, but what people get purpose from can vary widely from individual to individual. And once you find something that gives you purpose, you are not gonna let it go that easily.
Are you talking the same number? Cause while I don't know Finland specifically, I would imagine that cost of living would vary from America to Finland.
@@jambott5520 average monthly salary in finland divided by the 1 person poverty line monthly salary in finland. It ads up to around 2.97 (all done in euros). His stat for the US is also fairly accurate when using individual income but its 4.07 .
@@sportyeight7769 the same thing happens in finland. And depending on the STATE you live in the STATE has a different line. There is a reason why its called FEDERAL poverty line just like there is a FEDERAL minimum wage of which states make their own but can NOT go UNDER the FEDERAL number
The notion of only the CEO being rewarded for the company doing well is something only CEOs could think is right, as they tend to think the success is *SOLELY* based on them and not the staff.
Even worse: Many of these packages are tied to the company’s stock price, not its actual valuation/market cap, so executives are incentivized to buy back stock in order to artificially drive up the stock price and meet the targets for their compensation packages. Rather than using that money to invest back into the company to help it grow. Hurting both shareholders and employees in the long run.
Trying to understand what you’re saying. What actual valuation? Book price? True intrinsic value? A stock price multiplied by outstanding shares is its market cap… I think you are oversimplifying this quite a bit…
I think people do miss this. If the incentive it set up poorly such as EPS or ROE rather than MCD. There is some logical reasons such as pulling back ownership % to be able to make unpopular changes or hostel take overs, rewarding owners in unexpected win-fall years, or if management is trying to boost some confidence back into the business. The issue is the non-financial media financially illiterate and just repeat talking points from their bubbles on X.
Successful investing is hard work because it means disciplining your mind to do the opposite of human nature. Buying during a panic, selling during euphoria, and holding on when you are bored and just craving a little action. Investing is 5% intellect and 95% temperament.
True! Investing in a variety of asset types, such as bonds, real estate, and foreign equities, can help spread out your money and lessen the impact of a market catastrophe. This is, in my opinion, the greatest strategy.
Even with the right technique and assets some investors would still make more than others, as an investor, you should’ve known that by now, nothing beats experience and that’s final, personally I had to reach out to a market analyst for guidance which is how I was able to grow my account close to a million, withdraw my profit right before the correction and now I’m buying again.
I’ve actually been looking into advisors lately, the news I’ve been seeing in the market hasn’t been so encouraging and I could really use some guide, but are they really that effective though?
Big Credits to Rebecca Noblett Roberts she has a web presence, so you can simply search for, there are some others but it might be difficult to get them, but Rebecca has been a good guide through the year.
This comment section is absolutely full of people who think CEOs do nothing all day. Do any of you have a shred of evidence for this? Major corporate CEOs are savage workaholics. They take it way too far and it's almost like a sickness. That's how they get to where they get. It's the same as anybody with an obsessive personality. They get up extraordinarily early and work extraordinarily late and their personal life suffers greatly for it. Basically, they are nuts. The money is just a way to keep score.
There are also various methods to temporarily boost stock prices creating short term gains but hampering long term profitability. This creates incentives for CEOs, board members, and even shareholders to act recklessly because it will get them more money this year, right before they cash out or retire. But it will result in layoffs for employees, lower returns for longer term investors, and worse products and prices for consumers.
They started to publicate salaries in order to show how much they make and its not fair. the whole thing went backwards and guess what happened when CEO A saw that CEO B earns more... You even get the answer to what consultants do: CEOs pay them to show "market data" on how unfairly low their salaries are compared to other CEOs.
my company's CEO's net worth went from $60billion in 2020 to $110Billion in 2024. but he refused to give inflation adjusted pay increases to his employees, reduced healthcare benefits and enforced strict RTO policies 6month into the pandemic. While at the same time they jacked up the prices of services to the customers by 16%.
don't forget, in most developed countries, real wage values haven't really grown much since the 70s... coincidentally when the bretton woods system ended which unleashed the financial industries from their regulations - powerful points in history there merica, really hope you start to remember these key points soon
Look at the productivity gains in relation to labor vs capital driven. Labor driven productivity has stagnated while capital driven has skyrocketed (software, factory machines, etc) so obviously the compensation goes towards those who control the capital.
I work for a non profit hospital and our top 10 execs all make millions. The number one slot is 100 million+….. off the backs of people we need to help. I work for Norton health care
Gotta say, I love this channel. You have the stage presence of a reporter and charisma & timing of a comedian. Awesome subjects, well researched. Thanks to you and team for making these.
I love how your stuff is both informative yet incredibly silly, so many bizarre meta jokes I’m never ready for, plus some of the best endcards on the platform
Any CEO should be capped at a % of the lowest paid employee and the shareholders could decide that percentage up to 100x like the survey you did where most people think its around that right now. Appreciate this video and especially the end card montage ;)
I just want to make explicit the fact that at 200x the actual "time" rate of earning is roughly 16 and a half years. That is, for every monthly payment the average worker makes, they make roughly 16.6 years of monthly payments. 16.6 years. Holy shit.
My mom used to be a ceo/owner in the late 90s, I remember her telling me she payed herself a similar salary to her employees. Now a days that’s unheard of
That world is smaller than people think. If you're deciding on the pay for the CEO and it doesn't come out of your pocket, you're going to give them the bag because maybe the situation gets turned around somewhere else and that person is on the board and you are the CEO and you want the favour returned.
The question is very good and not easy to answer, if we take into account all the circumstances. F.e.; 1. CEOs may "seek" higher compensation ("rent"), but, since they would always have been doing that, what would really matter is their power to influence this outcome. 2. The stock market isn´t exactly an invention of the last couple of decades either. Company leaders would long have seen it as part of their job to increase stock price. 3. Having the greatest "head" of a company the same company can afford *sounds* smart enough, but is very misleading as to where the *majority* of a company´s brain power lies. It´s more about having great teams for important areas. 4. While companies with very high executive pay probably did well, other companies without such pay probably also did well. That the multiplication of executives´ pay is commensurate with a multiplication of the company´s fortunes sounds very unlikely to me. 5. It´s hard to evade high executive pay as an investor (ranging from very small to very big). Most major companies will see it as de facto necessity to make themselves look top notch, because they both have the money and know to hire the "best" leadership. In other words: If it´s *expected* to have very highly paid leadership, because so many companies have it, then the lack of it is seen as a flaw or even a warning sign.
This channel is a great example of why you shouldn't worry what people think of you, cause they really aren't paying attention, cause they really don't care. They make a lot cause they're saving up to pay the debt of the American government all at once! Isn't that great guys! Dan Toomey would make a great album cover.
Because they're legally allowed to. They can get all of the money the company makes that isn't necessary to production, and that includes the wage of the employees. They only need to pay decent wage to the people who oversee the other employees. The people actually doing the work don't need to get paid, if they'll do it without fair wages. They prey on people who have a choice between working and starving to death. You don't need to pay much, if the people are willing to work for scraps. This is how capitalism is intended to work. In the eyes of all those CEOs, the system works just fine. As long as they don't need to see all the homeless people, hence why cities are assigning shelter areas. It's not a good temporary housing option, it's just so the ultra-rich don't need to see them every day.
I firmly believe capitalism is the best financial system invented by mankind. It has lifted... The algorithm probably won't dig this deep: workers unite! Unions are the best way to even the playing field between the powerful capitalists and the everyday worker!
The stock price is the biggest problem with our economy. The CEO always takes the easy route, let’s just lay-off 25% of employees, cut pay raises and bonuses, that’ll increase net income and the stock price SHOULD go up! Which means the biggest holders like blackrock and other hedge funds and PE firms will benefit cause they hold 90% of the shares.
Oh yes, the shareholder. They really are the number one group being hurt here. I don't have working class people I know who are struggling or can't afford a roof over their head. It is the shareholder. Those poor and tirelessly working down trodden members of society. I shed a tear whenever I think about how unfairly they are being treated.
My gawd... Look at the chart and when it starts to explode. It's tax brackets and the tech boom. How did the economist miss this??? 1963: Top tax bracket 91%. 1965: 70% 1982: 50% 1987: 38.5% Capital Gains taxes (aka a loophole for wealthy people to pay less in taxes) also peaked in 1979 at 35%. It'd nearly be impossible to make 300x your employees wages with no capital gains preferential treatment and a 90% top tax bracket.
@@Kitajima2 when it was 90% they were actually paying 40%. our current ratio of top marginal tax rate to the effective tax rate is much better then back then. we need to raise taxes on where they actually get money instead of making 90% income tax which doesnt matter when they don't get a large base salary
Obviously, being a CEO isn't easy. But to suggest that the market is tight that it requires millions and millions of dollars to find good candidates is ludicrous. Especially given how many CEOs steer their companies into rocks and face no consequences.
Plain fact is none of this money is going to be used to improve services or companies, which is why we're in a massive recession that has not ceased snd also massive inflation. Something has got to give, and they better start giving back before it is taken.
It's just bald faced class warfare. The media (owned by guess which class) always scolds down anyone who brings up the gaping rise in income inequality, that has occurred from Reaganomics onward, as engaging in "class warfare". This is to obfuscate from the truth that one side HAS been waging an aggressive and effective class war for many decades. The plan was pretty well laid out in Lewis Powell's memo all the way back in 1971.
Income inequality is really an irrelevant economic metric in capitalism, when "the rich" get richer, "the poor" get less poor don't cut off your nose to spite your face
@@dtkp33355 LOL what is this trickle down economics, cut of your nose? DAFUQ? more like dont let parasites take your stuff "Income inequality is really an irrelevant economic metric" Its the only relevant economic metric. we literally have studies on chimps and how relative inequality of giving stuff like to some monkeys while not others causes terrible results.
They successful made the poor hate the poor and idolised the riche. So many of us middle class and poor citizen, we vote to not be taxed or preserve the right to keep our wealth for ourselves because we believe that IF we can be the ones to be rich, we wouldn't want to be "robed" of our wealth. The truth is, 99% of us will never make it up in the social wealth ladder (most of us will go down).
ive seen 4 ceos come in go in the company i work at. I still have no idea what value they bring. All they do is spout nonsense about company values that no one gives a shit about.
A CEO getting paid 3,000 times more than their employees? Shocking yet not shocking. Also, shouldn’t there be a provision for a pool of money that works as a security net?
The best thing ? it's when they crash a company and get "rewarded" by a huge payout. And those being illegal now, they pay them to "manage" the compagny until they get a new CEO. Absolutely hilarious.
It's not even the fact that they make so much money. As someone who plays videogames a lot on my free time, Activision Blizzard comes to mind, as one of the biggest CEO examples with their former CEO Bobby Kotick. This goblin of a man, made like 200million usd a year, or more. Yet his decisions were catastrophic. His ideas about making overwatch professional scene like NBA, just because he likes NBA and has delusions of grandeur, were awful. Esports scenes need to grow from grass roots for anyone to care. Teams have to grow with their own stories naturally, for anyone to care. It was a terrible cash eating disaster that killed overwatch. Bobby's cuts in staff, just ruined a bunch of games. He canned a bunch of games or required them to be made into instant cash cows, instead of keeping up the brand name and reputation, which they indeed lost. He also got the company in hot water, by allowing a disgusting workplace culture to fester. A situation with many horrorstories about women being abused. Including sexual assault and bullying leading to suicide, stolen breastmilk, a death threat made from Bobby himself to his assistant, and much more. His response to this disaster was awful. But at least he took the risk and paid for it? No, he got a golden parachute out of the company. He was the biggest reason that a leading industry giant of a company was left in ruins. And he got to keep all his billions, as well as a farewell gift of a few hundred million more dollars.
An easy solution would be removing stock options for CEOs, let the company pay them in cash instead, because stocks are easy to give away but cash is not, you always end up with liquidity problems.
We need someone to shake up the stock market. Something to decouple CEOs and their company’s stocks… Like how the BSOD from Crowd-strike affected many people worldwide, except, it was quickly covered up as a bug by the media.
It's because worker pay tends toward the minimum cost of living (the cost of reproduction of labor). Value in excess of this is pocketed by capitalists.
CEO's compensation is large because they are held accountable for business decisions. The only thing is CEO's can run a business into the ground for short term profits and have a businesses engage in illegal acts. Leaving the business and employees financially crippled only for the CEO to resign with millions of dollars in a golden parachute.
Alright sickos, point of clarification: we're talking about "top CEOs" in this video, and we want to re-emphasize that. We got a lot of data from the Economic Policy Institute's annual report on executive pay, which focuses on the CEOs of the top 350 publicly traded companies in the U.S. We're talking about the leaders of the biggest and most powerful publicly traded companies in the country here, not about everyone who runs any sort of company-because those folks, of course, are hard-working Americans just trying to sell you a microwaved chicken pot pie to eat before you head over to the couch for some missionary and Monday Night Football.
Here's a link to the 2023 report for those who want to check it out, authored by one of the guests on this episode, Josh Bivens (aka "Josh Bivens"): www.epi.org/publication/ceo-pay-in-2022/
Oil up lil bro
Wait, so I can buy microwavable chick pot pie from respectable small local business？
@@GoodWorkMB My couch sucks and is small, not gonna happen chief. But other than that yeah that makes sense
You're no better than the people you complain about with your misinformation. Be the change you want to see and be honest and accurate with your reporting, not just pandering to your preconceived idea.
Just remember the the CEO of Boeing who has not made a profit in his 5years in the role, has lead the company into multiple huge lawsuits and criminal fines, caused the death of over 300 people through budget and safety cuts, and which has resulted the stock bombing, STILL got a 46% pay increase last year.
46% raise on a multi-million salary, while the actual hands making the company function get jack
@ninetyone9191 Well yeah, that's what you get for thinking the american dream is still attainable. The house of cards is going down
@@Anthonybrother Bold of you to assume any of us actually still believe in the "American Dream." It's not the 60s anymore.
Don't forget he has a separate superannuation as well. the former CEO who was responsible for two crushes got 80M or something as far as I know-- I could be wrong tho, but anyway he got a massive retirement benefit.
Don’t forget the two murders.
My dad was a UPS man in the 70’s he told me a story of his coworker who would nickle and dime the company at every chance. He threw a fit about a shift being paid at 10 cents less than the hourly rate. My dad asked why he made such a big deal about 10 cents. He said, “if they take 10 cents a day from me every day that’s $1.20 dollars. What if they took a $1.20 from every employee in the company? That day? Who would even notice? And if you don’t notice they won’t give it back.”
Oh no they took a dollar! Get real, wage theft is a lie perpetuated by the left. No sane business person actually dose that. Sorry to say, but your dad lied to you.
This is what happens in countries like the Sudan and people make the same argument when you bring attention to it, despite it being very clearly forbidden by the main belief systems. People in charge take the small change from employee salaries or other forms of remuneration and treat it like a tip that's just expected for a gov employee to do their job, but many accept it coz at least they're doing the job when they can freely just not do it if they don't feel like it (i.e. when they're not getting generously "tipped").
Same thing happens with most construction or social projects with much of the funds going into personal accounts. When it's not stopped early it becomes a norm and deep-rooted into how the economy is structured, you begin to be forced to do the same thing to succeed and not complain about economic issues when you're not hustling as much as the other scammer are.
The national dream is literally to be an unqualified manager hired through nepotism and getting overpaid lol.
@@tubester358I hate nepotism. It’s destroying Uganda to the core.
It's like the reverse of Office Space
1. Ask your assistant to hire a team of consultants to do all the work
2. Profit
3. If it goes well, it was your brilliant idea in the first place to ask your assistant to hire a team of consultants
4. Profit
5. If it goes badly, deny any responsibility as it was your incompetent assintant who hired the wrong team of consultants
6. Profit
7. If it goes disastrously bad, accept the severance package
8. M-M-M-M-Monster Profit
9. Apply for another company
10. Repeat step one
nearly perfect.
except 9: applying? pfff, should say pick whichever gluttonous package the next billion dollar company offers.
Good Work!
This is not satire. There are CEOs of large companies who have destroyed every Corp they have worked at but they continue to rise upwards, like Adam Neumann but nowhere near as flamboyant and ridio.
@@mamotalemankoe3775 yeah, but that's the fault of the investors/stockholders. They literally have the approve the compensation package in the first place.
What if they should learn of your insubordination?!
@@2_Normal_Ted_Juniorthat requires actual hands on _management_ of the lowly hourly folks and I think most ceos assume these are made up of like, horses and talking farm animals (everyone knows horses can talk, they just _won’t_ )
the biggest pain here is that a CEOs life barely changes when their compensation goes from 100 million to 200 million. But the average joes life is unbelievably transformed when they go from making 30k per year to 60k per year
And then think how many 30,000 go into 100 million...
About 3,333 people could hsve huge improvements.
@@iCore7Gamingb-b-but socialism bad 🥺
I think the law of diminishing returns applies to earning more money at the scale CEOs do. Their greed keeps them insatiable and only wanting more while chasing a high that doesn’t hit like it used to, no longer able to understand the word “enough”.
@@thecl0ck30that’s not even socialism, its just equity.
@@thecl0ck30 it is. if a worker was paid 60k from 30k then your mcdonalds burger would cost the double too
CEO of my company is making 1.5 million a year. Plus over 20 million value in our company stock. We got a 1% a year raise averaged from 2016-2024
Hmm sounds like we may work at the same fortune 4 company!
it all has to do with leverage
where do you work lol? in most european countries a salary increase of 1% is illegal.
When I was at Lockheed, our CEO stepped down and received something like $400 million (in stocks I believe).
It sounds like most of these high compensations are in the form of stock/shares.
That's why I won't shed a tear if (what am I talking about? I mean when) the stock market crashes.
do you think CEOs would share if we asked nicely
Mine didn't. So I quit.
Mine did and he told me to quiet 🤫🤐
@@snowballeffect7812 good for you ! I hope you find a job that fulfills AND pays you well
Maybe if we all do it at the same time
No we wouldn't unfortunately
I asked 7 CEOs what's the secret to your success? , and they all said the same thing: How did you get in my house?
coincidence? I think not
Interesting. How do we capitalize on this, "how did you get in my house?" strategy?
You are definitely not a working class hero if they all lived to tell the tale.
Aren’t you getting inspired by the amazing achievements of Boeing’s employee of the year, Agent 47?
Rookie mistake. I brought them to my own property out of courtesy, and even got a reward afterwards
Comeback: who do you think payed for your house
This new host is devilishly handsome, unlike the regular host Mr. Tooney
Hopefully they stick with this new one. He's much funnier and has a unique voice.
He revealed at the end of the video that it was Tooney all along. I was absolutely flabbergasted
I'm not sure I believe him: techno wizards like Dan and their video editing can make someone believe anything.
@@LuisSierra42 If think that's just something they tell us. Like when an actor for a character gets replaced in the cast of a sitcom.
They just pretend it's "Dan Toomey" so the illusion is upheld - but we all know
@@LuisSierra42 didn't even stay to the big reveal, much less the teaser for the sequel in the end card
The problem we have is because Most people always taught that " you only need a good job to become rich " . These billionaires are operating on a whole other playbook that many don't even know exists.
Money invested is far better than money saved , when you invest it gives you the opportunity to increase your financial worth.
The wisest thing that should be on everyone mind currently should be to invest in different streams of income that doesn't depend on government paycheck, especially with the current economic crisis around the world.
Many individuals report success in investing in stocks,fx, yet I continue to struggle.Can somebody help me out or advise me on what to do?
Even with the right technique and assets some investors would still make more than others. As an investor, you should've known that by now that nothing beats experience and that's final. Personally I had to reach out to a stock expert for guidance which is how I was able to grow my account close to $35k, withdraw my profit right before the correction and now I'm buying again.
@ChunAli432Could you share information? I struggled without a proper guidance.
Missing the doorhandle at 0:26 was a genius move to throw off potential CEO snipers Dan
th-cam.com/video/mpC_hO15IoA/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=OfficialWKUK
notice how not a single CEO sniper got me? yeah. exactly.
@@GoodWorkMBwe noticed bucko thought you could slip a fast one by us mr tam doomy with ur eye brows let me guess it was a fake hat too? tim apple sends his regards
proof of existence of CEO snipers: th-cam.com/video/mpC_hO15IoA/w-d-xo.html
I'll get you next time, Daniel.
I think the real problem of having compensation tied to the stock is not that it doesn't really reflect the performance, it's that it encourage short term gains instead of long term stability
This is the overall decay eating away at our country, at product quality, at small business and the free market, at the environment, our health, and the global economy overall. Everything is set up to maximize _immediate_ *demonstrable* gains, not long term stability. They’ve equated efficiency with quality and it’s not the same thing. They’ve aligned profit and cost cutting with success, also not the same. Every corporate strategy is myopic as hell and this is why:
1. If you’ll notice, nothing really _improves_ (beyond what’s being enforced by laws) it just becomes more sellable, more profitable, requires longer and more frequent access for use. For the most part, especially in tech, products are no longer improving our lives, they are just getting “stickier” and requiring more time spent using them (attention economy: if it’s free, you’re not the customer, you’re the product (advertisers are the customer). If it’s not free, you’re the customer but you’ll only remain a customer if you think it is useful, you’ll only justify the expense if you use the product often enough to feel like it’s worth paying for, not necessarily bc it makes you more productive or improves your work) and more repeat visits TO them. We end up with less free time and more time spent staring at screens for no real increase in quality of life.
2. Assessing capital in a much shorter timeline results in what qualifies as capital being valued differently, we went from commodities with real world real time value (that could be destroyed if the goods are destroyed or go bad) being the most profitable industries to profiting more from promised value, things that represent value: things with the _potential_ to be worth something. With shortening our time to account for what has value, we can only count the immediate make believe “profit” by counting the theoretical numbers involved, not the longer term, real world _value_ being provided.
3. A lot of this shift can be traced back to the CEO of GE circa the 80s, his name was Jack and Alec Baldwin’s 30 rock character was loosely based on him. He started juicing the numbers right before every Quarterly earnings assessment so profit could be seen on paper, even if they weren’t actually making money. He did this by selling real estate, doing massive layoffs, and moving assets around so that every time it counted, shareholders saw gains and the numbers looked good. Now virtually all companies operate this way. It’s just shifting things around to suit some made up evaluation so that the rich stay happy, all the rest of us be damned.
@@rainbomg not just your country. Literally every country with a capitalism-structured economic system, so afaik it's all of them.
Become CEO of a compagny, Drive output or benefice by sacrificing employees health or just cutting jobs, stocks goes up because you can write a huge (inflated) benefice at the end of the year, quite 2 years after when the compagny is still mostly alive with a huge bonus and another CEO job for another compagny. Repeat. Let the next suckers (that will be blamed) handle the now failing compagny.
One example I know of where things aren’t as bad as the US is Japan, because apparently their business philosophy puts much more priority on long term corporate sustainability and small, frequent improvements, rather than the short-sighted US philosophy of only caring about the profits or stock price of that quarter/year
@@donkeystonky5362Japan also has regulations that make it much harder for a company to do mass layoffs
For all the business folk that actually believe that the “best and brightest” end up in CEO roles, do you actually have any evidence for this? My experience is that it’s really connections, luck (rich family) and (mostly) nepotism that leads to an executive title.
i still think its so tragic elon bought his way into owning majority in tesla, kicked out the founders, and did everything in his power to make the world believe he was the one and only founder of it
@@ChiliCheeseNuggies The worst thing he achieves is make people believe he was some kind of genius... We he is in fact, really not a genius at all.
@@ChiliCheeseNuggieswhat’s really tragic is i thought elon founded tesla until today
Height
@@fordakacar Wait until you find out he has pretty much nothing to do with paypal either 😅
If companies are "competing" to get the best and the brightest CEOs, why is mine so old and dumb?
A healthcare insurance CEO recently had their pay decreased by 100% when a concerned citizen asked them politely.
hah-hah
3:55 The really scary thought is what if the CEOs of oil companies can affect the global price of oil. They would have a personal interest in starting global wars
The true sigma grindset
Haha yeah what if that were true that would be crazy haha
They already are behind these global wars. They're actively supplying it
Unfortunately it exists and its called OPEC, fortunately Americans aren't part of it as much as they would want to.
@@Swancorner Haha almost sounds like a conspiracy theory, right? thankfully it would never happen hahah
why hello, early crew. gotta say you look dashing
Xoxoxo
Thank you!
Gotta say. Love the fedora
2 or 3 lines today?
Thank you sir, and you as well.
Oh what, that was Dan Toomey the entire video? Man, the dude will go above and beyond to give us the scoop. Appreciate the Good Work, Dan, keep it up!
What do CEOs do half the time? Ive witnessed a CEO of a massive comoany as she visited our office. She literally is always just doing visits, scripted interviews for the employees to watch later, training video clips and generally just stuff to make her and the company look good but i see almost no actual involvement in the actual company work.
Also ceos who are often on trial just cannot say out loud how much they make when theyre asked. Take the Boeing CEO recently, he is asked how much he makes and he says something like "thats well disclosed, you can see it in the proxy documents" so they ask him again what is it? He has the nerve to say "its a big number sir". So they say lemme help you out its $32.8 million does that sound right so he says "yes it does". They love to dodge the answer because you can tell theyre embarrassed to say it because they know its wrong, its too much, they could pay so many more unfairly treated employees, they could pay for so much more equipment and safety technology etc with even half of that salary but they are greedy.
He even says it was a 45% increase over last year then they ask him "what is it you get paid to do exactly?" And he says "i get paid to run the boeing company". Like come on! Thats not an answer. No one knows what ceos actually do, i think half the time they just play golf, take days off and then turn up to press events and company meet and greets just to look good meanwhile everyone underneath them does the actual work
I recommend: The lonely Island "Boss" Video. It shows what they do all day.
@@lenardgor haha an accurate portrayal. On another note Im starting to think CEOs are just scapegoats for boards and execs in a way to divert attention off of them since it's always said that CEOs salaries are agreed by boards etc. I get we need some execs and that but when thinking about bosses it always reminds me of the scene from The Office where the staff are left without a manager for a day and Jim says something like "weirdly, when a manager doesn't come in to the office, everyone just gets on with their job".
As long as we have incentives to do a good job, managers and bosses etc are often redundant. Imagine if instead of the managers having their "management" meetings in workplaces all the time, we had the whole team managing themselves and going to meetings together etc. and could actually voice their own opinions instead of managers just trying to fudge their numbers to make their team look good.
bro is nine years old
@@marsh346 um ok? Good...comment?
@@marsh346kinda cringe ngl, 9 year old has more output than you
Something that's always bothered me as well, is the way that CEOs (and other high value roles) are just circulated around between big companies (not necessarily "top" companies) every few years. Doesn't really matter if they did a good job or not, but they try to maximize shareholder revenue at any and all cost, and when their ways prove to be too unsustainable they move on to be CEO at another company, and a new CEO in a similar situation take their place. Repeat every 3-5 years. And with that in mind, they mostly do things that will look good on paper short-term, like firing workers to reduce costs and bump up share price. What happens in a few years time is a problem for another CEO.
There's literally no downside for them to have that mentality either. They both increase their pay, make their time as CEO look good on paper, and then bail before having to deal with the consequences and without having to take any of the blame. Often getting a pay raise in the process. If shit really hits the fan, they just glide their golden parachute over to their next grift and blame the market.
Even putting this (and why it feels wrong) into words is difficult. It's like there's a secret club of elites that take care of each other and make sure they all extract as much value for themselves as possible. I mean, considering how many brilliant people exist in the world, it's very unlikely that literally no one could do a better job. Instead, the pool of CEOs is circulated among companies, and access is restricted to those with connections.
Chomsky talks about this. In particular the rotation among private boards, execs and high political positions. It's a very incestuous society "at the top" of the US and world economy.
Similar in alot of ways to career politicians; depressing stuff
"bail before having to deal with the consequences and without having to take any of the blame." - The Russians have a description for this, it's called "Write two letters". When you move in to the high-paying job, you write two letters, one blaming the previous guy for everything that's wrong and another letter addressed to the person who will replace you telling them to write two letters.
Wow the end card was incredible
About to be introducing babies to cigarettes
@@foodiusmaximuswhat
@@chaquator watch the end, there are fake video links.
bet they're gonna feel dumb for doing this skit after youtube get rid of end cards for no reason other than to just change stuff
End card appreciation crew unite
Don't forget that the board gets to use the CEO as the fall guy for any illegal or shitty things they do. The CEO doesn't care because they have enough money to retire after working for like 2 minutes
The CEO is just a front-man, they make no decisions offer nothing.
@@jacobp8294who's making the decision for corporation then?
IMAGINE IF WORKERS WE'RE COMPENSATED ADEQUATELY FOR INCREASED REVENUE OR PROFIT OR DIVIDEND ETC. FUCK THE CEOS
Yeahh #FuckTheCEOS
there are companies that do this, it's called revenue sharing. imo it should be mandatory for all public companies
Revenue sharing is basically a bonus. Leftover money after shareholders and CEOs are fat and satisfied. Usually enough for a family sized pizza per employee
@@fantscher it added $3 to my paycheck, i'll take anything over nothing
Be like the ceo then. Sacrifice 99% of your pay to get paid in stock if it's so simple
One thing I'm surprised you didn't touch on in the video is that not only is the CEO pay gap unfair to employees and bad for shareholders, but it's also bad for most of the public.
Prices of goods and services are going up, and these companies are raising their prices "because they have to", yet somehow are still able to pay millions to their C suite and pay out huge dividends to their shareholders. You can't say that costs are rising and you need to maintain profit margins while also spending millions on bonuses and dividends.
Either your CEO isn't doing as great a job (and shouldn't be getting a bonus), or you aren't making as much money as you hoped (and shouldn't be paying out dividends you don't have), or both! Either way, the cost of your product/service shouldn't be going up just because you want another yacht. "oh but inflation!" no! You're the cause for much of the inflation. Not paying your employees livable wages, then also jacking up the costs of your products and services causes inflation.
That's capitalism in a nutshell. Modern-day feudalism with window dressing that says "you too can be a rich a**hole" F**k CEOs and the Capitalist system they use to line their pockets while screwing over everyone else.
Yeah, thats the monopolistic mindset. When you are out of options, they charge what they want for the only option.
people need to move to profit-sharing companies or employee-owned companies and boycott mega corps.
- 0:00💰 CEO pay has dramatically increased over the years, with CEOs now making significantly more than the average worker.
- 3:02📈 CEOs primarily earn their income through stock-related pay, a trend that started in the nineties.
- 6:02🎯 CEOs often have influence over their own compensation, as they select board members who determine their pay.
- 7:01🔍 Scrutiny over executive compensation is increasing, with legal battles and proposed regulations aimed at ensuring fairness.
- 8:11🔄 Changing the CEO pay structure requires systemic policy changes and a deeper understanding of shareholder interests.
- 9:37💼 There's a significant gap between public perception and reality regarding CEO pay, highlighting the need for greater transparency and awareness.
No the people that get hurt are the employees, remember every time the CEO decides to layoff employees so that dividends go up for shareholders AND the CEO makes bank! Its almost never because the layoffs are really needed its because they want the large stock bump!
Way back in the day, layoffs used to be considered an embarassment for the company because it was proof of poor business management on the executive end. But ever since shareholders and CEOs noticed big green line go up when they mass fire people, suddenly, layoffs became a feature of business management rather than a symptom of poor management. Its messed up.
@@bladewolf39exactly!
@@bladewolf39the pandemic and younger more get rich quick investors have made this the viable way of doing business.
Pandemic offered good excuses for this and the new investor type just cares about profit right now. They invest like they are going to the cassino...
If a company makes more money after they fire u then u dont deserve to hold that position. It's as simple as that
If you can layoff employees and profits go up, then what were those employees even doing? It sounds like the layoffs were really needed.
I am an undergraduate economics student in my third year and although very trivial as I am not an experienced researcher, I wrote my most recent term paper (submitted last night) about the relationship between CEO compensation and firm performance (NOT stock performance) and found little to no connection. Meaning that yes CEO comp packages are wildly oversized and firms (and society) could benefit from a change in the use of resources. Again I am not an economist and I am not claiming to be 100% right I just happened to spend a lot of time on this topic for the last few months.
Company stock isnt really a workable recource unless you sell it since its essentially just a piece of paper. Selling it usually just lowers the overal stock prices and many retirment funds and the wealth of employees that get payed in stock. Basically from your explaination your end result is the company itself (the legal entity of the company) just hordes nost of the stock and instead pays the ceo cash and every other employee cash while the few remaining shares are traded on the open market.
There's is almost zero connection between low level employee pay and stock performance as well.
@@patrickbateman1660There is you room temperature IQ. If employee pay is too low nobody works and the company makes no money and stock price goes to 0 quick.
Dalton it comes down to sharing with the tribe, investing the hunt into the joyous wellbeing of the tribe.
last name: weidman
“Socialist Gandalfs” had me dead 💀😂
Also the "Capitalist Gandalf"
"The Middle Earth people are tired of Sauron"
- Socialist Gandalf.
That door handle miss 0:25 😂😂😂
The pay of one CEO is about as much as a new factory or a new research department would cost. There's no way that dude counts for this much. It's all a scam by people who just pay themselves as much as they please.
We have now fully investigated CEO compensation. What should we cover next?
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate.. specifically single family homes.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate. Specifically single family homes.
Fucking TH-cam censorship.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate. Specifically single family homes.
Private equity firms part 2. But about how they (and corporations and LLCs in general) are buying up so much residential real estate. Specifically single family homes.
Great stuff.
Pay consultants are a big part of the problem too.
Board: "We would only employ a CEO that is one of the best. Therefore we must pay our CEO in line with the best."
Consultant: "This is what a top quartile CEO is paid, so you must pay more than that."
Rinse, repeat, keep cranking up the averages.
(Reality, by definition, most CEOs are about average, and half are below median ability.)
How bout you become a CEO instead then?
These overpaid nothingburger jobs are so annoying
@@MrTresto You're right, let me just be born to a billionaire parent and I'll get right on it.
@@MrTresto becoming a CEO often has more to do with knowing the right people than being competent.
@@MrTrestonepotism: "allow me to introduce myself..."
Can someone DM Dan and let him know someone is uploading on his channel?
Another YT channel that gets hacked
Luigi Mangione has entered the chat
Honestly, why do high earning CEOs even want to work anymore. Like once you reached your first $100 million, or even just $10 million why not just retire, spend time with family, travel the world, volunteer at your church or community. Why would you want the stress of sleepless nights to drive a company and its shareholders?
Probably cause it gives them purpose
@@brampelberg9335 I feel like there are so many more ways to find purpose, like feeding ducks at the lake
@@CaptainBenjamins of course, but what people get purpose from can vary widely from individual to individual. And once you find something that gives you purpose, you are not gonna let it go that easily.
@@brampelberg9335 you are right, we are all human, but doesn’t necessarily mean we are wired the same.
Because our global system doesn't have limit of wealth/capital, that one person can own at the moment 🌝👉👈
this guy is possibly the only guy who can make a youtube end card entertaining asf
Watching this with my CEO
tell him he's next
Was he sweating?
Same. My grandpa
Did you feel the tension in the room?
The average American makes 4x the annual "poverty line" salary.
The average CEO makes 800x the annual "poverty line" salary.
Thats a pretty good stat. The average finlander makes around 3x the annual poverty line salary
Are you talking the same number? Cause while I don't know Finland specifically, I would imagine that cost of living would vary from America to Finland.
@@jambott5520 average monthly salary in finland divided by the 1 person poverty line monthly salary in finland. It ads up to around 2.97 (all done in euros). His stat for the US is also fairly accurate when using individual income but its 4.07 .
That poverty line should really be re-evaluated, because that line changes a lot depending on where in the US you work.
@@sportyeight7769 the same thing happens in finland. And depending on the STATE you live in the STATE has a different line. There is a reason why its called FEDERAL poverty line just like there is a FEDERAL minimum wage of which states make their own but can NOT go UNDER the FEDERAL number
The notion of only the CEO being rewarded for the company doing well is something only CEOs could think is right, as they tend to think the success is *SOLELY* based on them and not the staff.
The reveal at 9:58 shook me to my core. Master of disguise.
Even worse: Many of these packages are tied to the company’s stock price, not its actual valuation/market cap, so executives are incentivized to buy back stock in order to artificially drive up the stock price and meet the targets for their compensation packages. Rather than using that money to invest back into the company to help it grow. Hurting both shareholders and employees in the long run.
Zombie companies rise up
Trying to understand what you’re saying. What actual valuation? Book price? True intrinsic value? A stock price multiplied by outstanding shares is its market cap… I think you are oversimplifying this quite a bit…
If something’s related to your stock price it’s related to your market cap….market cap is share price x shares outstanding…
So what you said is circular and doesn’t make sense but you’ve got 125 upvotes….go to school kids.
I think people do miss this. If the incentive it set up poorly such as EPS or ROE rather than MCD. There is some logical reasons such as pulling back ownership % to be able to make unpopular changes or hostel take overs, rewarding owners in unexpected win-fall years, or if management is trying to boost some confidence back into the business. The issue is the non-financial media financially illiterate and just repeat talking points from their bubbles on X.
I've never felt more attacked watching an end card in my life
I felt recognized.
Successful investing is hard work because it means disciplining your mind to do the opposite of human nature. Buying during a panic, selling during euphoria, and holding on when you are bored and just craving a little action. Investing is 5% intellect and 95% temperament.
True! Investing in a variety of asset types, such as bonds, real estate, and foreign equities, can help spread out your money and lessen the impact of a market catastrophe. This is, in my opinion, the greatest strategy.
Even with the right technique and assets some investors would still make more than others, as an investor, you should’ve known that by now, nothing beats experience and that’s final, personally I had to reach out to a market analyst for guidance which is how I was able to grow my account close to a million, withdraw my profit right before the correction and now I’m buying again.
I’ve actually been looking into advisors lately, the news I’ve been seeing in the market hasn’t been so encouraging and I could really use some guide, but are they really that effective though?
Big Credits to Rebecca Noblett Roberts she has a web presence, so you can simply search for, there are some others but it might be difficult to get them, but Rebecca has been a good guide through the year.
She appears to be well-educated and well-read. I ran a Google search on her name and came across her website; thank you for sharing.
One more point: CEO’s are also typically on boards of other large publicly traded companies. So it’s a closed feedback loop.
Finally some good journalism protecting shareholders, you're doing good work
If CEOs are making more money now, then they’re making more money than they did before.
genius
Wait a minute, you are onto something.
A succinct deduction Ms. Harris.
Damn. Mindblowing.
Do you have a peer reviewed source on this hypothesis? It seems pretty outlandish...
Watching that endcard is what I imagine most of the CEOs do with their work hours
This comment section is absolutely full of people who think CEOs do nothing all day. Do any of you have a shred of evidence for this? Major corporate CEOs are savage workaholics. They take it way too far and it's almost like a sickness. That's how they get to where they get. It's the same as anybody with an obsessive personality. They get up extraordinarily early and work extraordinarily late and their personal life suffers greatly for it. Basically, they are nuts. The money is just a way to keep score.
@@jasondashney it's a joke mate :)
Thanks!
thank you!!!
4:30 “such favorable remuner-“ *TWO ads* “-ation”
There are also various methods to temporarily boost stock prices creating short term gains but hampering long term profitability. This creates incentives for CEOs, board members, and even shareholders to act recklessly because it will get them more money this year, right before they cash out or retire. But it will result in layoffs for employees, lower returns for longer term investors, and worse products and prices for consumers.
They started to publicate salaries in order to show how much they make and its not fair. the whole thing went backwards and guess what happened when CEO A saw that CEO B earns more...
You even get the answer to what consultants do: CEOs pay them to show "market data" on how unfairly low their salaries are compared to other CEOs.
Reward Direcctor here, 100% this is the case.
CEO pay based on stock price.
CEO: “Price gauge everything and blame ‘inflation’.”
my company's CEO's net worth went from $60billion in 2020 to $110Billion in 2024. but he refused to give inflation adjusted pay increases to his employees, reduced healthcare benefits and enforced strict RTO policies 6month into the pandemic. While at the same time they jacked up the prices of services to the customers by 16%.
One salary just got reduced
7:49 is one of the funniest graphics you guys have done. I would buy that on a t-shirt.
don't forget, in most developed countries, real wage values haven't really grown much since the 70s... coincidentally when the bretton woods system ended which unleashed the financial industries from their regulations - powerful points in history there merica, really hope you start to remember these key points soon
Look at the productivity gains in relation to labor vs capital driven. Labor driven productivity has stagnated while capital driven has skyrocketed (software, factory machines, etc) so obviously the compensation goes towards those who control the capital.
I work for a non profit hospital and our top 10 execs all make millions. The number one slot is 100 million+….. off the backs of people we need to help. I work for Norton health care
Gotta say, I love this channel. You have the stage presence of a reporter and charisma & timing of a comedian. Awesome subjects, well researched. Thanks to you and team for making these.
“Next nerd please!” 😂😂😂
came for the CEO criticism, stayed for the end card. good shit
Do you think the United Healthcare guy saw this video?
He won't be seeing it now, that's for sure.🙃
I love how your stuff is both informative yet incredibly silly, so many bizarre meta jokes I’m never ready for, plus some of the best endcards on the platform
Any CEO should be capped at a % of the lowest paid employee and the shareholders could decide that percentage up to 100x like the survey you did where most people think its around that right now. Appreciate this video and especially the end card montage ;)
That'll effectively create a talent cap. It'll be hard to hire someone better if everyone is paid the same
If you already own 500 million, why would you wanna work for 500k a year? They'd just go golfing instead
If you're not already rich, it's over.
If you're not already rich, then have you tried not being poor?
@@MCArt25 by being unborn
Keep saying that to yourself while I get rich
Look at the stats, 80% of millionaires are self-made.
The vast majority of millionairs are self made and the first billionairs were mostly self made also
I just want to make explicit the fact that at 200x the actual "time" rate of earning is roughly 16 and a half years.
That is, for every monthly payment the average worker makes, they make roughly 16.6 years of monthly payments.
16.6 years. Holy shit.
Wah wah wah. Still more deserving than the wagie
@@MrGoodeats Are you having fun licking those boots that hard?
@@MrGoodeatsYou'd think someone named MrGoodeats wouldn't like the taste of boots so much.
@@glitchedoom how is that boot licking? lmao
“That’s right…I know words”
😂😂😂😂😂
My mom used to be a ceo/owner in the late 90s, I remember her telling me she payed herself a similar salary to her employees. Now a days that’s unheard of
It’s simple. I see a Good Work video dropped, I click play, I click the like button. Glorious cycle.
Let's remember a lot of board members are executives at other companies themselves... Who rely on the same sorts of pay structure....
That world is smaller than people think. If you're deciding on the pay for the CEO and it doesn't come out of your pocket, you're going to give them the bag because maybe the situation gets turned around somewhere else and that person is on the board and you are the CEO and you want the favour returned.
The question is very good and not easy to answer, if we take into account all the circumstances. F.e.; 1. CEOs may "seek" higher compensation ("rent"), but, since they would always have been doing that, what would really matter is their power to influence this outcome. 2. The stock market isn´t exactly an invention of the last couple of decades either. Company leaders would long have seen it as part of their job to increase stock price. 3. Having the greatest "head" of a company the same company can afford *sounds* smart enough, but is very misleading as to where the *majority* of a company´s brain power lies. It´s more about having great teams for important areas. 4. While companies with very high executive pay probably did well, other companies without such pay probably also did well. That the multiplication of executives´ pay is commensurate with a multiplication of the company´s fortunes sounds very unlikely to me. 5. It´s hard to evade high executive pay as an investor (ranging from very small to very big). Most major companies will see it as de facto necessity to make themselves look top notch, because they both have the money and know to hire the "best" leadership. In other words: If it´s *expected* to have very highly paid leadership, because so many companies have it, then the lack of it is seen as a flaw or even a warning sign.
Politeness ratchet then? Rude to pay less?
This channel is a great example of why you shouldn't worry what people think of you, cause they really aren't paying attention, cause they really don't care.
They make a lot cause they're saving up to pay the debt of the American government all at once! Isn't that great guys!
Dan Toomey would make a great album cover.
Because they're legally allowed to. They can get all of the money the company makes that isn't necessary to production, and that includes the wage of the employees. They only need to pay decent wage to the people who oversee the other employees. The people actually doing the work don't need to get paid, if they'll do it without fair wages.
They prey on people who have a choice between working and starving to death. You don't need to pay much, if the people are willing to work for scraps.
This is how capitalism is intended to work. In the eyes of all those CEOs, the system works just fine. As long as they don't need to see all the homeless people, hence why cities are assigning shelter areas. It's not a good temporary housing option, it's just so the ultra-rich don't need to see them every day.
I firmly believe capitalism is the best financial system invented by mankind. It has lifted...
The algorithm probably won't dig this deep: workers unite! Unions are the best way to even the playing field between the powerful capitalists and the everyday worker!
0:16 Freeze frame for the ages
End card 😂. The amount of meta references and self reflexive humor on this channel is amazing!
I love how you started the video from behind the trashcan 😂
The stock price is the biggest problem with our economy. The CEO always takes the easy route, let’s just lay-off 25% of employees, cut pay raises and bonuses, that’ll increase net income and the stock price SHOULD go up! Which means the biggest holders like blackrock and other hedge funds and PE firms will benefit cause they hold 90% of the shares.
Oh yes, the shareholder. They really are the number one group being hurt here. I don't have working class people I know who are struggling or can't afford a roof over their head. It is the shareholder. Those poor and tirelessly working down trodden members of society. I shed a tear whenever I think about how unfairly they are being treated.
EVE Online players could sweep the floor with most of these CEOs
The unclickable thingies at the end are a must produce!
My gawd... Look at the chart and when it starts to explode. It's tax brackets and the tech boom. How did the economist miss this???
1963: Top tax bracket 91%.
1965: 70%
1982: 50%
1987: 38.5%
Capital Gains taxes (aka a loophole for wealthy people to pay less in taxes) also peaked in 1979 at 35%.
It'd nearly be impossible to make 300x your employees wages with no capital gains preferential treatment and a 90% top tax bracket.
91% tax is insane
@@RillianGrantI wasn't then. And that's when Merica was great
@@Kitajima2 when it was 90% they were actually paying 40%. our current ratio of top marginal tax rate to the effective tax rate is much better then back then. we need to raise taxes on where they actually get money instead of making 90% income tax which doesnt matter when they don't get a large base salary
Yeah but 90% tax is unreasonable. It didnt matter at the time because they used other methods of income
@@linkplays2952 I agree, they should be taxed on whatever money they get when they dump stocks, and whatever they make in a year.
Obviously, being a CEO isn't easy. But to suggest that the market is tight that it requires millions and millions of dollars to find good candidates is ludicrous. Especially given how many CEOs steer their companies into rocks and face no consequences.
Plain fact is none of this money is going to be used to improve services or companies, which is why we're in a massive recession that has not ceased snd also massive inflation. Something has got to give, and they better start giving back before it is taken.
Watching the whole video after our investigator came out of a trashcan is wild 😂😂😂
It's just bald faced class warfare. The media (owned by guess which class) always scolds down anyone who brings up the gaping rise in income inequality, that has occurred from Reaganomics onward, as engaging in "class warfare". This is to obfuscate from the truth that one side HAS been waging an aggressive and effective class war for many decades. The plan was pretty well laid out in Lewis Powell's memo all the way back in 1971.
Income inequality is really an irrelevant economic metric
in capitalism, when "the rich" get richer, "the poor" get less poor
don't cut off your nose to spite your face
@@dtkp33355 LOL what is this trickle down economics, cut of your nose? DAFUQ? more like dont let parasites take your stuff
"Income inequality is really an irrelevant economic metric"
Its the only relevant economic metric. we literally have studies on chimps and how relative inequality of giving stuff like to some monkeys while not others causes terrible results.
They successful made the poor hate the poor and idolised the riche. So many of us middle class and poor citizen, we vote to not be taxed or preserve the right to keep our wealth for ourselves because we believe that IF we can be the ones to be rich, we wouldn't want to be "robed" of our wealth. The truth is, 99% of us will never make it up in the social wealth ladder (most of us will go down).
"What do I see? A parasitic member of Burjuwoozee!!!"
My new favorite channel
ive seen 4 ceos come in go in the company i work at. I still have no idea what value they bring. All they do is spout nonsense about company values that no one gives a shit about.
That end card had me shooketh.
A CEO getting paid 3,000 times more than their employees? Shocking yet not shocking. Also, shouldn’t there be a provision for a pool of money that works as a security net?
The best thing ? it's when they crash a company and get "rewarded" by a huge payout. And those being illegal now, they pay them to "manage" the compagny until they get a new CEO. Absolutely hilarious.
Watching this at work in protest of my overpaid CEO
It's not even the fact that they make so much money. As someone who plays videogames a lot on my free time, Activision Blizzard comes to mind, as one of the biggest CEO examples with their former CEO Bobby Kotick.
This goblin of a man, made like 200million usd a year, or more. Yet his decisions were catastrophic. His ideas about making overwatch professional scene like NBA, just because he likes NBA and has delusions of grandeur, were awful. Esports scenes need to grow from grass roots for anyone to care. Teams have to grow with their own stories naturally, for anyone to care. It was a terrible cash eating disaster that killed overwatch.
Bobby's cuts in staff, just ruined a bunch of games. He canned a bunch of games or required them to be made into instant cash cows, instead of keeping up the brand name and reputation, which they indeed lost.
He also got the company in hot water, by allowing a disgusting workplace culture to fester. A situation with many horrorstories about women being abused. Including sexual assault and bullying leading to suicide, stolen breastmilk, a death threat made from Bobby himself to his assistant, and much more. His response to this disaster was awful.
But at least he took the risk and paid for it? No, he got a golden parachute out of the company. He was the biggest reason that a leading industry giant of a company was left in ruins. And he got to keep all his billions, as well as a farewell gift of a few hundred million more dollars.
An easy solution would be removing stock options for CEOs, let the company pay them in cash instead, because stocks are easy to give away but cash is not, you always end up with liquidity problems.
We need someone to shake up the stock market. Something to decouple CEOs and their company’s stocks… Like how the BSOD from Crowd-strike affected many people worldwide, except, it was quickly covered up as a bug by the media.
the end card bit is glorious
Monopolies. Every part of the US economy is concentrated to a small group.
It's because worker pay tends toward the minimum cost of living (the cost of reproduction of labor). Value in excess of this is pocketed by capitalists.
lets not forget that warner bros stock price is nearing as low as it was 20 years ago and yet the ceo's salary just keeps rising
CEO's compensation is large because they are held accountable for business decisions.
The only thing is CEO's can run a business into the ground for short term profits and have a businesses engage in illegal acts. Leaving the business and employees financially crippled only for the CEO to resign with millions of dollars in a golden parachute.
I might be a sicko and I might have watched the death card. But at least I’m not making 200 more than the average employee.