http://money.cnn.com/2015/07/23/news/dun...=obnetwork

Quote:Dunkin' CEO: $15 minimum wage is 'outrageous'

Ah, you may ask....but what does he make?

Quote:
Nigel Travis
Executive Compensation
As Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at DUNKIN' BRANDS GROUP INC, Nigel Travis made $10,204,803 in total compensation. Of this total $990,385 was received as a salary, $555,682 was received as a bonus, $2,945,316 was received in stock options, $5,691,420 was awarded as stock and $22,000 came from other types of compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for the 2014 fiscal year.

Assuming a standard 40 hour work week poor suffering Nigel makes $4,906.15 per hour.

Just another corporate pig.

You gotta love democracy!

I wouldn't know.  What we have is an oligarchy of rich cocksuckers.

Quote:Fast food workers making about $12 per hour sounds more reasonable to Travis. He said that would be the living wage for a worker with family at home.

Even though the next paragraph puts the NY living wage at $12.75, someone should ask this asshole that if he believes in a living wage why his employees aren't earning even the $12/hour.

Quote:Travis said the decision to raise wages in New York is premature. "A debate needs to take place about how to tackle income inequality," he said.

What's to debate? Pay your fucking employees more. Jackass.

(July 25, 2015 at 8:50 pm)Cato Wrote:

Quote:Fast food workers making about $12 per hour sounds more reasonable to Travis. He said that would be the living wage for a worker with family at home.

Even though the next paragraph puts the NY living wage at $12.75, someone should ask this asshole that if he believes in a living wage why his employees aren't earning even the $12/hour.

Quote:Travis said the decision to raise wages in New York is premature. "A debate needs to take place about how to tackle income inequality," he said.

What's to debate? Pay your fucking employees more. Jackass.

Wouldn't paying everyone too much be a problem too? You can't just start paying everyone what CEOs make, right? Money would lose it's value and we'd be back where we started.

How much people get payed is not really the problem, I think - it's the means to live that need get more uniformly distributed and made available. 

What I'm basically saying is how current societies and economies work is the problem, really. We should work for other reasons than making a living. It's only when this initial problem goes away that we are able to truly work, efficiently, creatively and so on.
The state should provide us with sufficient resources to lead a normal life and we should strive to make it even better or work for the community at large on our own, unincentivized by a need to feed our own families and provide them with comfort and shelter.

(July 25, 2015 at 9:01 pm)excitedpenguin Wrote: Wouldn't paying everyone too much be a problem too? You can't just start paying everyone what CEOs make, right? Money would lose it's value and we'd be back where we started.

You'll have to explain when saying paying workers a living wage meant the same as paying everyone CEO salary.

(July 25, 2015 at 9:01 pm)excitedpenguin Wrote: How much people get payed is not really the problem, I think - it's the means to live that need get more uniformly distributed and made available. 

Last I checked, money was the means to live.

(July 25, 2015 at 9:01 pm)excitedpenguin Wrote: What I'm basically saying is how current economies work is the problem, really. We should work for other reasons than making a living. It's only when this initial problem goes away that we are able to truly work, efficiently, creatively and so on.
The state should provide us with sufficient resources to lead a normal life and we should strive to make it even better or work for the community at large on our own, unincentivized by a need to feed your own family and provide them with comfort and shelter.

I like the sentiment, I do; however, I encourage you to think this through a little more.

As far as working for reasons besides money, do you think people will voluntarily clean septic tanks for the enjoyment? There are all sorts of other shitty jobs this applies to.

The state produces nothing; therefore, it cannot provide. The state can reallocate; however, this requires a mode of production to tax to begin with. That said, what you may be after is more responsible legislation where the common good is given a higher priority. Gets messy, but it is achievable.

Also, do try to remember that when this scumbag pays his workers coolie wages they qualify for various forms of welfare which means we are subsidizing this bastard.

(July 25, 2015 at 9:01 pm)excitedpenguin Wrote:

(July 25, 2015 at 8:50 pm)Cato Wrote: Even though the next paragraph puts the NY living wage at $12.75, someone should ask this asshole that if he believes in a living wage why his employees aren't earning even the $12/hour.


What's to debate? Pay your fucking employees more. Jackass.

Wouldn't paying everyone too much be a problem too? You can't just start paying everyone what CEOs make, right? Money would lose it's value and we'd be back where we started.

How much people get payed is not really the problem, I think - it's the means to live that need get more uniformly distributed and made available. 

What I'm basically saying is how current societies and economies work is the problem, really. We should work for other reasons than making a living. It's only when this initial problem goes away that we are able to truly work, efficiently, creatively and so on.
The state should provide us with sufficient resources to lead a normal life and we should strive to make it even better or work for the community at large on our own, unincentivized by a need to feed our own families and provide them with comfort and shelter.

It's not about paying everyone 10 million dollars a year, it's about people working for the same company being paid proportionately. Its ridiculous for an executive to make 10 million a year and then call $15 "outrageous" for employees working at the same company. I mean what would be so wrong with employees making $25 dollars an hour and the CEO making 5 million a year?

It stuns me that a man with an income of just over 10 million dollars per years doesn't see the irony in asking for 'a debate about how to tackle income inequality'.

Maybe if he purchased one less Scrotal AutoPolisher per year, he might see his way clear to paying his employees a living wage.

Boru

(July 25, 2015 at 9:01 pm)excitedpenguin Wrote: Wouldn't paying everyone too much be a problem too? You can't just start paying everyone what CEOs make, right? Money would lose it's value and we'd be back where we started.

How much people get payed is not really the problem, I think - it's the means to live that need get more uniformly distributed and made available. ..

No, taking salaries from one rich man to give to 2000 poor men does not add add to the pool of currency and thus does not create inflation. Instead of cash being held in long term security cycles it gets put in the fast flow currency cycles that improves the poor and middle class more.

Sadly, the $10,204,803 dollars in CEO compensation is probably not even his only cash cow. Many if not most CEO's also sit on other company boards due to their investments and they receive salaries from them as well, BIG Salaries!

I think there needs to be a law that states that no one can sit on more than one corporate board. You'd be amazed at the influx of cash to the people as the next tier gets pushed up.