Re:McKinsey, technocratic management, and structural inequality
by roenxi on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @03:10PM
(#22240371)
I draw a parallel between that argument and the one that comes up sometimes that farmers should be paid big bucks because their output is critical to society in a way that, eg, a soccer player's is not.
The issue isn't that good CEOs add a lot of value - clearly true. The issue is why are they being allowed to capture that value despite fierce competition? Nobody else is allowed to do that. If there are 10 willing & hypercompetent people paid <$1,000,000 available to do your job, it shouldn't be feasible for you to earn >$2,000,000 unless there is something very strange happening. Like a very effective guild system and control of the corporate budget.
Exactly as you say, it isn't like we can differentiate between these people in advance. Why do we think paying them more will help? In any other field you can get exceptional talent for far less than a CEOs salary.
The issue isn't that good CEOs add a lot of value - clearly true. The issue is why are they being allowed to capture that value despite fierce competition? Nobody else is allowed to do that. If there are 10 willing & hypercompetent people paid <$1,000,000 available to do your job, it shouldn't be feasible for you to earn >$2,000,000 unless there is something very strange happening. Like a very effective guild system and control of the corporate budget.
Exactly as you say, it isn't like we can differentiate between these people in advance. Why do we think paying them more will help? In any other field you can get exceptional talent for far less than a CEOs salary.