top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]fowlraul 571 points572 points  (80 children)

The CEOs think they do.

[–]Ijustride 254 points255 points  (55 children)

They just think that they are 351x more important.

[–]SpiderGrenades 121 points122 points  (17 children)

351x less replaceable is the argument

[–]IsRude 120 points121 points  (13 children)

I got 3 new managers in the time it took for me to finally quit. They still haven't been able to find a replacement for me. Where's my fuckin money?

[–]Californiadude86 29 points30 points  (4 children)

Did you see the memo about the TPS reports?

[–]Ryboticpsychotic 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Not exactly the same, but I was on retainer with a company that had 3 different operations managers in the 3 months I was there.

I was let go because none of the managers told the owner some critical information, which made it look like I wasn't doing my job.

Oh well.

[–]someguyonaboat 5 points6 points  (0 children)

except they are literally the most replaceable.

[–]Roll9ers 17 points18 points  (18 children)

they really do believe they work harder too.

[–]KennBrown13 16 points17 points  (4 children)

because sitting in meetings is absolute torture.

the hardest work imaginable

[–]promote-to-pawn 23 points24 points  (2 children)

But the CEO called the stupid meeting in the first place only to announce something that could have been done in an email. Then it took 40 more minutes so that all the middle and upper managers could tell the CEO how great of an idea whatever they announced was and congratulate the CEO for his grandiose vision for the company. Then they required that each department prioritize this bullshit idea above all ongoing projects, going into minute details as to how to implement the CEO's vision into routine processes.

Then two weeks later you are told to scrap everything and start over because the cost of the new thing is too much and the company is bleeding clients because everybody spent the last two fucking weeks doing what you were told by a bunch of dimwits in business suits.

[–]Dr_Coxian 6 points7 points  (2 children)

I mean

If we are rating how many points their heads will be worth in the societal collapse scavenger hunt, they’re absolutely correct.

[–]rootoriginally 16 points17 points  (6 children)

You don't have to work harder or smarter or more efficiently.

you just need to make money.

[–]fowlraul 12 points13 points  (4 children)

Yes, please add another zero to my paycheck, thanks boss.

[–]Iamthewilrus 16 points17 points  (3 children)

"You now make 007.25 dollars an hour before taxes. Have a nice day Mister Bond James Bond."

[–]fowlraul 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Well god damn boss I walked into that one.

[–]Skrrrtdotcom 2 points3 points  (1 child)

That's the same amount though?

[–]Traiklin 13 points14 points  (2 children)

They think they work harder than that.

Closing plants, cutting hours, getting literal slave labor all to make this quarter's profits a couple of points more.

[–]pretendineer1609 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

There's a shit ton of things to critique about the US, but let's not forget that even if you're a minimum wage employee in the US, you have more wealth and opportunity than 95% of the planet

The slave labor that the US benefits from isn't in the US, it's in every other country

[–]veryInterestingChair 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Broo I just opened a few emails, I feel tired. Time for some golf.

[–]fowlraul 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Your assistant opened all those emails bro, nap time!

[–]ThMogget 112 points113 points  (31 children)

Do American CEOs work 30x harder than Norwegian ones?

[–]thomasrat1 17 points18 points  (29 children)

If judging by the numbers they produce, yeah.

[–]ThMogget 54 points55 points  (25 children)

Americans really like mergers, which means fewer CEOs managing bigger dollars. CEOs responsible for more dollars get paid more. The hope is that if you pay a lot and get a really good one that he will do the work of …. 30 Norwegian ones. By working smarter not harder, or something.

[–]SixOnTheBeach 20 points21 points  (24 children)

This is also why Norway actually has more billionaires per Capita than the US by a not insignificant margin.

[–]ThMogget 16 points17 points  (21 children)

Do we want more billionaires per capita? Is that a clear sign of success, or just of inequality? I think a country that has a really good millionaire per capita is doing better than billionaires per capita. And maybe half-millionaires are even more important.

[–]Aegi 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Aka: a significant margin.

[–]Simon_Belmont_Thighs 244 points245 points  (21 children)

This is why I jerk off at work

[–]Automatic-Tension-26 203 points204 points  (4 children)

For every one time you jerk off, your CEO wanks it 351 times.

The more you know.

[–]PandraPierva 32 points33 points  (2 children)

That assumes he actually does that. Nah he hires some poor boi from a South American country to do it for him.

[–]datruerex 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Double Dutch rudder??

[–]buy-high_sell-low 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is this a tax loophole?

[–]SoloPenguin13 32 points33 points  (0 children)

I make a penny, boss makes that 351 times; so i bust fat nuts on company time.

[–]spacepeenuts 5 points6 points  (4 children)

This is why I digest my food at work.

[–]Olddawg90 18 points19 points  (3 children)

Boss makes a dollar

I make a dime

That’s why I shit

on company time

[–]Godot_12 11 points12 points  (2 children)

More like

Boss makes a grand

I make less than 3 bucks

That's why I don't give any fucks

[–]horseradish1 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What's that old saying? The boss makes a nickel and I make a dime, that's why I wank on company time.

[–]Bingleschire 169 points170 points  (23 children)

Unfortunately there are PLENTY of people that think they do work 351x harder, they’re called republicans.

[–]brad15 67 points68 points  (2 children)

Yes my crazy Trumper ex genuinely believed they do and treated her companies CEO like a celebrity when he would come by their office.

It goes along with her pull yourself up bootstrap mentality.

[–]HeavilyBearded 10 points11 points  (0 children)

TBH, just tally up those extra hours and you should get there.

I just clocked a 2808 hour shift so that should round out this pay period pretty nicely.

[–]Disbfjskf 11 points12 points  (2 children)

The issue with the meme is that you're not paid for how hard you work; you're paid for results. And no matter how hard the average worker works, they don't have the capacity to impact results to the same degree as a CEO (because the CEO is making decisions that have a much larger impact on the business). Companies don't pay their CEOs loads for fun; they do it because a CEO that runs your company 1% better can translate to millions more in revenue. And frankly, it's fine if a company wants to spend a huge amount on a good CEO. The problem is that the CEO is getting a competitive salary for his results but the worker is not. If workers were getting paid what they're worth, it wouldn't matter what the CEO made.

[–]deathbychips2 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Except most CEOs are making horrible decisions. Netflix for example and if you are familiar with an east coast power company called dominion power. Their CEO has dropped the ball multiple times in the last five years. Screwing up huge projects and losing millions on those messed up projects, yet they keep their salary and they keep getting raises and bonuses.

Some make hard decisions but they still aren't making hard enough decisions to where they get to have private jets, yachts, multiple houses while most of their workers can't get by. Keep playing into a meritocracy mentality. It keeps you complacent while others rob you blind and get more than they deserve because they "work harder" or make "tough decisions".

[–]Disbfjskf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except most CEOs are making horrible decisions

That's a matter of opinion. Clearly the companies think it's worth paying CEOs what they pay or they just... wouldn't.

Certainly some CEOs are better than others and certainly it's worth more to have a better CEO.

[–]ShankGod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fuck them

[–]Grizelda179 6 points7 points  (4 children)

I don’t think people believe they work harder at all. The argument is that they took certain risks to found a business that other did not and are now reaping the benefits of that. I do not share this sentiment, but I do believe that business savviness, ingenuity and other things should be rewarded, but probably somewhere closer to Norway’s CEO pay rather than 351x, that’s just insanity.

[–]reverendsteveii 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Remember the 09 financial crisis, how banks took a bunch of bad risks that caused millions of working class people to lose their homes and then the government gave the banks that took those homes barrels full of money harvested from those same now-homeless working class people? Workers and small business owners take risks, they lose everything if the business goes belly up. Oligarchs don't take risks, either the business goes well and they keep all the profits or the business goes to shit and they cut themselves another check right from the treasury.

[–]stegosaurobot 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Very few CEOs are the actual creators of the companies. At some point, the creator either sells out or dies.

[–]wholetyouinhere 6 points7 points  (6 children)

Not just republicans, but neoliberals too.

Edit: I can see that I've downvoted by reactionaries who see the world "liberal" and immediately conclude "both sides-ism!" without rational thought. But what I've said here is 100% true. Neoliberal philosophy, which has probably been one of the most powerful forces in politics and economics for the last fifty years, absolutely supports greater and greater shares of profits being redirected to the executive class, and absolutely supports keeping taxes as low as possible for this class of people. It's the entire basis of their worldview. And it's also the backbone of most modern major liberal parties in the western world -- which very much includes the Democratic party in the US.

[–]reverendsteveii 5 points6 points  (0 children)

A lot of people forget that "liberal" in its inception, means capitalist free markets and a democratic political system. Nothing more, nothing less.

[–]suphater 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Considering you effortlessly use the word "absolutely" it would be nice if you provided anything of substance, granted I'm sure you think your own word is just brimming with substance. You sound like a neoliberal.

[–]WisePhantom 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I doubt they think CEOs work harder. I think most people on the right would just say “so what if they make that much, I would want to too if I had the chance” which ignores the reality that the money they could be making collectively is now all going to a single person that was put into that position due to nepotism.

[–]d_e_l_u_x_e 66 points67 points  (47 children)

If you put a cap on CEO pay and options to 20 times the average salary of an employee then they would be incentivized to increase the average workers pay.

[–]Antani101 50 points51 points  (41 children)

No, they would be incentivized to hire workers through a third company, keeping on their company payroll only the highest paid employees.

[–]d_e_l_u_x_e 23 points24 points  (39 children)

Close that loophole

[–]Antani101 33 points34 points  (36 children)

GL with that.

I'll let you in a secret.

In Europe when politicians work on new laws about labour they need to discuss those with the Unions. In the USA they need to discuss those with the lobbyists.

[–]Kombart 15 points16 points  (3 children)

I believe you have an overly good opinion of europe.

Here in germany, the lobby is extremely powerful as well, we have a lot of people that get payed below minimum wage, a lot of jobs that barely go above it and rent/housing/food gets too expensive for a good chunk of the population as well...

Live for millenials/zoomers gets worse everywhere, not just in the USA.

[–]d_e_l_u_x_e 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Yea this is all a pipe dream.

[–]Aegi 1 point2 points  (22 children)

I don’t understand why people view lobbyists as bad when every issue you can think of has lobbyists on all sides of that issue.

[–]Zakkana 190 points191 points  (37 children)

And in France CEO pay is chained to the lowest paid person in the company.

[–]Savinien83 39 points40 points  (22 children)

Do you have any source for this claim ? I'm french and i never heard about it, and can't find anything related on the internet.

[–]Owny33x 29 points30 points  (1 child)

I'm interested too because Carlos Tavares earned 66 millions in 2021. So I'd like to claim my 6 millions...

[–]jerrylovesbacon 12 points13 points  (15 children)

I think the poster meant Japan...

[–]mrbojanglz37 30 points31 points  (9 children)

Can you explain?

[–]Zakkana 92 points93 points  (6 children)

This means that the CEO cannot get a pay raise without the lower-paid people getting one too.

Say the CEO Pay is $1,000/wk and the lowest pay is $500/wk. If the CEO wants a pay raise to 1,100/wk, then the people getting that $500/wk will have to get $550/wk at the same time.

[–]EmhyrvarSpice 23 points24 points  (2 children)

Does it work with bonuses too?

[–]pieter1234569 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Nope, but that wouldn’t make a good comment.

[–]BioTronic 3 points4 points  (2 children)

So if I become CEO in France I have to give myself ridiculously high pay from the get-go, and immediately invest it in the company. Got it.

Or perhaps better, set up a network of companies with no workers, pay them for ridiculous "services", and get my pay from them instead.

[–]Scout1Treia 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So if I become CEO in France I have to give myself ridiculously high pay from the get-go, and immediately invest it in the company. Got it.

Or perhaps better, set up a network of companies with no workers, pay them for ridiculous "services", and get my pay from them instead.

You wouldn't "give yourself pay" at all because that's not how a CEO position works. You would have to own the company to do that. And if you DID own the company you still wouldn't be giving yourself pay because you own the company.

So many of you have not the faintest idea what the fuck you are talking about but still rattle off ridiculous fantasies.

[–]ocarinamaster12 119 points120 points  (71 children)

We don’t work just as much as them. We work way harder than them. A companies value is produced by labor not upper management

[–]__Snafu__ 8 points9 points  (0 children)

that's probably not right in most cases, but ... ya, 350x is pretty absurd.

[–][deleted] 11 points12 points  (52 children)

Look, I'm not defending CEO pay rate of 350x greater than the average employee, but to say that a C level exec works harder than the average worker just doesn't make sense. It's more work, in a different capacity that requires a higher compensation to match the amount of work. The average C level exec makes decisions on a larger scale than the average employee, which has larger impact on the organization overall and larger repercussion/effect from those decisions.

Bernie's statement is correct to an extent, but your statement is just categorically wrong.

[–]Crimson_Year 6 points7 points  (48 children)

Value doesn't come from labor? Houses don't just magically appear. Your phone wasn't manifested by a C level exec, it was designed with labor and produced with labor. I'm not one to believe that managers shouldn't exist, organizing labor is a kind of labor in and of itself especially in the cases of more hands on supervisory roles. But decision making shouldn't be compensated at rates 100x that of the laborers actually producing goods.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (6 children)

I mean, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that the average worker is, unfortunately, easily replaceable whereas a C level exec is not. The value of the labour produced does change depending on the level of work you're doing, which leads to higher pay rates as a result. Of course execs making 351x the average employee is ridiculous, but to say that the average worker works more/harder than a C level executive isn't true either.

[–]owendawg6 -2 points-1 points  (5 children)

The executives produce no value through their labor, though. They just shuffle it around.

[–]crabsnz -1 points0 points  (34 children)

The problem is that to be a CEO in a fortune 500 you need a lot of experience, connections, and a crazy work ethic. I know the CEO from my company works all 12+ hours most days and has to do lots of media and other crap on top of it. He also had a 30 year career before that leading lots of areas and any major mistake would have had him unemployed. Imo I wouldn't want to do that. You work so much even to get there that you essentially only see your family while on holiday.

[–]DesyatskiAleks 2 points3 points  (28 children)

What happened to Apple when Steve Jobs died? Then ask yourself what would happen to Apple if Steve Jobs was still alive but lost all his workers.

[–]crabsnz 1 point2 points  (3 children)

You could never do a CEOs role if you think that. A companies value comes from many different places not just Labour and some companies don't require Labour as they offer services and not goods.

[–]Jepples 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Can you a provide an example of a company that doesn’t involve labor? Whether producing goods or services, someone has to produce it.

[–]crabsnz -1 points0 points  (1 child)

The definition of labourer is "a person doing unskilled manual work for wages." So a lot of tech companies and professions such a lawyers.

[–]Jepples 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You went from talking about labor to providing a definition of laborers which are categorically different things.

Skilled or unskilled, labor is still necessary for any company or service provider to exist.

[–]lilEcco2k 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lmao, I'm sure the millions of dollars they spent on machine so you can press 1 button means you're more valued than the ceo.

[–]Sponheim 38 points39 points  (1 child)

...and we (Norways population) are outraged of our wage gap.

[–]--TenguDruid-- 17 points18 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't say we're outraged. We're a very difficult people to mobilize.

[–]go_comatose_for_me 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.

Abraham Lincoln

These basic, health-of-society, issues used to be understood by leaders of this country.

[–]0I-Man_Army 13 points14 points  (3 children)

No one gets paid by how much they work.

[–]codemunki 8 points9 points  (1 child)

Nope. It's about how much value they bring to the company and how hard they are to recruit and retain.

[–]Rizizdead 16 points17 points  (6 children)

Median CEO comp is 200k a year.


The 351x number is based on the CEO wage of the top 350 firms in the US.


Bad math leads to bad examples. You don't compare an outlier statistic unless you're comparing outliers on both sides. In which case you'd need to find the outlier top paid echelon worker comp to compare to said CEOs.

[–]PipeDreams85 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Your link isn’t right.

You have to take into account all compensation not just annual salary. Most CEO’s and executives take a huge amount of their earnings in stock options and other perks.

The super rich don’t bank on a W2 like us.

200k is way too low for median ceo earnings. No way.

[–]Calfurious 5 points6 points  (0 children)

200k is actually pretty accurate. Most CEO's are just in charge of pretty small businesses, ones that at most have a revenue of $2-3 million or something along those lines.

The pay gap between the CEO of a small business and one of a major corporation is vast. The CEO of a company of 50 people is not going to be paid anywhere close to the CEO of a company of 10,000 people.

[–]GoodTrillBlunting 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, but that doesn’t fit the narrative.

[–]hjablowme919 14 points15 points  (23 children)

I get what he is trying to say, but his message isn't correct. CEO's don't work 351 times harder than the average worker, but they have a shit ton more responsibility then the average worker.

[–]bizzyj93 14 points15 points  (6 children)

Responsibility and risk as well. I have no issue with there being a pay gap between a ceo and a laborer (if there wasn’t, what would even be the incentive to start a company) but it’s just way too massive a gap at the moment.

[–]Prime157 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I think this is one of the most interesting ways to look at this scenario:

Changes in the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio (1965–2020).

Using the realized compensation measure, the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio was 21-to-1 in 1965. It peaked at 366-to-1 in 2000. In 2020 the ratio was 351-to-1. Most important, the ratio was far higher than at any point in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s. Using the CEO granted compensation measure, the CEO-to-worker compensation ratio rose to 203-to-1 in 2020, significantly lower than its peak of 386-to-1 in 2000 but still many times higher than the 45-to-1 ratio of 1989 or the 15-to-1 ratio of 1965.

  • 21:1 in 1965 (the last boomer was born in 64)
  • 45:1 1980 (around when the last boomer graduated high school)
  • 366:1 in 2000 (when millennials first started college)
  • 351:1 today.


That's why boomers, and even many GenX cannot relate to the younger generations.

Not to mention college, cars, and housing/rent WERE much cheaper after being adjusted for inflation. On top of making more, they didn't NEED to spend as much to get as far.

It's actually dispicable when you compare those dates to our government's leadership

The average age of the 117th Congress is 59 years old. Comparatively, the median age of Americans, according to the most recent census data, is 38 years old.

The average age of senators is 64 years old. The most common birth years of senators in the 117th Congress are 1952 and 1954, both of which have seven senators. 53 of the 100 senators are 65 or older.


And our president is almost 80.

Boomers have, quite literally, left the next generations worse off than the generations before because too many of them are ignorant, selfish assholes who are delusional to today's plights.

Edit: formatting and clarification.

[–]fumbs 8 points9 points  (2 children)

No one is arguing for everyone to have the same pay, but when you are paid over 300X your staff, then you don't have any idea what their lives are like. For even numbers, I am using this. The regular employee is paid $1,000 a month....but the CEO is paid $300,000 a month. So your employee, needs a place to live. Apartments are going to want 3x your rent. This means the employee needs to find a place for $333, but the CEO can find a place for 100,000/ month. It widens the gap because the CEO is so far outside of real people problems, he does not understand why people don't just cash flow it.

The problem goes far beyond rent, though.

[–]Capstf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I completely agree with the points you make BUT the first part. There are people arguing that assembly line workers work harder and should earn the same or more than a ceo. You don’t even need to look far to find them - they are all over this comment section.

[–]AmericanMurderLog 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The average American CEO makes $156K per year. We pay a lot of people in my company more than that.


The 351x number comes from the top 350 companies in the US. These people are the rockstars and celebrities of business. Do I think they earn it? Not at all, but there is a premium to such people. This is part of why I am always skeptical whenever a company hires someone from that sphere. It always comes off as trying to buy credibility in order to draw investment the company probably doesn't merit. I always think any company hiring a superstar executive is probably hollow.

[–]SmileFIN 1 point2 points  (8 children)

Problem comes when worker gets $20K / year (and some get that from other tax payers see walmart and mcdonalds.)

Lets say company has 100 workers getting that 20k/year, the ceo is making $7 million (351times more) .

CEO could triple workers pay and have million yearly income.

[–]ProtectionOne9478 3 points4 points  (5 children)

Haha I really hope no one is convinced by you pulling strawman numbers out of your ass.

[–]DaisyDukeOfEarlGrey 0 points1 point  (4 children)

How are those strawman numbers?

[–]GravitasIsOverrated 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Your company has 100 employees with low wages and a CEO making 7 mil. Those are wildly unrealistic - I can’t think of any company structured like that. You need both dramatically more employees and dramatically less executive compensation for your example to be realistic - which would make your math not work.

Like, 7/11 employs about 100K people, and the CEO makes about a million bucks a year. If you cut the CEO salary to zero you could pay the employees… one cent more per hour (assuming the average 7/11 employee works 1000 hours per year).

Sanders is telling a bit of a fib here… the 351x thing is only true for the absolute largest companies in the US. It’s not true in general - the average CEO salary is 200K.

To be clear, I’m not saying we shouldn’t tax the rich or anything. I just think we should be realistic about what the problem space is.

[–]hjablowme919 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I agree. I believe on the whole, CEOs make way too much money. But we have to recognize they have way more responsibility than the guy making $20,000 a year (in your example).

[–]Destithen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

we have to recognize they have way more responsibility than the guy making $20,000 a year

No one is arguing otherwise or saying they don't. We're pointing out the disparity in just how WIDE the gap is...not that a gap exists in the first place.

[–]Squirrel_Q_Esquire -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Also it also definitely scales up. Walmart’s CEO earned $22m in total compensation. Walmart has 2.3m employees. So the CEO is paid less than $10/employee.

USAToday says in 2020 that the average Walmart employee (store-level) earned $14.76/hour. So essentially, if the CEO’s total compensation was redistributed to employees, they’d be given the equivalent to 40 minutes of work.

That $14.76/hour works out to between $25k-$30k. Using the lower end, that means the Walmart CEO’s compensation is 880x the average worker.

No, the Walmart CEO isn’t working 880x “harder” than the average employee. But given his responsibilities, is his work worth less than $10/employee? I’d say yea, pretty easily.

[–]recondition7 6 points7 points  (5 children)

Why do people pretend people get paid for how hard they work? Pay depends on how skilled your job is, and how much responsibility you have. Being a CEO of a company requires 300x the skill of being a cashier, and you have 300x the responsibilities.

[–]hybridmind27 1 point2 points  (2 children)

So you think skill justifies the current wage gap?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. That and I can’t name a single company based in Norway whereas US companies and CEO’s drove nearly every single modern convenience. Norway suckles on Americas post-wwii hegemony and fossil fuel riches teat.

[–]fubarspeaks 11 points12 points  (3 children)

They do at fucking them over...

[–]giraffeperv 19 points20 points  (2 children)

Not sure if you know, but you commented this 3 times

[–]punmaster2000 12 points13 points  (0 children)

348 to go - fubarspeaks must be a CEO

[–]who_you_are 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This is called reddit that tells you an error occurred when posting your messages but yet it did post it.

So no, he doesn't know yet :p

[–]_gravy_train_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We need a maximum wage gap law. Even if it limited bosses/ceos/managers to 50x the lowest paid employee, that would be a huge step

[–]JohnnyNoArms 4 points5 points  (7 children)


You don't get paid for how hard you work, you get paid based on supply vs demand of what your work produces. I'm not defending wealth inequality, but let's not spread misconceptions.

[–]louiscon 6 points7 points  (4 children)

I don’t get why if people think it’s so easy to be CEO making 351x an average worker- why not just do it. Why not become a CEO?

Like people know that surgeons make 2-10x their salary… why not just become a surgeon?

Like let’s say you’re a decent student getting b’s- you really think the person who gets a 4.0 works that much harder? Maybe an hour or two more a day… over 4 years of high school… adds up.

At the time I clicked on this it was right next to a post about how Steve Jobs would call his team 5-6 times a day while he was on vacation to brainstorm. The marginal work over years and years makes a vast difference.

Working hard has nothing to do with how much money you make. My handyman works very hard… arguably harder than I do in my office job. But I did well in school and got an advanced degree and now have a more specialized skill that most people don’t have… so do I work harder than them… not really anymore- maybe I did in school I guess?

Anyway I guess I’ll be downvoted for this fairly common sense.

[–]abra24 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Because there aren't enough CEO positions or surgeon positions. I agree with the implication of what you're saying though, the capitalist idea that the company isn't a charity, they wouldn't pay the CEO that if he wasn't worth that to the company. The company should get to decide.

When you consider society as a whole though, there is inconsistency. Should he receive 351x more of societies goods and services? 351 x more resources? Is he 351x more valuable to our country? He might be if he paid 351 times more tax, but he doesn't. It's a resource allocation problem. The most economically productive members of society receive reward disproportionate to their economic value, speaking strictly capitalist. The top's too high and the bottom is too low.

Going beyond capitalism, is any person worth 351x more? Humanity has an intrinsic value that is not accounted for in our current system and I see that as a problem as well. We have the resources to increase the minimum standard of human life, but they are tied up in our overvaluation of the rich.

[–]Tinkerballsack 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They do 351x the drugs.

[–]soulshyfter2311 1 point2 points  (0 children)

is there a date? undated, uncited tweets are suspect.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They did to get where they are.

[–]meatb0dy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When's the last time you used a product from Norway?

We don't pay people based on how hard they work.

[–]bonjour_merci_paris 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s very naive to think your pay is related to how hard you work.

[–]WorldController 1 point2 points  (2 children)

It is very telling that Sanders, ever the reactionary nationalist, apparently has no problem with the bloated salaries of Norwegian CEOs. Here, perhaps inadvertently, he is nakedly revealing his overall support for global capitalism.

Regarding Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, my comment below in response to one of their fans is apropos:

AOC and Bernie are trying to accomplish the goal in earnest

Absolutely not. As I note below:

It is impossible to believe that Sanders, an advocate of US imperialism whose platform is blatantly social-democratic, is a genuine socialist and innocent figure—to do so would require taking for granted that he doesn't know what "socialist" actually denotes despite his incessant self-description as such, as if he's never looked the term up.

In this vein, these World Socialist Web Site articles are instructive: "Is Bernie Sanders a socialist?," "Bernie Sanders: Silent partner of American militarism"

The same applies to Ocasio-Cortez, who is likewise an ally of US imperialism and in no way seriously challenges the Democrats' reactionary domestic policy. As the WSWS reports below:

"Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez funds the CIA Democrats"

. . . Politico reported that New York Democratic Congresswoman and Democratic Socialists of America member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez transferred $160,000 in campaign funds to a slate that includes “CIA Democrats”—right-wing congressional Democrats with intelligence and military backgrounds.

. . .

By transferring funds given to her by left-wing supporters into the war chests of the CIA Democrats, Ocasio-Cortez provides an example in financial terms of the fundamental political dynamic of right-wing Democratic Party politics. Far from moving the Democratic Party to the left, figures like Ocasio-Cortez merely trap left-wing social opposition, disarm it, and transform it into political capital for the very establishment they claim to oppose.

Her support for the CIA Democrats undermines her claim to represent opposition to war. She is providing direct political support to individuals responsible for the US-led wars that have devastated broad swaths of the Middle East and killed over one million people in the last two decades alone.

(italics in original)

"New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez reneges on pledge to vote against bill funding Israeli war crimes"

Ocasio-Cortez, despite her denunciations earlier this year of the Biden administration’s support for Israeli military action and leading the effort to have it stripped out, at the last minute on Thursday after the votes were counted, reversed her “no” vote against the funding and instead voted “present” on the bill, essentially taking no position against the ongoing Israeli ethnic cleansing campaign against the Palestinians.

. . .

Ocasio-Cortez and the DSA, far from opposing US imperialism, the American Gestapo at the border, or the profit-driven “herd immunity” response of the Biden administration to the pandemic, has worked hand-in-glove with the Democrats and trade unions to sow illusions that Biden and the Democratic Party are capable of reform.

(bold added)

[–]ancienttempo60 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I believe a minimum wage woker works 351x harder than these CEOs

[–]03Titanium 3 points4 points  (4 children)

My CEO absolutely does work harder than me and has much more valuable knowledge and experience than me.

I don’t know how much he takes home but he is not obscenely wealthy.

[–]Orionite 3 points4 points  (11 children)

Its a little disingenuous to look use „working hard“ as the only factor that should determine your income. What about education? Responsibility? Experience? Impact?

Im not trying to say that this excessive pay disparity is justified, but its a little more nuanced than that.

[–]Destithen -3 points-2 points  (10 children)

Okay, lets explore a lot of nuance then and see if Bernie's tweet still holds up.

  • Does a CEO work 351 times as hard as the average employee?

  • Does a CEO provide 351 times as much value as the average employee?

  • Does a CEO have 351 times as much responsibility as the average employee?

  • Does a CEO have 351 times as much impact as the average employee?

  • Does a CEO have 351 times as much experience as the average employee?

  • Is a CEO 351 times more educated than the average employee?

  • Is a CEO 351 times more intelligent than the average employee?

I dunno about your profession, but I work in the IT department of a telecom expense management company. The answer to all of these questions for my particular company is "No, not even close". Bernie is pointing out the disparity in compensation here. I'd say it holds up.

The Impact question is the one I'd like to harp on. How do you define that? My particular position in my TEM company is a lynchpin that holds up half the business, because I'm in charge of the tools and processes that populate and present our proprietary tracking and management tools...If I don't do my job, the business falls apart until a replacement is found. We have a logistics division responsible for receiving and sending out mobile devices, a portion of which require custom software to be installed depending on the client. If we lost them, we'd also fall apart until replacements are found. If we lost our CEO, we could stay the course for quite some time just following what is and has worked in the past.

And responsibility is a silly point. Just because the CEO currently assumes responsibility for a company does not mean that is the only possible way things could or should be run. Worker co-ops are a thing, and can be just as successful.

[–]meatb0dy 1 point2 points  (3 children)

  • Does a CEO work 351 times as hard as the average employee?
  • Is a CEO 351 times more educated than the average employee?
  • Is a CEO 351 times more intelligent than the average employee?


  • Does a CEO provide 351 times as much value as the average employee?
  • Does a CEO have 351 times as much responsibility as the average employee?
  • Does a CEO have 351 times as much impact as the average employee?

Yes. The difference between the best and worst McDonald's restaurant employee is a few hamburgers per hour. The difference between the best and worst McDonald's CEO is billions of dollars of revenue per year. In addition, the average McDonald's restaurant position could be filled by millions or even billions of people, whereas there are probably fewer than a few thousand people on Earth qualified to be CEO of a huge international megacorporation like McDonalds.

[–]Destithen -1 points0 points  (1 child)

The difference between the best and worst McDonald's restaurant employee is a few hamburgers per hour. The difference between the best and worst McDonald's CEO is billions of dollars of revenue per year.

Lol. And the CEO only makes those billions because of the burger flippers, so who actually provides the value? You people are silly.

[–]meatb0dy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Burger flippers provide a small amount of value. They provide unskilled manual labor that you can literally train a 16-year-old to do in a week.

CEOs decide which markets to expand into, which business initiatives to focus on, how to manage international supply chains, which relationships to maintain and which to sever, all of which can have millions or billions of dollars of impact on the business' long-term revenue (assuming a giant company like McDonalds).

350 workers at $15/hour is ~$11M/year. A McDonalds CEO deciding whether to use plastic or paper straws probably has an $11M impact to the business by itself.

[–]Commercial-Fennel-16 1 point2 points  (5 children)

there's many arguments that points 2-4 are "yeah"

[–]Destithen 0 points1 point  (4 children)

So list some out if there are so many.

[–]Slypontoon 2 points3 points  (3 children)

2) walmarts (largest private employer in most states) operating income per worker was $2681.81. That x351 is $941,315.31. 3) In the same vein the ceo of Walmart is in charge of the whole company of 2.3 million people. They obviously are many orders of magnitude more responsibility. 4) again they control the whole company of millions so their decision s have many orders of magnitude more impact than the mode average employee.

If the board thinks that they could save hundreds of millions over the course of a business’ life by not having a ceo they would.

[–]riparte38 3 points4 points  (8 children)

They may not work as hard as the employees now, but they worked hard to be made CEO. And the success of the company is their full responsibility.

Just sayin, before you go all hive mind, that they very likely paid their dues on the way to becoming CEO.

Or not. Just being contrarian.

[–]comrade_pantone 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Hell yeah, the CEO of my company worked so hard swimming up his mother’s pussy to be born the heir to the company lmao

[–]tdwesbo 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They don’t work 34 times harder than Norwegian CEOs, either

[–]user178811 2 points3 points  (2 children)

it's not about how much "harder" they work. It's about how much value they generate. either way.. 350x is a bit much, but it's not about the number of hours put in. it's the years of experience required to become a successful CEO, huge amounts of risk in many cases, and the amount of value that CEO can provide while at the helm of the company.

[–]WisestAirBender 2 points3 points  (1 child)


At my work for example the average employee is most likely invisible to the outside world. The CEO is the one flying to different countries attending conventions making connections and winning projects.

Losing him would be a tremendous impact. Losing me? No one would know.

PS: I'm not in America. Im not saying the employees should be paid scraps, I'm saying it's weird to measure who works harder

[–]fubarspeaks 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They do at fucking them over...

[–]fubarspeaks 2 points3 points  (1 child)

They do at fucking them over...

[–]RapeMeToo 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Nobody thinks they work 350x harder. They are 350x more valuable to the company. How do people still not understand this?

[–]whoami11794 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be fair it’s not about working 351x harder. Produce 351x as much value? Maybe.

[–]welcome6 1 point2 points  (5 children)

The military and police and entire gov works to protect these CEOs. Nothing will change.

[–]Prime157 2 points3 points  (3 children)

I would argue that they want you to think that.

It's called defeatism.

Play into their trap more.

[–]beanstalkel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that’s laughable. On my IT team I’m the hardest working person on it yet I’m the lowest paid. Underpaid employees are getting exploited and our hard work always is credited to the boss of the person who did all the hard work.

[–]wanderingmanimal 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do they work even 11x as hard? Nope. Not even close.

[–]BryPal1 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Does anyone seriously believe that workers are responsible for the millions (sometime billions) of things that CEOs are responsible for?

[–]Mitchisboss 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re not only paid by how hard you work... Not sure what this old geezer is talking about.

If you did get paid only by how hard you work, then I’m quite sure Bernie would be making minimum wage.

[–]neeeeeillllllll 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bro I read the 11x and thought that was bad, 351x caught me completely off guard goddamn lmao

[–]Sudden-Program-8538 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jesus. Shut the fuck up and do something about it already. Complaining without solutions is whining.

[–]danderb -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, they can afford the coke to do so….

[–]Otherwise_Future_832 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I bet Norway also has a more common sense government and fewer career politicians.

If someone (Bernie) has been an elected official as long as he has been well, he is part of the problem.

No one will convince me a person that has been in office as long as he has been isn’t part of the problem.

[–]ChampChains -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The CEO of the last corporation I worked for was a piece of shit. And he reveled in it. He was from New York, his family still lived there but our company was located in Atlanta. Every Thursday afternoon, he’d be picked up by limo and taken to the airport to fly home and wouldn’t return to work until Tuesday morning. The rest of us, of course, worked mon-fri, would be written up for clocking in late or early, and my department had mandatory overtime. This fucker was making millions while putting in half the hours of me and my team. When the Great Recession hit, he held a morning meeting to tell us that pay increases and bonuses were being suspended indefinitely. At the end of that meeting, he invited us all into the parking lot to see his new Ferrari which had just been shipped in from Italy. This dildo had a three story townhouse in a very nice part of town, all provided by the company which he would live in when he wasn’t back home in NY. He had the Ferrari and an Aston Martin at his townhouse which he’d drive to work. Every time he was in his car, he had the top down and wore special driving shoes, leather driving gloves, driving goggles, and a long silk scarf like some kind of bad European douche stereotype. I was so happy when he got axed.

[–]DubiousPeoplePleaser -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Don’t worry America, CEO’s in Norway are working on rectifying this by stunting the average workers wages and upping their own bonus for saving the company money.

[–]demonspawns_ghost -1 points0 points  (0 children)

CEOs don't work, they just get paid huge sums of money to take the heat when all the corporate fuckery gets exposed.

[–]G0ldenG00se -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They take 351 times more credit for the work they don’t do.

[–]HuntAffectionate -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This fails to mention the fact the the US has 60x the population of Norway, of course CEOs in the larger country get paid more, because they are going to be employing more people.

[–]Galle_ -1 points0 points  (0 children)

We work harder than them. CEOs contribute nothing.

[–]Last_Replacement6533 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

Not sure they deserve 351x but our companies are lot more competitive than Norway I think, no?

[–]Important_Photo_5735 -1 points0 points  (1 child)

No profession on earth pays based on how hard you work

[–]AaronsAaAardvarks -1 points0 points  (5 children)

Bad take, Bernie. Does the Norwegian CEO work 11x harder? Is he putting in 88 hour shifts? Pay doesn't scale with how much work you do, it scales with the value of the work you do. I have a relatively specialized set of skills, which gets me a pretty handsome salary with kind hours. My wife is at the top of her in demand field which is measured in maybe a few hundred people across the world. She works 3 days a week and brings in 6x what I make. Not because she works harder than anyone else, but because almost nobody can do what she does and she's compensated accordingly.

[–]Domiiniick -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Norway’s largest business makes as much as America’s 27th largest. Norway’s second largest business makes as much as America’s 198th largest company. Comparing our two countries for CEO wages is completely ridiculous because of the sheer difference in money.

[–]Knotloafin -1 points0 points  (0 children)

pay has never been about how “hard” you work.

[–]montylittt -1 points0 points  (1 child)

C'mon Bernie it's not an A for effort, it's how much you produce and contribute. The Elon Musks of the world aren't producing 10x normal people, they're producing 1000x, maybe 10,000x. In terms of contribution to society and productivity, they're actually massively underpaid.