well lets look at some numbers/research. here is a link to a pdf of a study of canadian (socialists!!) ceo pay. notably:
"The typical CEO's compensation grew by 112% during 1997, whether his company's profits rose or fell. He [sic] then received an additional raise of 2% for every 10% increase in company profits. Again the relationship is positive but weak: changes in profits expalin only 5% of the changes in ceo compensation"
or we can look at productivity of US workers -- standard economic theory for what should raise their wages. some numbers say:
"If wages had kept pace with rising productivity since 1968, the average hourly wage would have been $24.56 in 2000, rather than $13.74. The minimum wage would be $13.80--not $5.15."
I suppose what would really add to the discussion, besides theories such as yours, are numbers comporable to that canadian study for US corporations. Just how well did CEO's do, relative not only to workers, but to stockholders and profits?