They made the highest bid, no one else bid higher.
That’s not entirely true. If you read the article, that’s just not what it says.
I hope the Onion has the resources to genuinely outbid. Perhaps they could accept crowdfunding donations to reach the amount if necessary?
Here’s Legal Eagle on this particular case, incidentally:
For the record, it’s specifically CEOs of S&P 500 companies that make an average of ~18 million/yr.
https://aflcio.org/paywatch/highest-paid-ceos
The Standard and Poor’s 500 is ~500 of the largest companies in the country that are publicly traded. It does not include the vast majority of CEO positions in the US, just the biggest.
I never said it was fair, don’t get me wrong. How it got this way vs whether that’s a good idea or not are two totally separate topics.
I’m not sure that most boards of directors are full of CEOs either. It is full of rich people though.
The CEO does not set his own compensation. He is hired by the owners of whatever company to operate it for them. They ultimately determine the compensation.
I agree there’s no struggle to find top candidates, that’s for sure. That’s partly because the compensation tends to be very good. The trades, which do not compensate as well as a chief executive, are struggling more. If plumbers frequently pulled CEO pay, we would not have a shortage.
Sometimes a person does not have any good options available to them, but they still have to make a choice.
It’s not an absolute, it’s just an incentive. Talent is also an intangible, it cannot really be measured. Nor does high pay in some way guarantee you will get a talented or qualified person for your position, it just gives you better odds. It’s bait, basically, but you cannot guarantee your bait will work to attract what you want.
I’m not sure of any evidence, I’m not an economist. I’m discussing the theory of how capitalist systems are intended to function. How well they succeed at this is very messy and muddled at best.
Lastly, I actually disagree that our hypothetical construction person makes less because they are less talented. It’s that their skill is in lower demand. They could be extremely talented, but there are simply more of them available, so less needs to be offered to attract them.
She seems to be playing politics. Kissing his ass may be extremely distasteful and embarrassing, but it’s also a prudent move when his foreign policy is based so heavily on his own personal feelings towards another country’s leader. It’s the hand she’s dealt, so I don’t blame her for playing it this way.
It’s a big if, but if she actually is seeking American support against encroaching Russian influence for the sake of her citizens, then I respect the decision and would offer her a bottle of mouthwash to maybe get the taste of Trump’s ass out of her mouth. I cannot imagine that tasted good.
Hypothetically, if you were looking at two civil engineering jobs, and one paid 100k/yr, and another paid 200k/yr, which would you pick?
Would it matter much if any of the construction guys doing the actually construction of your projects made 50k/yr? Are they less talented than you for that?
It’s not so much about “talentless hacks” vs “a decent job” as trying to entice the best person you can afford.
No, a company definitely doesn’t have to pay their CEOs generously, and not all do. The median pay for a CEO is actually about 250k/yr.
https://www.bls.gov/oes/2023/may/oes111011.htm
Though if we just look at CEOs from S&P 500 companies, that jumps up to 16 million. There’s going to be a lot of factors involved, from the size of the company to the cost of living in the area. A CEO in San Francisco is probably going to make a lot more than one in Milwaukee.
It’s less propaganda and more just understanding how the capitalist system is intended to function. It applies to other jobs as well, a software engineer can make quite a wide range of pay, depending on who they work for. Then they can also get increased pay for advancing up the ranks of their organization, as promotions often involve raises.
This is more of a system issue than bad behavior of an individual charity.
Charities can underpay a little bit, because working for a charity has its own appeal. But if you want a talented, experienced person to run your org, you have to consider what they could make if they worked for someone else. San Diego is not a cheap city, and has its fair share of CEO positions.
If you really want to stretch your dollar though, local food banks are probably a better bet.
Yeah it’s fairly common on the internet for someone to take everything at face value.
Not exactly that rare irl either, for that matter. People even occasionally fall for Onion articles.
Normally I’m a little more picky about my food recommendations, but I fully agree.
It’s a texture thing, it’s not so much about the flavor the cheese adds as it is that sort of drippy, plasticy smoothness.
I understand people that prefer cheddar or whatever, and that’s fine, but it really is completely different.
Subterranean lizardmen, of course.
Ooh, they should train the next chatbot on 4chan.
Try to make sure you’re not fighting with it. As thoughts enter your head, simply let them, then let them drift away as you very mildly try to reassert your attention on whatever focus you’ve chosen. I’ve heard it described as “observing your own thoughts”. Watch them come in, watch them go.
Nope. Going ice skating and then out for sushi.
“We are the last bit of a republic, of the free world,”
Worlds a big place, lady.
No clue, I’m not too familiar with the ins and outs of filters and avatars and stuff. But yeah, I don’t think it’s anything super new.
There’s a certain fascinating aspect to it. They use some sort of facial monitoring tech to observe their faces so the animated avatar can replicate them in real time with a variety of pre-programmed animations.
This is a pretty well-known one:
wtf is Unilad?