[djbebs]

Bingo!

All these complaints that productivity growth has been matched by salary growth always seems to ignore that most of the productivity gains have been the result of capital expenditure, not of workers being better at their jobs.

[danaris]

And why, exactly, should that matter?

The execs of each company didn't personally invent every machine and write every piece of software their employees are now using to be productive. Hell, a lot of it they didn't even particularly choose—so much of the productivity gains comes from basic stuff like "personal computers" and "Microsoft Office".

They are benefiting from the labour and expertise of others, and saying that means they deserve to get more money. Why? Why should those gains not be shared equally with the people who are actually doing the work?

[djbebs]

Because the ones paying for that increase in productivity should be the ones receiving the benefits from it.

That is, the shareholders who own the business and paid for the machines, not the employees who merely operate them.

[yobbo]

One can argue that neither execs or workers deserve more, but worker's pay is mostly determined by supply and demand, while exec's pay is a governance issue that's the responsibility of the owners.