r/technology • u/geoxol • Jan 13 '23 • Bravo! 1 Helpful (Pro) 1

Apple CEO Tim Cook to take more than 40% pay cut Business

https://apnews.com/article/technology-apple-inc-tim-cook-business-d056553b10120c4a968b562cb7ece5d2
39.1k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

3.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

3.4k

u/royhaven Jan 13 '23 • Gold Take My Energy Eureka!

You really can't make people happy on reddit.

Company has a RIF and reddit's reaction is "shouldn't the CEO look at cutting his own salary?"

CEO cuts his own salary and reddit's reaction is "He's still getting paid too much".

This article wasn't aimed at making you feel sorry for Tim Cook. It was simply pointing out what happened.

1.2k

u/SarkHD Jan 13 '23 • Gold

Those things can both be true in the same time though.

Yes he cut his own salary, and yes he is still making more than anyone would ever need. It makes 0 difference for him financially, yet the $40 million he cut from his compensation package would be a life changing amount if broken up between 100 or hell even 1000 people.

35

u/kent_eh Jan 13 '23

yet the $40 million he cut from his compensation package would be a life changing amount if broken up between 100 or hell even 1000 people.

How much of a difference will it make to the income of the shareholders who voted for it?

29

u/charklaser Jan 13 '23

The value is 0.25 cents per share.

1

u/vaxul Jan 13 '23

And a bad leader can destroy atleast 50% of the stock price in seconds. I hate Tim Cook though. That formula 1 flag waving was horrendous.

→ More replies (1)

408

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Yes, but whining in response to this news pretty clearly shows that one's motivations are not genuine.

That is, it shows that they're just upset that other people are rich.

194

u/ThrowawayusGenerica Jan 13 '23

It's almost like being against the existence of obscene wealth is an ideological position some people have.

28

u/nau5 Jan 13 '23

Some of us learned in school about serfdom and thought about how awful it was.

Some kids learned that the few got to be super wealthy and do what they want and thought how great that was.

3

u/tomj_ Jan 14 '23

It's a perfectly reasonable position. There is only a finite amount of money/wealth in the world, and every extra dollar that goes to some billionaire who already has everything is a dollar that cant be spent on public transport, welfare programs like medicare and social security, or tackling climate change.

-2

u/Aururian Jan 14 '23

it’s a wrong position. reddit likes to be idealist but the reality is most people wouldn’t share their wealth gained over generations of hard work with a random person. is it morally wrong? maybe. the reality is that most people stockpile wealth for themselves and their future offsprings. is that wrong? i don’t think so. personally i make a 6 figure salary and i’m sure as fuck not going to vote for policies that reduce the money i have (my parents were literally dirt poor) just so that a few random people that i don’t know would live a marginally better life

2

u/smoothsensation Jan 14 '23

There’s a difference between changing policy around someone with a 6 figure salary and changing it for the ones with 7,8,9 figure salaries/comp. The latter is what I see most people on Reddit arguing for.

→ More replies (13)

-39

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

There's people in this world with no shoes that probably can't understand why you'd have more than 1 pair of shoes since you only have 2 feet. To most of us that's just something we do. Wealth is relative.

37

u/Thiserthat Jan 13 '23

This is the stupid “don’t complain there’s children starving in Africa”

It helps no one and changes nothing.

→ More replies (6)

8

u/Comrade_9653 Jan 13 '23

The gap between me and the guy with no shoes is smaller than the gap between me and Tim Apple. These people have the wealth and influence that is unparalleled and they deserve every ounce of hate they get from the masses imo.

4

u/LarxII Jan 13 '23

How many shoes could Tim Cook's wages buy? Better yet, how many shoes could Tim Cook buy and it not effect his Quality of life? The point is, there is only so much many a person can spend and quite a few of the world's wealthiest could spend $100k a day and still have obscene wealth. The jealousy narrative is non-productive to the actual point. No one individual needs Billions of dollars. It's actually extremely unhealthy for a democratic and capitalist society.

2

u/JagerBaBomb Jan 13 '23

Wealthy individuals are harmful to society in much the same way business monopolies are:

They become powerful enough to rig the system in their favor.

That's always the problem.

2

u/LarxII Jan 13 '23

Exactly, not even considering that taking large amounts of resources outside of the market in a capital driven system leads to a break down of the system.

2

u/tbh1313 Jan 13 '23

Ok that makes it worse though? You see how that makes it worse, though, right?

2

u/Shifter25 Jan 13 '23

Most people are closer in wealth to the people with no shoes than we are to the people with multiple yachts.

that probably can't understand why you'd have more than 1 pair of shoes since you only have 2 feet.

Pretty sure even the poorest people aren't that stupid.

→ More replies (4)

66

u/thesephantomhands Jan 13 '23

When economic inequality is rampant and people are struggling to put food on the table, we can't confidently say it's a matter of jealousy or anger at individuals. A lot of anger at the ridiculously wealthy, especially from corporations who aren't paying taxes and hoarding their money - is about how these people are emblematic of this inequality and the fundamental injustice of some people flying private jets while others who work hard are having to decide between food and medicine. Until we get the inequality bit sorted to the point of allowing for a basic level of wellbeing, it's hard to disambiguate the how people direct their anger.

-16

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

7

u/EthnicHorrorStomp Jan 13 '23

Thanks for this knowledge bomb that people are not homogeneous.

9

u/maxbemisisgod Jan 13 '23

Lmfaoo the boot polish is getting to their heads holy shit

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (14)

38

u/benderunit9000 Jan 13 '23

That is, it shows that they're just upset that other people are rich.

Nothing wrong with that. Something fundamentally wrong about hoarding that kind of wealth.

-8

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

There's nothing wrong in being upset that other people are rich, no.

There is something wrong with spamming your infantile emotional outbursts on social media though.

I disagree. What's wrong is parasitism and the organizing of society in a way that enriches a few by depriving many of a basic quality of life.

20

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

There is something wrong with spamming your infantile emotional outbursts on social media though.

Oh damn then I guess you had better stop throwing a tantrum on Reddit because someone doesn't like billionaires

→ More replies (2)

104

u/SuperMack99 Jan 13 '23

You decided it's whining and you deciding that means it's not genuine but that doesn't make it reality. You're projecting your interpretation of other people's words onto them and calling them whiners for your projection.

-19

u/ctoan8 Jan 13 '23

Oh come on he's absolutely right. At least for the majority of redditors whose main concept of economics is "Eat the rich. Seize the land. We all can get rich" completely oblivious to the fact that by global standard, all of you redditors ARE the rich and need to be killed.

7

u/DemSocCorvid Jan 13 '23

We all can get rich

No, but we could have no one living in abject poverty if the rich were less rich. Not everyone can be rich, however we can eliminate poverty by limiting obscene wealth disparity.

5

u/PlantApe22 Jan 13 '23

We actually all can be rich. We could've easily formed a utopia arguably multiple generations ago.

Homies we've been automating shit for well over 100 years for greedy businessmen. That's just full automation, we had other forms before that too.

This shit's so sad.

As others have said too, this is ideological not jealousy. Statistically I make more money than almost every single person reading this, if you adjust for demographics it's like 90% beaten by celebrity accounts and surgeons. Money stops making you happy a lot earlier than most of you believe... if you're a good person.

This is all morality and you can't argue morals with those who enjoy other's suffering.

2

u/DemSocCorvid Jan 13 '23

This is all morality and you can't argue morals with those who enjoy other's suffering

Or those who only care about themselves. Morality only matters to those with a sense of empathy.

→ More replies (4)

-13

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

That's some pretty whiny whining you're doing to justify whining.

→ More replies (1)

321

u/cayneabel Jan 13 '23

they're just upset that other people are rich.

Reddit in a nutshell.

165

u/artificiallight4464 Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

Most definitely.

A person posted a picture of a 15-20 year old kitchen they remodeled and one of the top comments was something like “uggghh, I wish I was rich enough to remodel a completely good kitchen”.

The people renovating it basically put in energy efficient appliances, new countertops, and painted the existing cabinets. They were proud as first time home owners and it wasn’t a fancy, gourmet kitchen at all, but people just wanted to shit on others happiness.

The social media jealousy/misery feedback loops just keep getting worse.

5

u/237FIF Jan 13 '23

The happy people are just logging off lol

I don’t know which begets the other, but doing less on my phone has been a good thing

4

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

The worst I ever seen was years ago. Somebody posts a picture of the Grand Canyon in the morning from the back of their old suv after car camping. The entire thread was bitching about this guy being rich because he could go on vacation. He car camped in a parking lot in a old suv and that was to rich for Reddit because he could afford a few days off work.

Unless you have 3 jobs, live paycheque to paycheque, and only eat Mac and cheese then you’re rich and deserve none of your money. Reddit for some reason thinks everybody needs to struggle and if you don’t it’s like you’re going against some narrative that everything has to be horrible and terrible because honestly that’s the excuse they tell themselves to explain their shitty situation.

56

u/notapersonaltrainer Jan 13 '23

Most of these American Redditors' salaries would be a life changing amount if broken up between 100 or hell even 1000 people around the world.

15

u/Transapien Jan 13 '23

True but the cost of living difference means you would have to live in those countries with your American salary to make that a functional reality.

→ More replies (1)

36

u/sagenumen Jan 13 '23

"No one can have nice things because wealth inequality exists around the world"

10

u/PetsArentChildren Jan 13 '23

Now we’ve come full circle. We’re back around to defending Tim Cook.

2

u/Pooh_Youu Jan 14 '23

How did you get from A to B in that one? That quote was saying the total opposite of what you inferred.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/sagenumen Jan 14 '23

What a shallow take on that.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

I mean that’s kind of the point they’re getting at. Somebody can’t have a nice kitchen because some random Redditor has no motivation to get a job beyond Applebees so no one else is allowed to have more money than him.

→ More replies (1)

-5

u/benderunit9000 Jan 13 '23

nice things

This is subjective.

7

u/sagenumen Jan 13 '23

So, someone improving their living space isn't "nice things?"

→ More replies (3)

2

u/artificiallight4464 Jan 13 '23

The person renovating that kitchen was absolutely not rich. This was someone’s first home and they spent money to make it better and more energy efficient. I don’t see the need to talk about splitting up a middle class income.

4

u/DenFranskeNomader Jan 13 '23

Ah yes, the "let's pretend that, because 15k a year is luxury overseas, the literally homeless Americans making that in the USA should be grateful" argument.

0

u/Sasselhoff Jan 13 '23

If you make more than $35,000 USD a year, you are the 1% (of the world).

1

u/DenFranskeNomader Jan 13 '23

Sure, but that's a pointless thing to mention. What matters is disposable income after expenses.

If the exact same apartment rents for 2k more in one country than another, then someone in the "richer" country can make literally 23k more than someone in the "poorer" country, but be objectively worse off.

A subsistence farmer in a country with universal healthcare doesn't have the same expenses as a homeless American with a medical problem. You're basically abusing the flaw of GDP (which is that only market transactions count as valuable) to pretend that a homeless starving man is richer than someone who owns their own land, does their own farming, and has their partner do unpaid domestic labor.

2

u/Sasselhoff Jan 13 '23

someone who owns their own land, does their own farming, and has their partner do unpaid domestic labor.

I lived in rual China for almost a decade...you have NO IDEA how poor so many people are. Just FYI, this turned into a novel of a reply, with no TL;DR, but if you are interested (you seem to be), I think it would be worth reading.

30 million people in the province I lived in were living in caves (caves with a front door, and often electricity, but still straight up just caves). The minimum wage when I was there was 1150rmb a month, it has since (a few years later) gone up to a "staggering" 1750 rmb...or, $250 USD a month. My partner has family that work for their village cleaning up trash...they get paid like 500rmb a month, which is somehow permitted because it's a "village thing". It was better for white collar office workers, but the ones that worked at the gas company I was a part of made about 5000 rmb/$714 USD a month, which isn't much to shake a stick at when you are spending $200,000 USD for your house.

I looked at buying a cheaper home when I was there (once they allowed laowai to own them), and it was a shitty two bedroom tiny apartment, in a shitty old neighborhood...it was just shy of $200,000 USD. Tell me how you can buy that (or a car, my partner bought a several year used cheap VW and it was $9000 USD) when you make $250 A MONTH. Even the cheaper stuff adds up when you're only making that little money...case in point, my internet and cable was only $15 a month, and my cell phone bill was $9 a month; but that's almost 10% of a minimum wage salary.

Also, there's no "universal healthcare" to be seen...they don't even have the US system where they help you first, then you pay (if you can, which often isn't possible given the insane US healthcare prices). If you can't pay in advance or have a way to show you can pay later they will straight up let you die on the sidewalk. I knew of a laowai where the doctor not only stopped working on him when he found out dude couldn't pay, he pulled out the stitches he'd already completed.

A few years ago I was told that "the average person in the world" is a Chinese man in his 20s with a cellphone and no bank account...I would not be surprised if that is still the case. I would see farmers working their little tiny plot of land (and I do mean tiny little plot) for the meager grains it's going to give them, that they then dry in the middle of the road (often in the curve...fun stuff on a motorcycle, lemmie tell ya). They'd be using a donkey for transportation, and had super rough clothes, no indoor plumbing that can handle "Number 2" (you have to go to a communal toilet, I found this out right before signing a lease once)...but they'd have a smart phone...it was one of the more bizarre things I saw there.

So while yes, there is some accuracy to what you were saying (just like there is accuracy to pointing out that the global 1% wage is $35k a year), but the situation is more in depth than you may be aware.

1

u/DenFranskeNomader Jan 13 '23

Funnily our background isn't too dissimilar. I've also spent time in China as well.

Subsistence poverty is an incredibly different kind of poverty, one that basic financial figures like GDP are notoriously terrible at tracking. To be clear, under no circumstances is 1150 RMB a month, rich. However, that 1150 RMB doesn't cover food nor shelter, as both are generated outside of GDP metrics. Or in other words, it's basically dishonest to claim that 1150 RMB is all that they're living on because it just isn't true. They're living off of 1150 RMBI and however much food they can grow, all while not paying for housing. To compare, a homeless person in Shanghai making double that would not have food or shelter.

However, there is an important caveat that you brought up and that I want to acknowledge. What I'm saying is only true for the subsistence farmers who actually own their farm and land. The people in these towns who need to survive without a subsistence farm are impoverished on a truly unique scale. Funnily, I had the same experience as you with looking at homes too. Also yeah, with the healthcare stuff I wasn't trying to imply that all 3rd world countries had UHC. I was more saying that a homeless minimum wage worker in the USA could have a far worse living standard than a subsistence farmer in a country that did have universal healthcare.

I also want to point out the nuance of how radically different the poverty is between western low-wage workers and third-world subsistence farmers. There is far more stability for a subsistence farmer who knows that, no matter what, they'll survive the year and will always have a roof over their head, and is surrounded by a community that is set up for this kind of living, than in a low-wage homeless person who's very existence is criminalized, who needs to pay for all food without even a kitchen, and who will certainly be high risk for eviction. However, there is a certain helplessness for subsistence farmers. There are no jobs, no chance for growth, no access to high quality infrastructure, education, healthcare, etc.

Tl;Dr

We need to actually compare metrics like life expectancy, access to education and healthcare, caloric intake, etc. Trying to call a homeless person working at McDonald's in a first world country richer than someone who doesn't pay for rent or food is basically a trick of the numbers, abusing the flaws of GDP.

→ More replies (0)
→ More replies (1)

15

u/bicameral_mind Jan 13 '23

Gotta remember large numbers of people on Reddit are broke 20 year olds who smoke too much weed and have no goals, spending their time doom scrolling all day and imagine they will never be able to earn any money. Many of them will find in a few years that yes, they can in fact earn money.

7

u/cayneabel Jan 13 '23

Many of them will find in a few years that yes, they can in fact earn money.

And all their "fuck the rich" shit goes right out the window.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Jabrono Jan 13 '23

But you'll be king-shit after posting a $20k PC setup

9

u/lemoncocoapuff Jan 13 '23

Not always, this Xmas someone posted a pic of their family together all gaming together and the comments were really upset. Things like how dare you post this when others have nothing this holiday, show off, must be nice asshole, etc etc. lots of people crying in the comments about how they could only afford a computer from the 90s and this was an affront to themselves personally lol.

6

u/maximumutility Jan 13 '23

Crabs in a bucket

1

u/SmokelessSubpoena Jan 13 '23

And mainstream media will continue profiting off this business loop, it's why it exists.

Love, wealth and tragedy sell.

IRL issues do not.

1

u/sagenumen Jan 13 '23

Is that the media's fault or the consumers'?

2

u/SmokelessSubpoena Jan 13 '23

Depends on how you view it.

One can argue the media perpetuates and re-establishes this behavior, for viewers, consistently and repetitively.

One could also argue, it's the onerous of the viewer to understand ignorance from fact or fiction.

Considering it's easier to bulk change everyone's understanding, via changing media norms, vs having to educate every, single, user to know how to decipher bullshit, I'd argue the onerous is on the media.

One could ask, rhetorically then, who's at fault? The heroin user, or the heroin dealer? Or how about the heroin manufacturers?

Key point, it depends on the viewers opinion, there isn't a 100% set answer to your point, as responsibility lies in the palms of all parties involved (media, producers and viewers).

Personally, I believe the majority of the responsibility falls on the production companies and media companies, not the consumers.

But that also depends on your beliefs and whether you agree or not.

0

u/sagenumen Jan 13 '23

onerous

I think you mean 'onus'

One could ask, rhetorically then, who's at fault? The heroin user, or the heroin dealer? Or how about the heroin manufacturers?

As someone intimately familiar with this subject, it's on the user, not the supplier.

→ More replies (8)

30

u/TLettuce Jan 13 '23

So we're just gonna pretend income inequality isn't a problem? Richest country in the world and how much homelessness? How much poverty? While the top 1% makes 84 times as much as the bottom 20%?

We can do SO much better.

I have the worlds tiniest violin for the rich that get their feelings hurt reading comments on reddit...

0

u/astrange Jan 13 '23

Homelessness in California is caused by local governments not letting anyone build enough homes. It literally wouldn't be solved by giving people more money, because they'd just bid up the existing supply of not enough homes.

(You can see this because homelessness patterns in the US are explained by local home prices, not by poverty levels or how many drugs everyone is on. West Virginia doesn't have the homelessness problem, SF does.)

The state government has been doing pretty successful programs like HomeKey though.

2

u/TLettuce Jan 13 '23

I think the argument that homelessness as a whole is solely caused by zoning problems and nothing else is not a very compelling one.

I don't think you can look at the growing homelessness all over the country with rocketing home and rent prices with inflation and cost of living as the cherry on top and just ignore all that. Not to mention a broad and total lack of any type of a definitive mental health care system.

I think there is actually no place where income inequality is fully on display more than in a wealthy city.

The life experiences of someone who is poor in the city barely making ends meet and someone who is wealthy living in a suburb or gated community are absolutely night and day. They might as well be in different countries when you look at how sections of cities are maintained and how rules are enforced. And this is not a new phenomenon at all. In my experience personally (in Portland) these homeless camps often get pushed into the poorest neighborhoods where we've seen an explosion in crime with absolutely no enforcement in those communities meanwhile in expensive communities the sidewalks are pristine there is very little crime and these areas are very well represented politically.

In my experience also you don't see these issues in more rural areas where there is also less wealth just like you say. There is not the kind of gentrification and income segregation happening that you see in cities either.

If you look to other parts of the world you will see less homelessness for a variety of reasons but to me fundamentally it starts with prioritizing those things with government. But like I say who is being represented politically? It's not the homeless... and it's not the poor. So who's will is being served?

And you say you can't throw money at the problem and have it go away, sure of course... but you also can't tackle these problems without spending a good deal of money either.

There has to be money allocated if we want to make sure people who are unable to take care of themselves get the basic decency of having things like a roof over their head, food on their table, basic health and mental healthcare. Yet with SO much money available... with MORE wealth than anyone we as a nation never seem to be able to justify the spending to tackle these issues even though many countries with LESS money can.

So I think to me it is just simple logic to understand that can we afford to do these thing? Objectively yes. So why don't we?

1

u/astrange Jan 14 '23

Is there rocketing homelessness all over the country? It's mainly an issue in cities. (Though, most homeless people aren't on the streets either, they may live in a car or RV or simply a series of informal sleeping on sofas arrangements.)

But like I say who is being represented politically? It's not the homeless... and it's not the poor. So whose will is being served?

The average voter, who is a retired white homeowner with a lot of free time to complain when they see an apartment or poor person near them.

So I think to me it is just simple logic to understand that can we afford to do these thing? Objectively yes. So why don't we?

No, that totally fits with it being zoning. If there's a limited amount of houses you cannot fix it even with an infinite amount of spending.

Californian cities are willing to allocate any amount of money to solving the problem though, as long as nobody actually does the thing that will solve the problem (building apartments). So it either doesn't actually get spent, or else an infinite amount of money goes to landowners in the few neighborhoods you're allowed to build apartments in.

Portland has been doing some zoning improvements here, but there's lots of well meaning things like increasing IZ, which theoretically means more affordable housing except if you set it to high nobody can build anything.

And of course, they could do a good public housing agency… nobody is really serious about this unless they know what the Faircloth Amendment is and are trying to get it repealed. (Or Article 50 in California.)

-21

u/cayneabel Jan 13 '23 • Gold

So we're just gonna pretend income inequality isn't a problem? Richest country in the world and how much homelessness? How much poverty? While the top 1% makes 84 times as much as the bottom 20%?

We can do SO much better.

I have the worlds tiniest violin for the rich that get their feelings hurt reading comments on reddit...

  • Typed on my iPhone

7

u/Taistelulaam4 Jan 13 '23

You sure showed them

9

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

[deleted]

-15

u/cayneabel Jan 13 '23

I'm an immigrant that came to this country unable to speak your language... And through hard work and dedication (something that probably terrifies you, I know), I'm a licensed attorney, and now I'm wearing those boots.

So you have a lick, little guy, and tell me how they taste.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '23

So because YOU were able to do it, you’re suggesting everyone else has the same opportunity to be successful?

What about teenagers who grow up in poor violence rich neighborhoods who’s dad teaches them to do illegal activity?

Do those people have the same chance at life as you? What about people who had terrible living situations and had to take care of family responsibilities and go to school too?

I knew a woman in high school who worked 3 jobs. A TEENAGER working 3 jobs because she HAD to. I can guarantee you she didn’t have the same opportunities as you.

People like you suffer from something called survivorship bias. You do realize that if EVERYBODY was as successful as you, there would be nobody working at the bottom right? Who would teach kids? Who would take care of you at the grocery store or airport or literally ANYWHERE you go?

And before you call me lazy - I make $250,000/year working in big tech as engineer.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/WhatsThatNoize Jan 13 '23

You're an entitled piece of shit is what you are.

Everything else is wallpaper.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/TLettuce Jan 13 '23

Even if I owned any Apple products (I don't) it wouldn't make me a hypocrit like you imply for reasons I'm sure would fly right over your thick skull.

-4

u/cayneabel Jan 13 '23

Sure does. Because what people like you fail to understand is that you are someone else's "rich asshole."

2

u/TLettuce Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

Sure does. Because what people like you fail to understand is that you are someone else's "rich asshole."

Lol! You're totally right I shouldn't be calling for less suffering in the richest country in the world when it's so obviously ME that's problem.

Edit: I guess the idea of helping people in need really strikes a nerve with these folks.

→ More replies (3)

0

u/NotaChonberg Jan 13 '23

That IPhone totally wouldn't exist if Tim Cook wasn't making millions a year.

1

u/VaccinatedApe Jan 13 '23

All consumption is inherently immoral. And consumption is an inescapable fact of living in a society. You're stupid if you expect people who point out these systematic problems to simply stop being functioning members of society.

You'd think a self-proclaimed lawyer would be smart enough to understand that, but apparently not.

-1

u/HotTakes4HotCakes Jan 14 '23

Don't bother my man. This sub is infested with /r/neoliberal users.

→ More replies (10)

8

u/Eindacor_DS Jan 13 '23

I don't care if people get rich, I just don't like how society is structured to make very few people rich at the expense of everyone else.

-4

u/cayneabel Jan 13 '23

You're going to have to define "very few" and "rich."

I come from a former communist country where there was lots more "equality" - everyone was equally poor.

I'm happy to live in a country where there's a tiny subcategory of 1% "mega rich" and the next 95% still live like kings, compared to where I come from.

8

u/Eindacor_DS Jan 13 '23

Things aren't fine just because they are worse elsewhere. I'm glad you think what we have here is better than where you're from, but it's still bad for society and bad for humanity.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

3

u/maxdamage4 Jan 13 '23

I'm okay with this one

3

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/tttt11112 Jan 13 '23

Lol not defending Reddit but the idea that everyone who complains about inequality is a lazy bum is weird

3

u/acehuff Jan 13 '23

Like a large majority of people living paycheck to paycheck are incredibly overworked.. but I guess if they don’t want to work multiple jobs anymore they’re considered lazy? Shits weird

1

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Gekokapowco Jan 13 '23

Like growing a conscience apparently

→ More replies (2)

34

u/KingOfRages Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

YES, we are upset that people are so rich that they can be called billionaires. it’s unfair, and our system shouldn’t allow for hoarding that kind of wealth. that’s a perfectly valid opinion, and calling people with that opinion whiners for expressing it just means you like the taste of boot.

/e he got banned(?) lololol

5

u/Lessthanzerofucks Jan 13 '23

Seriously, these folks think “work very hard, make very big money” yet every statistic available shows the exact opposite is true. If you don’t start out with lots of money, you will not end up making lots of money no matter how hard you work. Exceptions to these statistics are extremely rare, but the moneyed class loves to amplify these unicorn stories so that people think everyone has a chance to crawl out of poverty.

4

u/filthyrake Jan 13 '23

not taking sides, but it is worth noting that Tim Cook is one of those unicorn story examples/exceptions lol

2

u/KrauerKing Jan 13 '23

Right so they love to wave it around as an excuse that it's possible.

-1

u/SoretomoOre Jan 13 '23

but why? We should societally provide healthcare, food, shelter, etc such that everyone can have access to a standard healthy, and secure life, but that probably doesn't require that other people not be rich. Is my life really substantially worse because Bezos can afford a bigger house than me?

3

u/NotaChonberg Jan 13 '23

The reason we don't have those things is because of lobbying and propaganda from major corporations and the uber wealthy

1

u/SoretomoOre Jan 13 '23

even if I agreed, that wouldn't really be relevant assuming you live in the U.S., Canada, Europe etc where not-rich people vastly outnumber the rich and can outvote them

→ More replies (5)

9

u/spader1 Jan 13 '23

We already do not provide healthcare, food, shelter, etc such that everyone can have access to a standard healthy, and secure life, and we see all the time that billionaires funding conservative campaigns, PACs, and political groups have a huge hand in that. The problem isn't that these people are wealthy, it's that they're so outrageously wealthy that they actively make life and society worse for everyone else.

3

u/SoretomoOre Jan 13 '23

We already do not provide healthcare, food, shelter, etc such that everyone can have access to a standard healthy, and secure life

...right, which is why should do that and raise taxes proportionately to pay for it. There will likely still be some billionaires at that point, but why would I care if there's enough redistribution for everyone?

2

u/spader1 Jan 13 '23

In a better version of this world, yes, you'd be absolutely right. We absolutely should raise taxes on the wealthy and raise them even more on the very wealthy so that we all can share in the enormous prosperity that their employees have generated but are for some reason not entitled to as much as the very wealthy.

But the very wealthy have used their immense wealth to make actually implementing those policies at the governmental level extremely difficult, which was always going to happen when wealth became so concentrated in so few hands. When people become wealthy they want to keep their wealth. This is fine; it's human nature to be self interested, and I'm not going to say that the wealthy outright don't deserve any of their wealth. But when someone becomes so wealthy that they can actually pull the strings of society to entrench their wealth forever at the expense of everyone else, that's when one's wealth becomes unconscionable.

So yes, I don't disagree that billionaires are a problem if the rest of society doesn't know scarcity, but billionaires have done observable damage to society's ability to be more equitable, and because of that allowing wealth to concentrate like that has been a clear failure that has hurt all of us.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Kylesmomabigfatbtch Jan 13 '23

Maybe not yours, but the lives of every employee whose labor value was leeched off of by what is effectively some guy who has a piece of paper that says he has that right, and unfortunately, in a world where that paper’s declaration would be backed by armed police if threatened.

5

u/SoretomoOre Jan 13 '23

obviously I'm not a leftist so I disagree with that characterization, but in any case that's my point. This is just about vitriol towards rich people, not about helping poor people, since we can already massive raise up poor people with social democrat policies.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

social democrat policies involve taxing billionaires until they're no longer billionaires, genius

7

u/SoretomoOre Jan 13 '23

...no they don't? They involve taxing people such that necessary programs are affordable. It doesn't really matter if some people are still billionaires. The point is helping people, not taxing just for the sake of taxing

-4

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Context: rich guy takes major pay cut of his own volition

You: WAH RICH PEOPLE MAKE ME ANGWY!

Me: stop being an infant

You: WAH YOU SUCKY SUCKY BOOT WAH.

0

u/grchelp2018 Jan 13 '23

There is no hoarding. Its like saying the crypto bros are hoarding. Share value is made up out of thin air and changes like the wind.

-1

u/futurepersonified Jan 13 '23

keep to yourself everyone else is tired of seeing these same salty comments in every thread

-9

u/Jimmy_Fromthepieshop Jan 13 '23

Being this rich is unfair though. Literally unfair.

Nobody, NOBODY can earn $50m a year. You haven't earned it, you've scammed other people - who do work hard - out of their money. All these mega rich these days are just parasites on humanity and parasites on the Earth's resources.

You think they care about you? They don't. They could make countless people millionaires by donating them their spare change. But they don't. They hoard it for themselves.

3

u/EddieSeven Jan 13 '23

That’s not true at all. You, or any single person, doesn’t decide what earning $50M looks like.

People seem to think that ‘earning’ X amount of money has something to do with how much work goes into it, and that’s just simply not what it is. That’s why people get mad that they “work their ass off” for scraps, while others sit around making decisions and speaking publicly for millions.

It’s about what the market perceives as valuable. Tech is more valuable in the current market than other industries. And business perceive their leadership as more valuable than all the foot soldiers combined. A company’s employee workforce is typically the biggest cost a business has, but each individual worker is replaceable. They’re not valuable in the business sense. And no, the fact that these are human beings we’re talking about, isn’t being weighed in. Companies are built to make money, not to take care of people, even if that’s who is generating the income day to day.

Leaning into that perspective, Apple wouldn’t be worth a couple of trillion dollars if competent leadership wasn’t leading it in that direction. Paying millions a year for building a trillion dollar company looks like excellent value from that viewpoint.

You can say that the methods employed to get to billions or trillions are immoral or unethical. And you may even be right. But that’s just not what business looks at. If dude can return billions, he’s seen as worth paying millions. The methods are irrelevant to that.

Conversely, you’re talking about billionaires donating their “spare change” to make others millionaires. How is that earning anything? Why is it their responsibility to donate to humanity?

I certainly wouldn’t mind some handouts — I would like to get some millions myself. I get that it seems unfair that homeboy has billions and I have to struggle and budget. But life itself is not fair. Fair is not something you’re ever going to get. All you can do is play the game as it lays with the hand you are dealt to the best of your ability. And part of that is accepting the unfair truths. Which includes that hard work, in and of itself, has nothing to do with how much money you ‘earn’.

→ More replies (2)

39

u/SOSovereign Jan 13 '23

I think this comment gave me Reddit bingo

8

u/DogAteMyCPU Jan 13 '23

Redditors aren't ready for this conversation. Wait until their lives are more directly impacted by wealth hoarding and capitalist exploitation. As of now it's just an inconvenience while they ignore it with consumerism.

15

u/daiwizzy Jan 13 '23

i mean plenty of people earn $50m a year without scamming other people. musicians, athletes, movie stars, etc. hell, there are people who made that much selling video games that they made.

3

u/specfreq Jan 13 '23

To expand on this: Musicians, athletes, movie stars, game developers and CEOs can create more value, than say a truck driver, because they are in a highly scalable business.

The difference in that truck driver receiving 120k and Tim cook receiving 50m is not because they earned that much it's ultimately the price to replace that worker with another of the same skill set. Floor moppers are a-dime-a-dozen and they work hard but there's only so many educated candidates to run a multi-billion dollar company.

People are right to be angry that some people can disgustingly wealthy while most are in poverty, but it's not Tim Cook's fault. The inequality has always been here, but now it has peaked because the capital scaling has reached a global level.

-6

u/Harborcoat84 Jan 13 '23

Plenty of supporting staff around musicians, athletes, and movie stars who don't see millions in compensation for the work that makes this level of income possible.

4

u/TheyCallMeStone Jan 13 '23

Sorry if this is harsh, but that labor is much more replaceable than the talent of whatever act they're supporting. It's simply not worth as much.

0

u/Harborcoat84 Jan 13 '23

Picture this: it's 10am on Superbowl Sunday, and all stadium employees, broadcast crew, athletic trainers, and so on decide to walk off the job.

Last year's game generated around 15 billion dollars in revenue. How much is their collective labour worth now?

2

u/TheyCallMeStone Jan 13 '23

Let me counter you an alternate won't-ever-happen scenario: all the players do the same thing.

Which one is easier to replace?

0

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

1

u/PopcornBag Jan 13 '23

Yeah, folks aren't really grasping the situation here, especially when they're pointing out folks that require teams of people doing their part to be successful.

And to point out to folks just joining in: you don't need to scam someone to make millions. You can just do good ol' fashioned capitalist exploitation and wage theft (like what literally has to happen to make multi-millions and billions)

3

u/daiwizzy Jan 13 '23

except the guy literally said nobody can make $50m without scamming other people.

tom cruise made $100m for top gun. did he scam the film crew, the editors, other actors, etc? how about the minimum wage movie theater employees that made it possible for top gun to be shown in theaters? no he did not. tom cruise has no control over any of that. if lets say they decided that tom cruise was too expensive and they decided to cut him in favor of getting a cheaper main actor to pay the supporting actors more, would top gun maverick have done so well? no, absolutely not.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/dclarsen Jan 13 '23

People are not paid for how hard they work. They are paid for how valuable they are to their companies. The star athlete has a rare skill set is a valuable asset which brings in revenue - the groundskeepers are less so.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

9

u/Danielsuperusa Jan 13 '23

Nobody, NOBODY can earn $50m a year.

Why not? What does "earning" mean to you?

0

u/BlankkBox Jan 13 '23

Can’t tell if you’re just playing into the narrative at this point

3

u/TrueBuster24 Jan 13 '23

You’re getting downvoted for saying no one can earn 50m/year. They must have very high aspirations to make money this year! You better watch out!! They might just prove you wrong!!

2

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 27 '23

[deleted]

-6

u/TrueBuster24 Jan 13 '23

That quite literally is what’s happening but you just think it’s a joke that hundreds of millions of people live on less than $2/day while tech giant spokespeople make millions without even struggling. Haha that’s so funny😐

-2

u/gods-chewtoy Jan 13 '23

Whole lot of billionaire simps in this thread unfortunately

2

u/walden42 Jan 13 '23

The guy is running a company that brings useful gadgets to hundreds of millions of people on the planet. Can you put a price tag on what "fair" compensation for that is?

1

u/TheyCallMeStone Jan 13 '23

You can earn as much money as people will pay you

1

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Fairness is a subjective value judgement.

I'm not interested in a wanky conversation of who you think deserves what.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/BabyStockholmSyndrom Jan 13 '23

He could literally give all his wealth away and Reddit will still be like "he's still a CEO!! He will just make the money back again!!!". Fucking pathetic ass people lol.

2

u/KingZant Jan 13 '23

That's my problem with all these "whataboutisms" where people will still go out of their way to point out another problem. Like, sure, while these things may be true, where does that get us? Why not celebrate the good changes? What's your solution?

Every single time I see people complain here I can't help but wonder "Okay, what are you doing about it besides letting it consume you?"

3

u/Diligent_Gas_3167 Jan 13 '23

But what makes it a "good change?"

The article does not say anything about how the money will be used instead.

3

u/sunderpen Jan 13 '23

Because this is an individual company making and individual decision about an individual employee. It's a drop in the bucket. It will ultimately do nothing in the grand scheme of things, the same way me giving a sandwich to a homeless man is kind of nice but won't solve world hunger.

The fact that a pay cut that large still leaves him obscenely wealthy in a country that can't even provide shelter, healthcare, or food reliably to all of its citizens is just evidence of how desperately systemic change is needed.

1

u/SteelxSaint Jan 13 '23

What a load of sanctimonious horseshit coming from you. We’re out here struggling to pay for food and you come with the tiny violin for the wealthy?

Fuck off.

1

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Me: castrating you with cogent criticisms

You: WAH YOU MUST LOVE RICH PEOPLE WAHHHHHHH

-1

u/SteelxSaint Jan 13 '23

“Clearly shows one’s motivations are not genuine” is the single most sanctimonious thing I’ve seen so far in this short year.

I stand by what I said. Your morals are not my morals. Back the fuck off.

3

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

I like how you tried to use an insult and a non-sequitur as a response.

1

u/BrazilianTerror Jan 13 '23

it shows that they’re just upset that other people are rich.

Yeah. I’m upset that people can be this rich while others can’t even pay for medicine or food. It’s the whole point of economic inequality. We want wealth to be better distributed because then more people would be better.

2

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Yeah, except whining when something happens that runs contrary to the exacerbation of wealth inequality shows that you don't actually have that opinion.

Maybe try replying to me instead of regurgitating the shit I'm criticizing you for not actually believing.

→ More replies (2)

-2

u/jawknee530i Jan 13 '23

Uh huh. If he cut his salary by $1 would you also classify any negative comments and whining and not genuine?

Of course you wouldn't So you actually at some level understand that the complaints about CEO compensation are about being paid more than they could possibly deserve and more than they could ever need.

So since you understand that then why can't you understand that when people say CEOs should cut pay that it means to a level that is reasonable? And any cut that isn't to a reasonable level makes no difference, the same way that a $1 cut you would understand makes no difference.

6

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

If you're trying to equate a $1 and a $50M pay cut, you need to take a deep breath and promptly unfuck yourself.

I'm not interested in having a discussion about what CEOs should be paid in the first place. I'm pointing out the blatant ulterior motivation behind responding to this information with buttpained whining.

This kind of whimpering goalpost-shifting pseudo-absolutism is the exact same shit that the right spews endlessly, and it's twice as disgusting when it's coming from people I ostensibly agree with.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/quixotic120 Jan 13 '23

They’re upset some people are obscenely rich. Cooks estimated net worth is 1.7b, he has enough resources to never need a salary again. This is not the same as a ceo with a net worth of 4 million taking a 40% pay cut, cook likely won’t have a noticeable impact on quality of life even if this was an 80% cut

2

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

That just furthers the point that they're just upset that other people are rich. Again, I'm not talking about whether wealth inequality still exists. I'm talking about people responding to this information with whiny sarcastic comments.

0

u/_TheMeepMaster_ Jan 13 '23

People have a problem with wealth disparity and they're the problem?

1

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Yet more disingenuous whining.

0

u/lazercheesecake Jan 13 '23

No it’s because Tim Cook made a huge portion of his wealth off the back breaking labor in foreign countries, notably Foxconn employees in China who have literally been killing themselves to make apple just a little bit more money. The 3 million he makes in salary alone could change the lives of those factory workers, but he doesn’t. They die so we can have our iPhones and Tim Apple can have his yacht

-6

u/PastafarianProposals Jan 13 '23

Dont tell the antiwork sub that

0

u/GNSasakiHaise Jan 13 '23

That's not a bad thing. Everyone should be upset that there are billionaires out there while homeless people have an entire subgenre of architecture designed to punish them for being poor.

2

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

People behaving like small children having emotional outbursts is a bad thing, even if you also dislike what they're upset about.

→ More replies (1)

0

u/NothingForUs Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

That is, it shows that they’re just upset that other people are rich.

Or maybe that the system is so rigged that this just appears as a publicity stunt as nothing really changed.

Also, with the amount of cash Apple has on hand it’s a choice that they are not paying their employees better.

EDIT. He replied and then blocked because he’s afraid of a simple conversation.

HAHAHAHAHA

1

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

I'm not sure how a reddit comment of someone making a sarcastic remark about a rich person taking a pay cut shows that the system is anything.

You clearly read too much out of random social media posts.

0

u/gigibuffoon Jan 13 '23

they're just upset that other people are rich.

No they are upset that this CEO makes an amount of money in a month that most other people on the planet will likely not even make in a lifetime. And that the obscene wealth is a result of them manufacturing their products in areas where the working conditions are close to inhuman for a fraction of the price at which they sell them to customers

2

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Repeating what I said is not disagreement.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 13 '23

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

Considering how much you like sticking things in other people's mouths, I trust you're an expert on them.

→ More replies (2)

0

u/EvenOne6567 Jan 13 '23

Im sure tim is so thankful to have someone like you defending his honor in the reddit comments

1

u/Seiglerfone Jan 13 '23

I'm sure all your bitching in the comments is really going to resolve wealth inequality.

0

u/notashortfatman Jan 13 '23

Well correct, no one should be that rich. You're close to figuring it out.

No one is whining. They're pointjng out that Tim Cook is still grossly overpaid and his 40% income cut means nothing. It's a public display to make people view him/apple in a favorable light.

→ More replies (35)

4

u/gophergun Jan 13 '23

We're not talking about 100 or 1000 people though, we're talking about 65K. Only rewarding an extremely small proportion of the workforce is just insulting.

1

u/SarkHD Jan 13 '23

Only rewarding the CEO is also insulting to the other 65k workers when they see the CEO making $100m in compensation for the year while the workers are making 60-200k or so a year.

2

u/ThePwnHub_ Jan 13 '23

he’s the CEO of a trillion dollar company though lol. of course he is making a shitload of money. not saying it’s right but the people who are working and making $150k a year are working jobs that would pay $150k a year at other companies as well. It’s just how the market values their job. without major legislative changes that’s how it is going to be. If we want to change it we have to vote for people that want to reign in these kind of extreme salaries

1

u/JayKayne_ Jan 14 '23

Seriously, he's the CEO of fucking Apple. The company that is worth more than half the countries in the world's entire GDP. And these people are upset he's making millions of dollars. Wtf. What do they want him to make? $250,000 the same salary the software engineers at apple make?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/oxide1337 Jan 13 '23

Who then deserves this money?

→ More replies (1)

3

u/EQTone Jan 13 '23

So your main reaction is to say, “Why can’t he give his money away?”

You people need to grow up.

1

u/SarkHD Jan 13 '23

When did I say he needs to give his money away? I wasn’t even talking about his money. Apple is paying him an absurd amount while sitting on billions of dollars. He makes substantially more than any other regular employee at Apple.

4

u/SplitPerspective Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

His every decision and influence affects the profitability of the company. Those decisions are worth a high compensation, how much is debatable but for a trillion dollar company he’s paid peanuts in relative terms.

He should split up his money? How about you divide half your salary to the homeless? I’m sure you could live on half as well.

I get this whole eat the rich anger, but you’d be just as much of a dick, if not worse, if you came to such wealth. And to think you won’t is more arrogant than the people you’re chastising.

As long as it’s legal, the anger should be directed at the system and its policies, not at the individual. You’re just jealous you’re not capable to thrive in the system.

0

u/SarkHD Jan 13 '23

It’s not about how he should split up his money though. Apple is giving 1 person a compensation of $100m a year. While the rest of their employees make pocket change compared to that, and the work they outsource to factories overseas pays Pennies to people that are being overworked under awful conditions.

3

u/SplitPerspective Jan 13 '23

Some people are worth more than others. Whether by luck, by privilege, or by hard work. But compared to any other time in history, we live in the best times now where one can improve their standing from birth, unlike caste systems or monarchies.

Can it be better? Sure. But direct that to politicians and policies.

Just as you can bitch about Apple’s CEO, what are you going to do about a billion other people complaining about a privileged life YOU are living? Right, ignore it right? And continue to wallow in your self righteous and victim mentality right?

The problem with people like you is that you do not have any real substantive solutions, and your anger is misguided towards the wrong parties all the time. Always making virtue signaling bullshit “well if he would cut his wages by xyz %, you can feed this many more people”, shut up…

…damn self-righteous hypocrite. You think you’re exposing something great and meaningful, but it’s all on deaf ears to the rational and pragmatic, especially when it’s gratingly hypocritical.

→ More replies (3)

2

u/wrx_2016 Jan 13 '23

He could cut his salary to $0 and people would still find a reason to complain.

“Why doesn’t he use all his money to pay his employees?!?”

2

u/LittleJerkDog Jan 13 '23

Out of interest how much should he earn? Considering he’s running the most valuable company on earth.

→ More replies (27)

2

u/grchelp2018 Jan 13 '23

More responsibility == more income. He doesn't need the money and he probably shouldn't even be working anymore but since he is, this is the way it goes.

Tim is rich and loves apple so that is why he's taking this pay cut. But if I were him after managing apple through everything that has happened, I'd just say "you think I make too much? Fine, I'll leave" and watch the shareholders panic.

1

u/juptertk Jan 13 '23 edited Jan 13 '23

Apple currently has around 164,000 employees. If those $40 million are shared between all those employees, each employee will only get $242. The vast majority of those employees are in developed countries, so it's highly unlikely that that amount will be life-changing for them.

Arbitrarily choosing who will receive part of that compensation will even be more complicated than that. Imagine that the company you work for announces that it will give a $40 million bonus to certain employees. $40 million is a huge number in people's heads. Many of the employees will have a different work attitude after they discover they were not part of that $40 million dollar compensation or bonus.

And those are $40 million worth of Apple stocks. Those $40 million will be tied to how well Apple stock performs this year. A company or a CEO will not liquidate $40 million worth of stocks just to give it as a bonus to their employees, that'd just be insane.

2

u/mdizzle40 Jan 13 '23

Doesn’t fucking matter…the dude cut 40 million, that is a shit ton even to the rich. God, people on here just want to cry, it’s like embedded in their characters at this point.

1

u/SarkHD Jan 13 '23

Tim Cook’s net worth is 1.7 billion.

I don’t think 40 mil will make a dent.

1

u/mdizzle40 Jan 13 '23

I’m not going to change the mind of an average whiny redditor like you but I meant generally. Y’all won’t ever be happy

1

u/juptertk Jan 13 '23

Is Tim Cook supposed to work for free just because he has 1.7 Billion?

3

u/zacker150 Jan 13 '23

would be a life changing amount if broken up between 100 or hell even 1000 people.

But it would be literal pennies broken up between everyone that apple employs. Also, those pennies would be imaginary since they're the option to buy stock from Apple at the current market value.

0

u/SarkHD Jan 13 '23

“Since this $100m would be Pennies if split between all employees, let’s just give it all to the CEO.”

Gotcha.

Apple also has billions and billions they could use any time to pay their employees more. And their factory workers overseas a living wage.

0

u/charklaser Jan 13 '23

As Apple user and shareholder, I want the company to be run by a fantastic CEO and I'm happy that they compensate that position sufficiently to attract top talent.

→ More replies (1)

-1

u/Rorasaurus_Prime Jan 13 '23

Still not the point…

-1

u/redditingatwork23 Jan 13 '23

I could change my life with 40 grand, lol... let alone 400k. Invested safely and only aiming for a measly 6-7% yearly return along with a meh paying job that pays like 30-40 thousand a year would be enough for me to live a happy life pretty much forever. Maybe I'm just too used to being poor.

1

u/m703324 Jan 13 '23

And if would have someone here who does book keeping on this level and isn't silenced then it would be clear how Tim will save more money by doing this than he looses

→ More replies (9)