In fact, for a company to be successful, they need to be better at allocating excess cash than their competitors.
CEO salaries are an extremely small subset of the profits companies make.
In fact, since all of the money is so well allocated, it's really impossible to tax a corporation, if you think about it. All you would do is increase their expenses, which would then be passed to their customers. You can't get money from a corporation that doesn't exist in a customer's hands at one point, and taxing companies is just another way of taxing the customers that use them.
I mean really, think this through. Do you really think that the .1% of gross profits that go to a CEO makes one speck of difference in the large picture?
Interesting... do you have any citations? (I am genuinely curious, not looking to continue an argument.)
I'd be curious to see some stats too.
But using common sense (which always isn't so good a guide) can you imagine being a board of directors that approved the CEO making 10 percent of profits? You'd have to be an idiot. (Unless he were also a founder and controlled the board)
Not that boards are very popular right now -- but I don't think they're that dumb.
I came up with that figure using an imaginary $10 Billion company paying their execs in the tens of million range, which seems reasonable to me.
Oh wait, this is reality. It actually just ends up in their CEO's pocket which then gets passed on to their kids and other friends in high places. I'm so glad they're not paying taxes and forcing our government to 'waste' that money.