It probably will bankrupt him. But only because he built his business on the basis of exploiting employees. He won't make money if he doesn't do that. Which of course means he shouldn't be in business.
He is only CEO. Ford going to zero will only sting, it cannot bankrupt him.
Your point remains.
Looks like we found one job that should be automated by AI to save Ford 21 million dollars a year.
Total revolution needed. Workers that do the real thing barely can feed their mouth, while those useless management ceo got huge cut
I thought he looked a lot like Chris Farley!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Farley_(businessman)#:~:text=He%20graduated%20from%20Georgetown%20University,and%20AHL%20player%20Tripp%20Tracy.
https://www.zenger.news/2023/01/09/god-we-were-lucky-ford-ceo-shares-family-tidbit-about-chris-farley-and-tommy-boy/
Tommy Boy is literally based on this loser fucking prick.
I wonder if there was family drama when Tommy Boy came out:
"You can't make a movie where the bad guy is an evil capitalist who doesn't care about the auto-workers. That's a direct attack on your cousin!"
Is this Guy related to Chris Farley? I definitely see some resemblance.
Why are these posts specifically aimed at car company CEOs?
Are they begging for money in Congress again ?
Is this an anticar thing ?
Are they in union négociations ?
I'd guess it's because of the automotive union strikes that are going on in the US right now?
Ford has 186,000 employees. His entire salary, divided amongst every employee, would be $112.90.
He's certainly overpaid - like pretty much all CEOs - but this is a bad example.
Its called juxtaposition my guy, Ford also spent almost half billion on stock buybacks last year which could have been used to give every Ford Employee a $2500 bonus to share their profits, but instead they used it to buy back stocks...
And buying back the stock has the effect of making the stock price go up. And guess who gets the most stock? The CEO and C suite. They give themselves huge raises by doing this and it's perfectly legal :(
Well see that's a good example. Ford is a profitable business, and should be paying their employees. All I'm pointing out is that the CEO's salary - in the specific example of this business - does not represent a significant proportion of what is being taken from the average employee. That's most likely going to the shareholders.
The CEO's are partially to blame, but more blame lies with the shareholders, and also the legal system that mandates the CEO's act in the interest of the hypothetical worst, most profit-hungry shareholder.
Personally I think there should be a law you can’t borrow to pay dividends. They must come from cash
Fucking absolutely. But that's a drop in the bucket of financial fuckery that goes on, which is a very big elephant in the room.
I mean I personally think income should be tax free up to a relatively high amount. Like 6 figures, minimum. You're giving up your time, in service of a business which itself is in service of society, you shouldn't have to subtract from your reward for that to give more. The business' taxes should be covering that.
We should be heavily taxing investments, the times when people don't actually do anything themselves but pay for things to be done, with the plan of getting money back and giving as little to those that actually did the work as possible. The business owner gives the minimum to their employees and takes all the excess for themselves.
What's needed is a sliding tax scale where employers benefit from giving out higher mean salaries, not median, such that employees and employers both together benefit from the success of the business. If you pay your employees better, up to or maybe a little above the average income, your business gets taxed less. That's the sort of government incentive we should be having.
Did the post day to divide his salary to everyone or did it laugh at the thought of a living wage bankrupting his company?
No the post compared his salary to the employees earning $66,000 or above. I'm not sure what the median income is at Ford, but I'd guess it's less than that - so really the post is only in support of less than half of the company's workforce.
Yes, the post did just that...
...while laughing at the thought that raising the lower paid people's salary will bankrupt his company.
Your attempt to spin the memes meaning around is an amount of reaching that I'd recommend stretching for next time
Your attempt to spin my comment into a scarecrow you can argue against is the real stretch here.
I'm not saying it isn't ridiculous that giving a raise to employees of a profitable business would bankrupt the company. I'm saying it's a bad example for the meme to bring up the CEO's salary, rather than the profit of the company. The CEO's salary is peanuts divided amongst every employee, meanwhile the company profits and shareholder dividends represent much more of the wealth that the employees have generated without being compensated for.
The CEO's salary is peanuts divided amongst every employee, meanwhile the company profits and shareholder dividends represent much more of the wealth that the employees have generated without being compensated for.
True. The big shareholders are definitely a problem. I wonder who Ford's largest individual shareholders are.
James D. Farley, Jr. owns a total of 1,103,833 Ford shares.
What’s a perfect day for you? Waiting in line for your government cheese?
