View Single Post
Old 12-04-2013, 05:37 PM  
mineistaken
See signature :)
 
mineistaken's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: ICQ 363 097 773
Posts: 29,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltav View Post
That's not the point the OP is making. Read the article.

The CEO makes nearly $100 million, but because of the performance-incentive pay structure the company is able to *deduct* this amount from their taxes. So they basically hit society with a double whammy - firstly not paying their workers a living wage and forcing them to rely on welfare/assistance programs paid for by everyone else, and secondly - writing off the ungodly salary give to their single CEO via loophole, avoiding paying tax back into society.

CEO pay is so ridiculously obscenely fucked up, and minimum wage is not a living wage yet is often the only option for unskilled workers. Not sure how anyone could argue both those points.
So what?

2 situations:
those 400k employees work for Yum!
those 400k people are jobless

Which is better for the country/state(s)?

Also how much taxes are paid on those salaries? I am not familiar with US taxing system, but I am pretty sure every paycheck has one or couple lines which says taxes. Are these calculated in the OP?
mineistaken is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote