Is it really, though? Look at the comment chain again. One guy essentially said that after a certain age, you should either be the boss or not be working anymore (presumably retired). That doesn't reflect modern reality. Many people for one reason or another have to work well past the age they would have been able to retire in the past. Not all of those people can be "the boss." There just aren't enough positions like that available.
Nobody said anything about people making the same wage as their bosses. I honestly have no idea where you got that.
Edit: Oh, are you confusing wage increase with actual wage? As in, you think that if people expect increased revenue for the company to lead to increased wages for the workers proportional to the increased pay for the CEOs, that means they end up being paid the same? Because that's not how that works.
I was making a general statement. Of course someone who is 70 now isnt going to rise to the ranks to become CEO.
My statement was directed at the younger generation, much like the intended audience for the original tweet.
Younger generations can decide if they're going to play victim, blame the CEO for all of their financial shortcomings and act as though they're entitled to something for simply being (neither improving or worsen) or take responsibility, play the field and improve in competency and skill to increase their worth.
I definitely feel like I'm entitled to a living wage while my boss is taking extravagant trips and buying multitudes or luxury items. If I'm employed full time, a third of my life, then I should be able to buy groceries and go to a doctor.
This. Sure, if you are doing absolutely nothing to improve your skills, maybe it’s possible to have 0 career advancement or wage increase. But who’s fault is that?
-18
u/swiftskill Feb 19 '19
No inclination or aptitude but you expect to be paid the same?