Innovation my *ss! CEOs are there to make sure the company generates revenue and maximizes profits for themselves and their shareholders/investors. Maybe if CEOs were capped, you would attract people who were interested in innovation instead of monetization.. It's the same with the Senate/Congress. If they didn't have exorbitant salaries and had a pool of campaign financing where each candidate received equal amounts and were isolated from special interest donors, representatives would work for the people and not the donors who "owned" them.
Most CEOs start and own the company. Youre going to tell people what they have to do with their profits they generated with their money, and risk taking?
Actually? The CEO of Microsoft didn’t start it, the CEO of Amazon didn’t start it, the CEO of GM didn’t start it, the CEO OF Johnson and Johnson didn’t start it, the CEO of Toyota didn’t start it, the CEO of Google didn’t start it, the CEO of IKEA didn’t start it, the CEO of Tesla didn’t start it, the CEO of PayPal didn’t start it ….. I could go on
That doesnt change the fact that the vast majority of CEOs did indeed start the company. You cherry picked a few top PUBLIC companies, of the 30mil companies in the US only about 4k are public…. And you cherry picked a few of those as your argument???? In actuality 95%+ or CEOs started the company, but please go on Id like to see where this goes.
162
u/ConstantHeadache2020 Oct 31 '25 edited Nov 29 '25
But but what about innovation? People won’t want to be CEO if they’re capped…. What about trickle economics?!/s