Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (338734)	5/31/2007 2:11:24 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574884

I have said repeatedly that salaries at the high end are growing exponentially when compared to lesser salaries. Assuming that's true, it isn't the same as "the rich are getting richer at the expense of the poor", any more then if you accelerate your car, while I apply the breaks on mine, you would be going faster at the expense of my car. There is the same correlation between salaries of the rich and poor as there is between two people driving on the same block of the same street at the same time. here is no fixed schedule that says a chancellor must get X amount of dollars. As you attest to up above, the salary is determined by negotations between the school and the candidate. That's arbitrary. Any fixed schedule would itself be arbitrary. The particular salary under the fixed schedule might not be, it would be set by the schedule, but the setting of the schedule would be. You are arguing here for the sake of argument. Salaries of chancellors are negotiated; they are arbitrary. There is no fixed schedule that says a chancellor should make X amount of money.