Distribution of Wealth

A full time employee working forty hours a week contributes a great deal towards the functionality and overall success of a business to receive a paycheck in order to pay the bills. Everyone knows that failing to meet performance standards can bring disciplinary actions resulting in suspension or possible termination. All companies are heavily dependent upon the day-to-day workforce to accomplish their goals and ultimately bring in revenue, yet the compensation given to these employees is drastically less than that of the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs). The required skills and abilities of a person in a lower ranked position are in relative abundance, but expendability should not be a basis for a much smaller paycheck. The responsibilities of a CEO should not yield annual salaries and benefits totaling upwards of nine figures. If a company thrives, every one of its employees should be rewarded accordingly. Equal growth of income can be achieved by re-evaluation of monetary distribution within corporations to increase raises for workers and eliminate executive bonuses. The distribution of wealth within a corporation is about as fair as 300 against one in a game of dodge ball. In 2007, the Economic Policy Institute took a survey to determine that eighty percent of the working class has possession of only fifteen percent of wealth in America, while the one percent of citizens comprised of the upper class own almost thirty five percent (Executive Compensation, 2010). It is no secret that executives get paid in the millions every year to run their companies, but is it entirely necessary that they also receive stock options as well as bonuses comparable to their already undeserved salaries? Any CEO will argue their compensation is justified “because of the long hours they work and the intense responsibility of managing a corporation” (Executive Compensation, 2010), however most people put in long hours each week just to pay the bills and put food on the table. It