She also made $29,000,000 in 2022 for herself, cause she worked so hard and made so many cars herself. Ha

  • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    159
    ·
    1 year ago

    Keep these CEO memes coming. These assholes need to have a spotlight shown on them. A company is not a person, a company is ran by people.

      • Risk@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        They do if we threaten their pockets or their lives.

        Historically, which one is targeted is their choice.

          • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d rather steal from them. There’s a Brazilian saying, “A thief that steals from a thief has 100 years of forgiveness”

            • NeoTeNu@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              We have the same saying in Spanish, but it’s 1000 in our case, so if you steal do it in Rodrigo Montoya way :)

          • Risk@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pick a time in history where there was violent upheaval of working people. Tell me who they targeted first.

            • Maalus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You are calling for people’s deaths. That is a punishable offense and makes you batshit insane.

              • Risk@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                No. I’m highlighting that, historically, angry poor people have killed callous rich people.

                It’s naive to not recognise it will happen again.

                • Maalus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  You have about as much plausible deniability here as someone saying “watch out mr president, a lot of presidents have been assasinated in the past”.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Seriously, a lot of CEOs and most managers could be much more easily replaced by AI than the workers. Run some analysis on some metrics lay off people based on that. Go over the market analytics, direct staff to work on derivative versions of the products that have good numbers, cancel products that don’t. I’m not even sure if you really need AI for this, a very basic script could handle a lot of it.

        Of course a program would be lacking in the common sense to say “Nobody is going to drop a week’s pay so they can go into a virtual world where they’re a poorly drawn legless cartoon character”. But present day CEOs make these mistakes anyway. It wouldn’t be good, but it wouldn’t be worse than the status quo.

  • Veedem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    155
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Stock buybacks need to be made illegal again. I don’t understand how it’s anything other than market manipulation.

    • GrayoxOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      117
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ronald Regan really fucked this nation over. . .

      • StickyLavander@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        43
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        He’s was the first paid actor, just a puppet so the people in control can remain unknown. Skull and bones secret society was/is a real thing.

        • iBaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          40
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not a secret, we know who the billionaires are that are funding this madness, but the only people that could put a stop to it, are the ones benefiting from them.

          • MisterD@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            So we’ll have to eat them for real.

            The announcement of the first TRILLIONAIRE should cause a worldwide civil war.

    • db2@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It makes sense if they’re pulling out of the stock market entirely, in that case it’s just settling the books. Any other reason is to manipulate the price. The whole stock market is a house of cards controlled directly by a few self-titled elites though, so chicanery is literally built in and always was.

    • JasSmith@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. I could live with it if it were merely a way to defer taxes, but the U.S. has something called the stepped-up basis. This allows people to inherit stocks without paying tax on the capital gains. The wealthy can live their whole lives without paying any tax. Both stock buy-backs and the stepped-up basis severely undermine the stock market and tax system.

        • porkins@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am an MBA and agree that buybacks are fine. The problem is toxic anti-capitalism from my perspective. People are not really educated well on these topics. I find your comment funny that an army of accountants come to explain things and help everyone understand the nuances and why this is needed, but all the experts are somehow shills.

          • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The problem is toxic anti-capitalism

            It’s not like capitalism is doing itself (or the 99%) any favors. When it’s blatantly clear that the ultra rich and short-term profit seeking are responsible for a lot of world problems (extreme pollution, climate change, corruption, being essentially immune to most laws), being “toxic anti-capitalist” is a natural step.

              • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That was probably more valid before WW2. Afterwards, it’s mostly government (military) spending and financing that really funded the innovations we’re using today, at least regarding computers and electronics

                • porkins@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The modern PC was developed in a garage. Linux was a pet project. Uber and many other companies was funded by the previous success of another app. The owner sold StumbleUpon to eBay for $75M then used that money to make a killer rideshare app. SpaceX, Tesla, Streaming media. I beg to differ on whether most innovation is government funded. There are thousands of entrepreneurs that prove you wrong on that point.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s very obviously is. Stock buybacks aren’t allowed almost anywhere else in the world for a reason. It just leads to terrible behavior. This coupled with insanely low effective corporate tax rates means companies horde capital and do buybacks instead of doing other activities that are more economically beneficial to the country. Like increasing worker pay…

    • Snipe_AT@lemmy.atay.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If I’m being honest, I don’t understand this angle. Why are stock buybacks immoral or wrong? Isn’t it simply using extra cash in a company to buy back stock from shareholders? With the same demand and reduced total stock, of course the price is going to go up. But the total market capitalization remains the same. I don’t understand why this is somehow wrong. Can someone help me out?

      • Veedem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because executive pay is largely given in shares, so it incentivizes the leadership to invest funds in buy backs to inflate the price of the very shares they own instead of investing that money into employee pay or other company centric initiatives.

      • JasSmith@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The other reply is correct regarding the macro effects of the practise. The more immediate issue is that it allows shareholders to avoid paying dividend taxes. So they can effectively defer paying taxes until they realise any capital gains. This is a huge benefit, as the present value of money is worth much more than the future value of money. However there is an even larger benefit in the U.S. Dependents can inherit stocks at the current price and avoid paying any capital gains tax. This is called the “stepped-up basis.” It’s an insane tax loophole. Together stock buy-backs and the stepped-up basis allow the ultra wealthy to pay little to no tax, ever. They take out perpetual loans to pay for living expenses, guaranteed against their holdings.

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree. They need to do a reverse split if they want to change the shares in circulation.

      The idea was a company could show faith by buying their own stock. Now ceo pay is tied to factors associated with the stock that can be manipulated by buying it back.

      The IBM bro Ginny made millions while the company shrunk by manipulating the stock.

      I don’t care what a ceo makes. I do care what they do. If they’re only focusing on themselves, I care.

  • _cnt0@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    A tale as old as mankind. Like 20 years ago I saw a movie. Some indie thing from France or Spain. The kind of shit that gets highly acclaimed at the Cannes film festival. In one scene there was a bricklayer reciting a poem (from the top of my head and loosely translated from German):

    My grandfather was a bricklayer. My father was a bricklayer. I am a bricklayer, too. But, tell me, where is my house?

    That allways stuck with me.

    • Hoomod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You load 16 tons, what do you get?

      Another day older and deeper in debt

      St. Peter, don’t you call me 'cause I can’t go

      I owe my soul to the company store

      • BigNote@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The devil put the coal in the ground

        Devil put the coal in the ground

        He buried it deep so it’d never be found

        Devil put the coal in the ground

    • _cnt0@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I did some brain jogging and I think in German it went like this:

      Mein Vater war ein Maurer. Sein Vater war ein Maurer. Auch ich mauere Tag ein Tag aus. Doch sag mir, wo steht mein Haus?

      Which would translate to

      My father was a bricklayer. His father was a bricklayer. I, too, wall up day in and day out. But tell me, where is my house?

      But I can’t figure out what the movie was.

    • Astroturfed@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s blatant stock manipulation. The stock price goes up because they increase demand for the stock for no reason. The value of the company doesn’t change at all other than they’re holding stock as an asset instead of the cash. Yet the stock is worth more now. It’s stock manipulation, plain and simple.

    • grazing7264 [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      When organized labor is weak and non-militant, capital can get away with a lot more, so it does get away with a lot more.

      It strips away anti-corruption, regulations, and social democracy as soon as it can get away with it.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      But…but it’s politics! Surely politics must always be 50/50 divisive, and not be based around universal assmunchers that any sane person should agree is an asshole?

  • PorkRollWobbly
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They could’ve paid for all of the UAW’s asks and then some with just that but it’s less about the money and more about trying to look strong. The reality is they are nothing without their workers, no company is.

    • GrayoxOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      50
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just like how the losses the entertainment industry has suffered due to the writers and actors strike could have paid for their demands 10 times over. This is 100% about stripping the power from workers and keeping the power in the C suite.

  • kool_newt@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    How cool would sleeper cells of anti-capitalist assistants, cooks, personal trainers, etc be lol. These people should be living like Putin afraid everyone is planning to take them out. Take the joy from their lives if that’s all you can take.

  • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    “But if you shared that money among all workers, they’d only get an extra 50 cents per hour!!!” - some tool defending corporate profit

      • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        True, but that would only be for one year. What about after that? Take the raise away? They don’t do $3.4b stock buy backs every year I imagine.

        • Fogle@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s just the exorbitant profit that they put into stock buy backs. And if they spent half of that on buybacks and gave every employee a 10k bonus I’m sure opinions of them would be a lot more favourable.

          They could easily cut back some of their “profit” to pay people better

          • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, I don’t disagree that it should have gone to employees, just wanted to be clear that $10 an hour wasn’t quite accurate. I’m sure a one time yearly bonus would be just as much appreciated and needed.

            • Fogle@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              They also paused stock dividends for COVID 3 years ago and only resumed it now at 9¢ instead of 38¢

              And their 2022 gross profit was nearly 21 billion dollars. That’s an extra 60 dollars an hour for every employee

              They have the money.

        • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          They don’t do $3.4b stock buy backs every year I imagine.

          No… but they could give everyone a $2/hr raise, which isn’t trivial, and sustain themselves at that level for FIVE YEARS on the current excess.

          Another option is to give everyone a bonus; doing the math on 3.4bn/167k workers, is around 20k each; even if they “only” gave half of that back to the workers, a $10k bonus is pretty nice and one-time. There’s no excuse…

  • grazing7264 [they/them, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If stock buybacks are Capital’s path of least resistance it will self organize, like iron shavings to a neodymium magnet, and make it happen. There is no human agency in the circuits of capitalism and never will be.

    If this woman tried to not do stock buybacks, she would be fired by her peers/board and replaced.

    If this woman was even capable of considering doing pay raises instead of stock buybacks, she would have been clocked and removed from the circuit like an intelligent species crashing into the fermi paradox/great filter.

    • GrayoxOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They just want to maintain their status quo, humanity be damned.