true as that may be, the point being raised in this thread was, that a few of them are rewarded handsomely even if utter failures.
To me it's simple, you do well, you should be paid well, you do badly, then sorry no bonus for you (at best).
In relative terms, many of them are paid less if the company does badly than if it does well under their leadership.It may be the difference between $60 million and $90 million, which isn't a small sum, but it is less.
I think the problem in this discussion is that salaries in the tens of millions and golden parachutes seem like a pretty cushy exit for someone who has failed in a job. And they are. But that's the deal the executives made. They got as much as they could for their service going in. That's what Adam Smith meant when he called England a "nation of shopkeepers." Everyone is trying to sell their product or service at the highest possible price.
This is what workers need to learn. They need to ask for the extra money when hired, then continue to add to their inventory of "skills" throughout their careers. They need to display their merchandise to its best advantage and they need to keep their "shops" open as long as possible.