plainS-wordrhetoric

..an exercise, I'll just leave this here..

People who work for a living should earn a living.

If a company cannot afford to pay production- and service-layer employees enough to meet their needs for housing, food, medicine, and still enjoy leisure and prosperity, how can that company afford to pay its managers even higher salaries and benefits? How can it afford to pay its executives salaries and bonuses? How can it afford to pay its investors dividends?

If the claim is that managers and executives are much more critical to the company's success than production and service workers, then that is an argument for centralized, top-down command decision-making in an economic structure.

If the claim is that investors' right to growth is more important than workers' right to a living, then that is an argument for the right of a minority (investors) to live in ease off the hard work of a majority (workers).