Agreed.
Instead of welfare and other incentives for people to not work, how about some sort of incentives to relocate if that will help them find new work?
Ideally the company would be paying any incentives. Still a lot of companies who are paying execs huge compensation while expecting to pay front line workers peanuts.
Immigrants allow this trend to continue. It's honestly embarrassing the salary we are allowed to offer for some positions.
There is a reason why board members and sharehholders and paying executives that money.
Put it this way. You have an online book shop ten/twenty years ago. Do you hire some slob for 100k, or Jeff Bezos for 1 million? Or Jeff Bezos for a 10% share in the entire company? The executives can make or break your company: bankrupt it, or a turn it into what Amazon is today.
I'm all for CEOs (and anyone for that matter) making a fair market value, as much as they can get.
My thought is that perhaps if companies were not subsidized by the government, that market value might be less, because that money would need to be used in different ways.
How about incentives for companies to provide incentives? Tax breaks for helping workers instead of taxes to pay for social programs?
I could go for that, but ideally the government should not be involved. Do these companies really need more tax breaks when the average fortune 500 CEO makes over 11 million a year?
Perhaps scale incentives based on market capitalization.
(post is archived)