The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Retirement Discussions / Retired Fools
|Subject: Re: Is your 401(k) Inadequate For Retirement||Date: 7/31/2008 9:53 AM|
|Author: Howie52||Number: 13762 of 20077|
"This really depends a lot on what you mean by simple.
Nothing could be more simple than the life of the near-homeless.
He does nothing but work, sleep, eat, work, sleep, eat, work, sleep, eat, work..... very simple. No planning required. The only worries are if he can keep whatever job it is and if he can afford the next meal.
CEOs on the other hand hit the golf course, fly around in private jets, eat at luxurious restaurants -- probably in the Chef's private dining room -- sleep on silk, and are assured that even if they lose their job they will walk away with enough money they wouldn't have to worry for the rest of their lives.
I would be happy to run a company into the ground for a CEOs wages.
Too bad, though, for all those workers who would suddenly be living the "simple" life after the company went away.
CEOs are overpaid.
I think even Warren Buffett would agree with me.
Last time I checked, some CEOs, sports personalities, entertainers,
politicians, agents, lawyers and a few others overpaid - even indecently overpaid.
And the emphasis is on some.
Again, what do you propose to do about indecent salaries?
How do you define indecent salaries?
Does a salary change from reasonable to indecent if a comapny's
growth does not always increase? What definition will you use?
I have seen salesmen also hit the golf course, fly around in
private corporate jets, eat at luxurious restaurants and the whole
I have seen plan folks hit the golf course and do all of the above -
admittedly with the exception of the private jets and the worries
about job loss. Is this indecent when there are poor near-homeless
folks living cross town or even next door?
I know as an absolute certainty that I would not want a CEO's job for all the money in China.
And a simple life is worth more than CEO's make - even the indecent ones.
This is my opinion.
You may disagree.
|Copyright 1996-2016 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|