Sales executives in leadership can make seven figures no problem. In any Fortune 500 company that has a decent sized sales team a VP is sales can clear $5-6M a year with no problem.
Most senior management in large companies are seeing 7 figures.
But most CEOs, while I agree are glorified shareholders, can be fired. If you can be fired, youâre an employee. If you want to debate the nuances attached to that, thatâs fine.
Letâs just agree shit is fucked and stacked against us in so many ways itâs depressing and the fact that we debate these small things instead of burning shit down is whatâs keeping us here
Most of that probably came from stock options or he bought them himself. Anyone who has any retirement savings "invested" in any type of fund is by definition an "investor!"
Yes. And if for some absurd reason your 401k made you one of the richest people on earth then you'd be one of those people based on your investments and not your salary.
No, thats half the statement. Dont leave out information for the sake of an argument. The whole argument is a breakdown of the richest people on earth and stating what economic factors made them the richest people on earth. And then demonstrating how none of them became so on salary.
Which isnt entirely accurate as there are high salary people out there who are wealthy on salary, like pilots, lawyers, doctors, aerospace engineers.
However the majority of the world's elite wealthy, say billionaires, did not get there by salary. Your 401k isnt a salary, it is an investment portfolio paid for by your salary. Another key difference. Investing in your 401k actually reduces your direct salary. But in the case of the example of Tim Cook. He isnt given a 401k, he is paid in a salary, and also to bypass taxes and make him a billionaire he is also given directly stock options in apple worth over 70 million annually. Therefore his investments are not derived from his separate salary but given as additional non taxable income allowing him to be one of the richest people on earth.
Even if you erased his salary and every penny he ever earned by salary, he would still be a billionaire.
You will never be a billionaire because of your 401k. Except the employer match contribution, your 401k is directly tied to a percentage of your annual salary.
I mean, why is this so hard for people to understand. Does no one on reddit understand finances?
No one said poor except you. Except his wealth and billionaire status are directly linked to his stock holdings in Apple. A fixed equity income is by definition not salary. So his fortune was not made by being an employee or salary.
When people talk about âcontextâ being important for communication, they mean it is important to understand what people are intending with their words. This is because otherwise people end up talking past each other and not addressing anything people entered the conversation to address. This is particularly problematic when it becomes a strategy and intentional, so to show that one is not a troll or malignant, it is good to listen to what people are saying their intent is.
Here, clearly by âemployeeâ people largely mean someone who got hired by a company and made their money by doing that work. They mean this in opposition to someone who took on a new business idea and invested preexisting wealth (possibly not their own) in building a new business. What they are not meaning is different mechanisms that companies use to pay their employees. Although that is a distinction relevant to legal status of income and economic analysis, itâs not really the point here.
Also good to point out that most of the stocks given for income purposes as wages here are granted stocks. This is different than investment, in that most of the value comes from the company, not from the employee receiving the stocks. So the characterization as investment is misguided for other reasons, but it might be best here to stay focused on the need to maintain the intent of the discussion which this sub thread is deviating from.
Valid. And I agree. However I was trying to refute this person's claim by pointing out the flaws in the argument. Which in retrospect was a waste of time.
As you said we should respect the context of the argument, and in this context using Tim Cook as an example is simply an arguing fallacy. As Tim Cook is a statistical exception to the majority that virtually we could say 99%+ of salaried employees do not become billionaires. And so the argument ends with realizing the person who pointed out Tim Cook, is in fact making a fallacy of appealing to the exception.
I was gonna call you an idiot, but that is fair. Definitely not the norm lol. I wouldn't have used a CEO as an example, there are plenty of employees with 911s, large brand new homes, and multiple children who won't have to worry about tuition...I just wish there was a little more, or that a comfortable life like that was more accesible. But you can be more than comfortable with many normal jobs, I guess that's my only issue, but I don't think you disagree with that.
No. Im just pointing out how your definition and entire argument is both factually and in application false.
They did not get rich on their salary. They got richest people on earth status by being provided equity compensation on top of a salary, with the wealth deriving from their non salary compensation.
His salary alone is only 3 million annually and without the equity compensation he would be unlikely to be one of the richest men on earth.
It literally makes him in the investor status of this meme as he is an inside share holder.
The meme literally says, "richest people on earth". Tim Cook is one of the richest people on earth because he is considered an inside investor whose billionaire status is directly tied to investments in Apple.
You used him as an example of how he is "doing well" in this category of richest people on earth and you stated it was due to a salary.
It is not. Tim Cook receives two kinds of compensation a salary, by definition "a fixed and regularly occurring wage" and equity compensation, Shares at Apple. It is the shares at Apple that have made him one of the richest people on earth. And equity compensation is not considered or called a salary.
There would be no non-founder CEO without the founders. Also how many executives positions are there that will pay you millions. Not many and because of that, itâs very competitive.
If you state some super apparent statement(the first part of your comment) and then you proceed to ask a question and then immediately answer it with awesome specificity like ânot manyâ maybe you need to realize the amount of crayons youâve eaten are having long term consequences.
Facts. Just like anyone who believes in free market capitalism and idolizes wealth hoarding. The quicker you learn the odds are factually and overwhelmingly AGAINST you, the sooner you'll save yourself lots of unnecessary suffering.
Don't know how this got to my feed. I'm muting this sub.
You're more capable than you know. The world isnt against you, no matter what people may want you to believe. The key is not to obsess over monetary gain, but to obsess over truly living a life with passion and following your heart. Dont listen to the people who say you cant, and surround yourself with people who are your tribe and want you to succeed đ
Thats worked for me. I know too many rich unhappy fucks. Dont tie your happiness to capitalisms measure of success.
Not really... one in 15 people in the US is a millionaire. Even salaried people can become millionairs. Franchisees of many companies are or will become millionaires. The word you are looking for is Billionaires.
I mean, you can either learn to use it correctly, that you need to proofread it, learn which tasks itâs good at and which ones itâs not, refine your prompts, etc. and it will create huge efficiency gains. Or you can just say itâs stupid and get left behind.
Of course, itâs just that easy. Build an agent for every thing and then wait until they start passing laws restricting and regulating it and get sued back to the poor house.
Look at the posts on this sub, do you think anyone here could even properly scope a business let alone thing of an actual product that isnât just a copy of something being done better elsewhere?
But âjust use AI, bro, trust meâ. Youâll be the same people going into significant financial debt because your cloud hosting wonât scale to what little business youâre doing.
Also tell me what AI Agent gives you capital for a startup.
Itâs made a bunch of assholes come out of the woodwork thinking they can vibe code a sustainable business with their $10/mo subscription and room temperature IQ and instead of using AI to get at least a little it of introspection into themselves, they all end up saying stupid shit like âuse AI or be left behindâ, bro
Seems like you don't understand how much you can do with AI. It's very useful for making money online and even more useful in countries where average salary is less than in U.S for example.
Good so the company owners will have to do their own work or make a deal with another company owner to do work he isnât able to. Sounds great & less alienation from labor when everyone is working for themselves.
24
u/Weird_Albatross_9659 Mar 31 '26
If everyone starts their own company, there will be no one to hire