1. Your comment about the penthouse owner suggests a lot about how you perceive the world. No, I did not say that in fact in most apartments the penthouse owner does not have the majority of votes assuming that the voting was done on the basis of each units floor space. Then the majority would be by who has to fund the fees. The cutoff being 50% plus 1 decides how you spend the fund.
2. Yes, your proposal starts the process of trying to establish an alternative viewpoint and measurement. Much like we have in politics right now. So we elect the politicians on an exhaustive basis. Then we don't like what they intend doing so we start a page on Change.org to change their behaviour... No different to what you are proposing - Is it really relevant that even 200,000 think we should do ... What we cannot establish is what the majority want us to do. So the pressure group wins out because they shout the loudest and at times that can be the Penthouse owner... I am opposed to that - we have one process one outcome leave the playing field or get enough votes to vote them out or sell out.
3. You don't have any evidence that majority see the reward system as suspicious and if the majority of shareholders see it that way ( by way of who has the most invested = number of shares) they can fire the management. I don't mind paying very high remuneration if it is based upon results - I also think that the majority invested should say how the company is run.
4. Yes, I am opposed to creating any additional measure - The majority of shareholders by the number of shares do say what should happen. You just think a form of socialism is the best way to run the company and that is not its charter. The majority of people think that management is overpaid - Possibly and at times I think that is so in regard to a specific company or even country but if we are to allow disinterested parties who can for say $12 each have an equal vote with say Statewide Super then I cannot agree because then you may as well cancel capitalism and have committees running companies and we have those in government and look how well that works.
5. Yes, I do and he is not that wonderful alternative to all things capitalistic. He gets paid a fixed remuneration of $100,000 and lives fairly frugally. But his compensation is, in fact, variable and has at times exceeded $500,000. However, his wealth resides within his equity and in fact, his famous attack on the tax system was debunked as inaccurate.
(20min delay)
