The concept of a CEO is quite radically different when there’s collective ownership of the means of production.
Going back to the grandparents point - it’s often healthy and useful to disagree, often the root of progress but we can’t skip the necessary first step of learning first. An opinion built from a misunderstanding of what’s being discussed is not useful.
I'm sorry but I really don't understand what are you trying to say.
> The concept of a CEO is quite radically
Perhaps. My point was that tying minimum pay to CEO salary/remuneration doesn't really make sense. Nothing else.
> An opinion built from a misunderstanding of what’s being discussed is not useful
You mean like my opinion? Why? I mean your comment is very vague and unspecific. You didn't say anything besides that I don't understand what I'm talking about with no explanation or arguments.. (which sort of illustrates my implicit point that idealistic socialists tend to ignore most of the hard issues and mainly focus on gaslighting their 'ideological opponents' instead of offering actual solutions)
So penalizing companies in low margin sectors and depriving them of top tier leadership talent while favoring companies in high margin industries seems reasonable to them? e.g. Amazon would have a much lower cap on CEO remuneration mainly because they are in retail and distribution (not implying that warehouse workers are not treated poorly) than Google for instance just because they employee less software engineers etc. proportionally?
Doesen't make much if any sense to me...