I'm guessing this had to due to surge in stock market.
In my opinion the only way to get this large inequality between CEO comp. and employee compensation under control is for employees to also be rewarded with more options for reduced stock-price purchases and a tax-incentive or tax-reduction on those realizing those profits instantly (as oppose to the waiting period in order to avoid capital gains tax).
Maybe an overall tax haul for people who profit less than X amount of dollars per year with stocks.
This doesn't solve much directly for people under a private employer, but I think it's a start. Maybe indirectly, people will have more money to spend on stuff therefore helping everyone, but it might also cause prices to rise.
Disclaimer: Not a financial advisor (anymore) nor a economics professional.
Why do these headlines leave out the "in the top 350 companies in the US"? How much bigger have these companies grown in the number of employees? Is the job the same for the CEO or more difficult?
I'm also curious: what does an average/median CEO earn? Not in the top 350 US companies, but among all of them.
This seems like an issue to me, but the way it's framed makes me feel like we're not hearing the whole story. If the companies in the top 350 are now X times larger than in 1965 then that seems like it would matter here, no?
In my opinion the only way to get this large inequality between CEO comp. and employee compensation under control is for employees to also be rewarded with more options for reduced stock-price purchases and a tax-incentive or tax-reduction on those realizing those profits instantly (as oppose to the waiting period in order to avoid capital gains tax).
Maybe an overall tax haul for people who profit less than X amount of dollars per year with stocks.
This doesn't solve much directly for people under a private employer, but I think it's a start. Maybe indirectly, people will have more money to spend on stuff therefore helping everyone, but it might also cause prices to rise.
Disclaimer: Not a financial advisor (anymore) nor a economics professional.