Home The state enables sky-high CEO salaries
News

The state enables sky-high CEO salaries

AFP

The High Pay Centre has garnered a lot of attention in the British media over the last few days, reporting that on January 5th — what they have dubbed “Fat CatTuesday” — average high-earning CEOs’ pay will have already surpassed the annual pay of the average British worker.The High Pay Centre claims more needs to be done by government to curb the exorbitant salaries of bosses. Sam Bowman of the Adam Smith Institute had the following to say:

“Chief executives can be worth quite a lot to firms, as is shown by huge moves in company share prices when good CEOs are hired, or bad CEOs are fired. Steve Jobs can make a firm; Steve Ballmer can break a firm. The High Pay Commission’s complaints only make sense if you assume firms don’t actually care about making money — which is to say, they don’t make sense at all.”

It’s true that in a free market, a person’s income will tend to reflect the value of their work. However, in a free market, the person paying the worker usually has a fairly good view of the connection between the worker’s actions and the value of those contributions.

Alas, we do not live in a free market. State intervention massively hampers entrepreneurial activity by artificially increasing start-up costs through burdensome regulations and often, creating outright barriers to entry. This hampering of competition, in turn, protects established market actors from competition, allowing them to grow far beyond the size they could otherwise maintain in the face of unrestrained competition.

They are able to reap the benefits of economies of scale, whilst making up for the costs of diseconomies of scale by not having to compete with up-starters. This means that many firms are able to sustain their position, whilst being plagued by internal knowledge problems. These knowledge problems allow firms to make irrational decisions about allocating capital without bearing the true costs.

The enormous compensation packages of many CEOs seem like a prime example. When we are unable to make decisions based on objective assessment of their expected outcomes, we often use proxies, or rely on social norms to guide our decisions. It seems that there are a host of reasons, other than the actual economic worth of CEOs, which would lead firms to pay them irrationally high salaries. It looks, then, that high CEO pay may not be perfectly rational, so perhaps something ought to be done about it — either for the sake of social justice, economic efficiency, or both.

Presumably the High Pay Centre thinks capping high salaries will somehow mean this money will be redistributed to those who have greater need or greater merit than CEOs. But it seems obvious that capping CEO pay will not automatically result in higher worker incomes. More likely is that corporations will merely find other ways of compensating CEOs beyond salary and benefits packages. More government intervention is not the answer.

There are of course side-constraints on how we achieve social justice — using coercion is out of the question both morally and prudentially. However, the fact that there are side-constraints on how we solve a problem does not mean there isn’t a problem. Capping high salaries does nothing to help the poor, just as boycotting sweatshops does not help their workers, and raising the minimum wage does not help low-paid workers. However, just because the common remedy is worse than the sickness does not mean there are not remedies out there, and it certainly does not mean there is no sickness to remedy. We should not be, as the Institute of Economic Affairs wrote, “intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich” given the gross lack of freedom in today’s marketplace.

Making markets more free and increasing the sphere of voluntary, mutually beneficial cooperation improves the use of information in society. Truly free markets would also render the ludicrous salaries of CEOs far more costly to firms, and force them to learn from their errors if they are to succeed in the market. Calling for more state involvement in economic life is the wrong solution — but the problem is nonetheless real.




Featured Video

 

AFP

AFP

Have a guest column, letter to the editor, story idea or a news tip? Email editor Chris Graham at [email protected]. Subscribe to AFP podcasts on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Pandora and YouTube. Support AFP by signing up for our newsletter and/or powering our work with a one-time or monthly contribution.

Latest News

waynesboro map
Local, Politics

Waynesboro: Mimosa Farm owner throwing in the towel, puts property on the market

vdot road construction
Local

VDOT begins work on $2.1M project to improve pedestrian access at three intersections

Work began this week on a $2.1 million project to improve safety and access for pedestrians and public-transit users at three locations in Augusta County and the City of Waynesboro.

Elaine Luria
Politics, Virginia

Poll: Elaine Luria has three-point lead over Jen Kiggans in the Second District

A poll out on Wednesday from Christopher Newport University gives Democrat Elaine Luria a three-point lead on MAGA incumbent Jen Kiggans in the Second District congressional race in Hampton Roads. The 2026 midterm race is a reprise of the 2022 midterm race in which Kiggans unseated Luria by three points, in a mild upset. The...

arn anderson mid atlantic territory wrestling
Pro Wrestling

Mid-Atlantic Territory Wrestling returns to Augusta Expo on Saturday, Nov. 7

government money
Football, Go 'Hoos

UVA Athletics: Taking selling out to the highest bidder to the next level

richard linton virginia tech
Life, Virginia

Virginia Tech: Board of Visitors names alum Richard Linton new president

uva football offensive line
Football, Go 'Hoos

UVA Football: Interesting tidbit on the O line from Pro Football Focus grades