Sure it does. As SunTrader adroitly pointed out, power wins. I do give a fuck. I have no problem if a chief executive makes a buttload of money provided that those below him are compensated fairly. But when CEOs are flying higher than they have ever flown before while average and lower-end employees are increasingly having difficulty making ends meet, then some kind of a recalibration is in order. I'm not saying I have the solution, because I don't. But I can stand back, look at the big picture, and see that something is askew and needs fixing.
Almost all your posts on here have been about the CEO's pay and virtually none have been about worker pay. We know the solution isn't to lower executive comp. That will enrichen shareholders but no one else.
No, I am outsider. Nor I am the one to judge. It's up to the business itself. You said it yourself you don't know what a fair pay is. It's very subjective. If you know I am paid more than you are you would think it's fair that your pay would be at least as much as mine. But is it really fair? But I might think it's unfair toward me. And somebody else would say it's ok I'm paid less, I am pretty comfortable with my pay since I have less duties at my job.
It highlights the increasing disparity. While many of regular, hard-working folk are struggling and stagnating economically, the elite are cavorting in an embarrassment of unprecedented riches. The trend is clear, but where does it end? When there is no middle class left? Wouldn't that begin to resemble a Third World country? Maybe you have the answer. Maybe this is the capitalist utopia that Ayn Rand always dreamed about:
Anecdotal assessments don't mean very much. Look at the broad trends in the growing income disparity over time among the population. Is it because top employees are becoming super competent while lower rung employees are becoming increasingly inept? En masse?
Rich get richer until you have a dictatorship. Biden inflation reduces disposable income. The FED raises interest rates to cause a recession. Unions are owned by the Dems. RFK wants Bitcoin for freedoms sake. Reich would rather have 1,000 millionaires instead of one billionaire. Grow the middle class.
Again, you are focused on the one guy at the top and not on the guys at the bottom or the middle. The core argument isn't about improving the bottom 50,000 people, it's about lowering the 1 guy at top while acknowledging that money will just trickle out to other people at the top. Why aren't you railing against Tom Brady who made hundreds of millions while the waterboy on his teams only made 10k (if he was paid at all)?
If compensation is based on shareholder value and you are not meeting that metric, then that's what is fair. The problem I see is that often that's not the case. If you are in sales and you are not meeting your quota then you should not be compensated for not meeting your quota. Its kind of basic.