Consumers, Employees and Investors are annoying but CEOs get pay rises!

This morning, I had a lovely time to watch Television with strong black coffee and bread and butter. I was updating global news on BBC Breakfast. Hobby is making me crazy. For a conversation Professor Andre Spicer was presented on the screen. Spicer was talking about corporate behaviour. In the answer of a question he was explaining very interestingly that ‘there are annoying consumers, employees and investors but CEOs are being paid lot of money. It was easy to understand what actually he was intending to say that- because of austerity, expensive commodities and too much competition consumers are disappointed. Academia work for pittance for the benefit of corporate house and majority of the workers are being paid even below the subsistence level. Investors are not happy as their investment is at risk because of prolonged financial crisis. CEOs are doing nothing to avert such problems but enjoying with pay rise.

My question here is who let the CEOs to earn more money? Who let them to exploit consumers, employees and investors? My answer obviously is- the state, who let the CEOs to do so.

I was suddenly dragged to think about some sayings of Professor Joseph Stiglitz, Professor Thomas Piketty and Professor Robert Shiller and so on. Here, by the way, I better quoting sentences from the book Capital in the Twenty First Century by Professor Thomas Piketty- ‘‘Capital in the Twenty-First Century is all about income inequality over several hundred years. Super-managers do not produce wealth but get highest income. Super managers, wolf of Wall Street, footballers and billionaires who are competing, ill competition or conflict, to increase their income from property and assets whereas majority of the people are looser. This is the meritocratic extremism. The super-rich do not produce the wealth but get highest salary from it. This is an absolute form of theft.’’

My question here is who let the CEOs to earn more money? Who let them to exploit consumers, employees and investors? My answer obviously is, the state, who let the CEOs to do so. Because CEOs may be right as they have been provided the rules that ‘CEOs or BODs can take a decision’ without any threshold or limitation to get pay rise. By following such state provided rules super-managers have taken decisions.

State can solve the problems but first, state must be ready to change its behaviour in line with the interest of majority. Without an imagination of new state the old structure and system will be continued. People must be victimised.

So, I think, this is state created problem. Let’s take another example. A talented poor student is not allowed to go to the University because of rising tuition fee every year. If he drags the issue to the court, probably court will find it very legal because fee is being raised by following the rules approved by the state mechanism. Justice is denied by design. Whatever the problems are seen around they all are state created. State can solve the problems but first, state must be ready to change its behaviour. Without an imagination of new state the old structure and system will be continued. People must be victimised.

In the meantime my lovely black coffee was finished and caffeine energised me to think about pros and cons of the current politiconomics (politics and economics) in the twenty first century. Can we ask the state not to let the super-managers free?

Enjoy with the gorgeous sunny Sunday.