|
|
|
|
|
by slt2021
1187 days ago
|
|
you are right, but the argument itself is flawed in the first place. CEOs are not the rich class, they are elite but they are employees. Plenty of CEOs get fired for doing bad job, or get softly pushed out. Argument that labor union keep CEOs from getting rich is absurd because CEOs are part of labor force. it is shareholders who get rich by squeezing profit, so I dont get why bring up CEOs. A CEO maybe get paid $10 mln a year. But shareholders get dividends/buybacks in order of hundreds of mils/blns My argument was that labor unions lead to piss poor quality due to mediocrity (example: US automakers). the japanese automakers have factories in the US and produce much higher quality cars without labor unions. How come??? |
|
While this is sometimes true, the executive status class overlaps significantly with the haut bourgeois economic class (and most of the rest of the executive status class is in the petit bourgeois economic class; there are probably working class “CEOs” somewhere, but they are very much not the norm), and very typically they are specifically significant holders of capital in the firm of which they are CEOs. CEOS are not just employees, and their relationship to either the firms they control or the economy more generally are not very much like those of regular employees.