Why are people so upset over CEOs salary?

[Anonymous]

They are upset because the salary for CEOs has increased significantly more than the salary for other workers at companies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are upset because the salary for CEOs has increased significantly more than the salary for other workers at companies.

So? Don’t like it, find another job or better yourself so you can move up the ladder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

Still doesn’t change the fact that if he made zero dollars, the savings wouldn’t be there for that number of customers. Even if he made just $250k, the savings per customer would only be $3 and some change. Even if none of the top executives made any money, and let’s say the company saved 1 billion, the customer would only be saving about $4.50. Would you notice or care about $4.50? What if nobody at all made any salary at BC, and you saved $15. Would you be happy? You wouldn’t even notice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's a disturbing amount for "non-profit mutual benefit" company.

Or any company.

Truth.

And frankly, at that number, it’s just bragging rights. His life is not measurably better than someone making $5mil a year.

Slowly people are realizing that we’re being turned into serfs, with all our wealth concentrated in the hands of a few people. Maybe the tide will turn, maybe it won’t, but I think it will get ugly before it’s over.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

So if you worked your ass of, got graduate degrees and moved up the ladder, you’d be ok earning the same as an entry level employee? Your worth to your company would be equal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

Still doesn’t change the fact that if he made zero dollars, the savings wouldn’t be there for that number of customers. Even if he made just $250k, the savings per customer would only be $3 and some change. Even if none of the top executives made any money, and let’s say the company saved 1 billion, the customer would only be saving about $4.50. Would you notice or care about $4.50? What if nobody at all made any salary at BC, and you saved $15. Would you be happy? You wouldn’t even notice!

But you know who WOULD notice? All the underpaid peons at Blue Cross. Lower his pay to something less insane and give them a nice raise. And get me a better price on freakin Epipens!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

So if you worked your ass of, got graduate degrees and moved up the ladder, you’d be ok earning the same as an entry level employee? Your worth to your company would be equal?

We are talking about percents, not whole dollars. You are being deliberately obtuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

So if you worked your ass of, got graduate degrees and moved up the ladder, you’d be ok earning the same as an entry level employee? Your worth to your company would be equal?

I’d be okay with $1mil/year. Wouldn’t you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

So if you worked your ass of, got graduate degrees and moved up the ladder, you’d be ok earning the same as an entry level employee? Your worth to your company would be equal?

We are talking about percents, not whole dollars. You are being deliberately obtuse.

LOL what?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

Still doesn’t change the fact that if he made zero dollars, the savings wouldn’t be there for that number of customers. Even if he made just $250k, the savings per customer would only be $3 and some change. Even if none of the top executives made any money, and let’s say the company saved 1 billion, the customer would only be saving about $4.50. Would you notice or care about $4.50? What if nobody at all made any salary at BC, and you saved $15. Would you be happy? You wouldn’t even notice!

But you know who WOULD notice? All the underpaid peons at Blue Cross. Lower his pay to something less insane and give them a nice raise. And get me a better price on freakin Epipens!

Seriously. Look at what’s happening with the prices for epipens, insulin, Humera. People are literally dying for lack of access to drugs, and the people at the top of the healthcare industry are raking in money. This is a problem. This is not right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

So if you worked your ass of, got graduate degrees and moved up the ladder, you’d be ok earning the same as an entry level employee? Your worth to your company would be equal?

We are talking about percents, not whole dollars. You are being deliberately obtuse.

+1
Looks like she went to a diploma mill for grad school. No critical thinking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

So if you worked your ass of, got graduate degrees and moved up the ladder, you’d be ok earning the same as an entry level employee? Your worth to your company would be equal?

I’d be okay with $1mil/year. Wouldn’t you?[/quotesure!

But the arguement was that if he was making 1 million instead of 19 million; premiums would be lower. But BC the savings would only be $3 per customer. Try to keep up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It just illustrates the immense profits in health care if they can be profitable and still pay an excessive salary to the CEO. Especially when they are paying that 20% copay.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield is not a for profit company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

Still doesn’t change the fact that if he made zero dollars, the savings wouldn’t be there for that number of customers. Even if he made just $250k, the savings per customer would only be $3 and some change. Even if none of the top executives made any money, and let’s say the company saved 1 billion, the customer would only be saving about $4.50. Would you notice or care about $4.50? What if nobody at all made any salary at BC, and you saved $15. Would you be happy? You wouldn’t even notice!

But you know who WOULD notice? All the underpaid peons at Blue Cross. Lower his pay to something less insane and give them a nice raise. And get me a better price on freakin Epipens!

+1 +1 OP, you're being deliberately dense. The Blue Cross guy makes $19 million which if we take your assumption that there are 6 million blue cross customers in a particular state, works out to 3.2$/customer.
My value system is such that I would much rather that the $19 million was used to give 10,000 Blue Cross workers a $1,900 raise. Money is fungible you know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s say you make 50k a year and your boss makes 100k a year. In 10 years you make 65k a year and he makes 3.5 million dollars a year. That’s what happened to CEO pay in relation to employee wages.

Still doesn’t change the fact that if he made zero dollars, the savings wouldn’t be there for that number of customers. Even if he made just $250k, the savings per customer would only be $3 and some change. Even if none of the top executives made any money, and let’s say the company saved 1 billion, the customer would only be saving about $4.50. Would you notice or care about $4.50? What if nobody at all made any salary at BC, and you saved $15. Would you be happy? You wouldn’t even notice!

But you know who WOULD notice? All the underpaid peons at Blue Cross. Lower his pay to something less insane and give them a nice raise. And get me a better price on freakin Epipens!

Seriously. Look at what’s happening with the prices for epipens, insulin, Humera. People are literally dying for lack of access to drugs, and the people at the top of the healthcare industry are raking in money. This is a problem. This is not right.

Then the issue seems to be government regulation.