CEOs vs Workers
Published 2010 in Voices of the Future
Are humans born into this world identical? Since the tangled webs of evolution began weaving intricacies within our matter, opportunities and instinct have allowed some individuals to rise above while others remained common. No one wants to be common. Common means expendable. Common are those who get pushed into the dirt, working the low wage jobs whose names will never be remembered. The true glory is in uniqueness; being louder than others, better than competitors and wealthy.
As each searches for his or her self, as well as acceptance from their peers, the desire for more grows. Greed becomes a leech that steals all the blood rather than just what it needs. At this point the questions begin: how much is too much? What is a person worth in a century of currency and bills? Are CEOs worth more than factory workers only because their decisions affect more people?
Having never been a CEO myself I can comment very little on their responsibilities, concerns and thoughts. However, they are people, and bound to be imperfect. Do CEOs deserve pampering? Perhaps the question isn’t even if they deserve it, but if it is morally acceptable. Understandably, as thinking creatures ruling this precious planet, humans should endeavor to stand out from their billions of brothers and sisters, yet the most appropriate goal may be changing our attitude toward what it means to be common.
CEOs are a Western invention, consisting of wealthy white men running multi-billion dollar businesses. If the majority of the world were white, wealthy men then there would be no problem but the majority of humans are coloured, poor, and include a female gender. As the world shrinks and the value of resources skyrocket, the poor will be left behind those who can afford life-sustaining necessities. As a result, unrest will rise, resulting in terrorism, sabotage, and blood shed because desperate people have nothing to lose.
As a species on a finite planet, defining what is fair and unfair becomes paramount. The inequality between people must become, in some sense, equal. Therefore, a person who earns four hundred times the average wage is inexcusable. Work effort and personhood should determine their success, yet not beyond need. Those who become CEOs reach that position not necessarily because they are the best, but because they have the opportunity. Just because the majority of individuals never have these opportunities does not make them lesser people.
A CEO should receive higher compensation but the amount must be restricted and kept within a reasonable framework. Deciding the restrictions would require more research and investment. In conclusion, since each human life is unique but not all receive the opportunity to succeed, movements should be made to ensure that what currently exists is fair. Less money is needed in the pockets of those with excess and more for those who struggle everyday to feed their families.
© Katarina Claire E.R.
Are humans born into this world identical? Since the tangled webs of evolution began weaving intricacies within our matter, opportunities and instinct have allowed some individuals to rise above while others remained common. No one wants to be common. Common means expendable. Common are those who get pushed into the dirt, working the low wage jobs whose names will never be remembered. The true glory is in uniqueness; being louder than others, better than competitors and wealthy.
As each searches for his or her self, as well as acceptance from their peers, the desire for more grows. Greed becomes a leech that steals all the blood rather than just what it needs. At this point the questions begin: how much is too much? What is a person worth in a century of currency and bills? Are CEOs worth more than factory workers only because their decisions affect more people?
Having never been a CEO myself I can comment very little on their responsibilities, concerns and thoughts. However, they are people, and bound to be imperfect. Do CEOs deserve pampering? Perhaps the question isn’t even if they deserve it, but if it is morally acceptable. Understandably, as thinking creatures ruling this precious planet, humans should endeavor to stand out from their billions of brothers and sisters, yet the most appropriate goal may be changing our attitude toward what it means to be common.
CEOs are a Western invention, consisting of wealthy white men running multi-billion dollar businesses. If the majority of the world were white, wealthy men then there would be no problem but the majority of humans are coloured, poor, and include a female gender. As the world shrinks and the value of resources skyrocket, the poor will be left behind those who can afford life-sustaining necessities. As a result, unrest will rise, resulting in terrorism, sabotage, and blood shed because desperate people have nothing to lose.
As a species on a finite planet, defining what is fair and unfair becomes paramount. The inequality between people must become, in some sense, equal. Therefore, a person who earns four hundred times the average wage is inexcusable. Work effort and personhood should determine their success, yet not beyond need. Those who become CEOs reach that position not necessarily because they are the best, but because they have the opportunity. Just because the majority of individuals never have these opportunities does not make them lesser people.
A CEO should receive higher compensation but the amount must be restricted and kept within a reasonable framework. Deciding the restrictions would require more research and investment. In conclusion, since each human life is unique but not all receive the opportunity to succeed, movements should be made to ensure that what currently exists is fair. Less money is needed in the pockets of those with excess and more for those who struggle everyday to feed their families.
© Katarina Claire E.R.
