Quote:
|
personally, i look at this as an insane skewing in the distribution of resources and cannot for the life of me figure out how it is exactly that the populist right was persuaded that defending this sort of nonsense was in any way in their economic interest. but there are greater mysteries in the world, ones that do not lead toward total cynicism in thinking about the way this one does.
|
Maybe because a lot of us in the populist movement realize historical fact when we see it. That in no society in history has everyone held an equal share, and they never will so long as we're human?
My reasoning has nothing to do with CEO's being paid well, it has to do with CEO's that failed miserably being paid well. People are paid by how difficult they are to replace. If a manager is integral to a company's success, he should be compensated as such. If a manager is worthless he should be paid as such. The CEO's who need bailouts failed in their duty, so if they need a bailout they should not get a windfall.
This is not a failure of the capitalist system no matter how you try to force that square into the circle. This is a failure of the people in charge keeping a lid on lending to those who can repay, and a failure of those keeping a lid on corporate expenses vs. international competition.