Question

3.1

For this discussion forum, begin by reading the following statement and decide whether you agree or disagree with the statement:

“The government should set a maximum on the amount of money that company presidents can earn.”

In a post of several paragraphs, discuss the reasons why you agree or disagree with the above statement. What evidence from the lesson or outside research can you find that supports your stand? How can you connect your argument with the terms and ideas we have studied in this lesson?  Include in your post evidence for your stand, especially related to the effects of such an earnings cap for company presidents on other groups such as consumers, producers, workers, savers, and investors. Remember: there are often additional consequences with price controls.

Answer 1

It is fairly agreeable to keep an upper cap on President's annual salary which is in line eith industry standards and commensurately given as per performance observed.

It is so because that having complete fixed salary or keeping extremely high salary as compared to median salary is unreasonable as seen in case of Infosys CEO Vishal Sikka who failed to bring changes even due to excessive high payouts and benefits. Unfortunately company lost against its peers and resulted in stock price crash.

Secondly earnings cap help increase average cost of employee and without need for considering mass layoff . Also performance of All executive is pegged to performance which means better productivity and better results which is plus for investors, customer and producers.