I did not know either of these metaphors. I like them both.

This idea survives because it's appealing, but when you look at it:

McDonald's payroll is $4800000000 and the CEO is paid $7300000 (over 600% of average worker salary) So he could only increase McD payroll to $4807300000 by forgoing his own compensation.

If the CEO of McDonalds did his job entirely pro-bono and personally wrote a check to every McDonald's employee at the end of the year, dividing his expected salary evenly to each and every one of them, that check would be for five dollars.

However. If that CEO did an outstanding job? Raises for everybody, a hundred thousand new jobs a year. If that CEO did a shitty job? Cuts, losses, pain.

So. Can another $million get the board somebody who understands the industry, finance, marketing, accounting, who can anticipate major trends, make the best decisions? Absolutely worth it, if your goal was more money and better jobs for all. You would make that tradeoff and spend that money every single time if you were deciding how management compensation should operate.

If the previous CEO wasn't cutting it, not doing the job he was paid for, which I assume is why they got the current CEO, he was being overpaid.
Why should the current CEO get more money than the last guy was getting to do what they expected the last guy to do?

Oh wait, lemme guess. Because the circle jerk culture of the 1% club says major CEOs should get a shit ton of money more than they're worth to keep up the justification for the rest of the club to get a shit ton of money. And who hires the CEOs and sets their pay grade? The board of directors which make up another chapter of the 1% family, the fuck-the-working-man club.

But nobody makes that decision expecting to lose money on it. So the reason it's a marketplace of douchebaggery, where in order to be considered you must have out-douchebagged all the other douchebags in the room, is because that's a very safe approach when everybody's money is on the line. Nevertheless, it's not their douchebag salaries that are the ruin of us all, that's my point.

(But rather than edit to add)

It's not their salaries, that's not the problem, it's their tenacious need to play everything mightily safe while the world needs change. It's their douchebaggery itself. Every place I've ever worked, company politics is the ruin of productivity. When someone cuts through that, something better becomes more important in the company culture, and it can wind up improving the world.

If you can find people who can do that, the true leaders - visionaries, motivators - they should be paid 100 times what these douchebag CEOs are paid, and it would be a bargain. I doubt there's one of em amongst the douchebags. Gates, Jobs, Larry and Sergey, they had to invent something to get into the club.

Godamnit, I went to piss and my whole post is gone. :eyebrow:
Anyway, we used to have CEOs that did a good job for a much smaller piece of the pie, and still had big houses, fancy country clubs, hot mistresses, and limos. Even the ruthless nasty robber barons cared about the country.
Now they care about the money, and the irony is they don't need it, it won't change their standard of living, it's just a way to keep score. Think of a cribbage board made of peasants and swords.

I call Bullshit - thats just an opinion piece ...
"Americans for Tax Fairness, a coalition of 400 national and state-level progressive groups, made this estimate using data from a 2013 study by Democratic Staff of the U.S. Committee on Education and the Workforce."

Small math problem to call to your attention:

600% is six times the avg. salary. The report shows the CEO is making six hundred times the average salary. I don't know the # of McD's employees, but remember the stores are franchises and I don;t know if there is a distinction between franchise employees and McD's corp employees. Judging by the 11k figure, I'd say it's the former.

Still, as you point out that would only mean 600 more minimum wage jobs, but I suspect the effect of a small cadre of people holding 90% of the marbles makes for a shitty game of marbles. The effect of diminishing the wage gap would have a more profound effect on society as a whole than can be reckoned by looking at a single metric.

It is very hard to nail down exact figures on any of this. It seems to me that this isn't accidental. Despite what Tony is saying about douchebaggery, I don't see why there is a connection between someone's being "a visionary" and commanding a huge salary. I think Sanders is somewhat of a visionary and he isn't insisting on making a ton of coin. Wealth and usefulness to society are not correlated. If it were plumbers and trash collectors would live in mansions. The real function of Huge corporations isn't about being a visionary beyond coming up with visions to kep the company and its shareholders obscenely rich. A pretty narrow vision. Not only can't they see the forest, they can't see the trees for the leaves.

I hear plumbers are on the way up.

These days everybody wants to go to college. Good plumbers need to do a little math, but if you can do a little math these days, you get a medium SAT and President Sanders sends you to college. And why not, I mean after that you get a nice cushy office job, in an air-conditioned office, instead of going through crawlspaces figuring out someone else's screwed-up installation.

I admit I don't know, but some people say the average age of skilled tradespeople is increasing and some people figure we are in for a shortage on the order of 3 million of 'em.

The value of the job is no longer communicated through society's respect; therefore, it will now be communicated through hourly rates. Wealth and usefulness to society are not correlated... right up to the moment you need your shit to go down the drain. At that point, someone's gonna have to get paid.

And so, the marketplace of humanity: it's a terrible, cruel system, but nobody has figured out a better way.

Of course you do, because the numbers came from the Democratic staff. How does it compare to the numbers from the Republican staff? [silence]chirp chirp chirp[/silence] Oh that's right, the Republican staff doesn't give a shit about education and workforce.
A friend volunteers at the Food Bank on Cape Cod. Fully half the people coming in have been given a sheet by their employers listing the Food Bank, Welfare offices, Food Stamp(SNAP) services, Charities, Child Services, etc, so they can survive without getting a living wage.
Very true, it's impossible to nail down exactly how badly we're getting screwed with the rabbit's warren of loopholes and moving targets. That's why it all estimates and averages, so it may be only 5 Billion or maybe 10 billion. We only know it's Billions, and it ain't right.
Plumbers have an advantage. Car breaks, buy a new one, no money down, 72 easy payments. Tooth breaks, chew on the other side until you can scrape up enough to buy a pair of pliers. Plumbing breaks, you need him right now. Of course the plumber's overhead has skyrocketed too, just insurance can run $hundreds a week.
But we had a better way in 1955, and we know what's changed in law and attitude.

Well said.

I wish someone would pay for my health care, heat, and food. I should quit a job or two.

:eyebrow:

You forgot the eyebrow. It's specified in the thread title. Your wish can't come true without it. I've posted one for you. You're welcome. :D

3F. I'm sorry to hear about your situation. I've been there. I've even lived in my vehicle at times. Keep your head up. Things do get better and one thing I learned is prayer works