Tag Archives: pay

The Government Will Foot the Bill!

This post was initially written in French https://freakonometrics.hypotheses.org/87308

Who has never heard this phrase? It comes back almost automatically as soon as a collective risk becomes visible. After a flood, after a wildfire, after a storm, after a drought that lasts too long, you hear, in passing conversation or in an op ed, a formula that sounds like both an obvious truth and a conclusion. That familiar The Government Will Foot the Bill, which I have kept as the title of this post. Sometimes it appears in a gentler form, The government must take responsibility. Sometimes in a harsher after the fact form, They have to pay. In every case, the phrase says something about our relationship to the collective, to solidarity, to justice, and to public money. It also says something about the way we turn a disaster into a political problem.

I wanted to write a post that starts from this formula, not to decide whether the claim is true or false, but to understand what it means, what it hides, and what it forces us to make explicit. The expression has a particular power. It seems simple, but it compresses very different ideas, sometimes contradictory. It can express an expectation of protection. It can express anger. It can express a demand for justice. It can express a vague belief in an unlimited common pot (that famous magic money, as we call it in French) to reuse the well known phrase. It can also express a feeling of individual powerlessness. And depending on the country, the history of institutions, and lived experience of risk, the word government does not evoke the same thing. Still, it is worth noting that this debate about who pays often starts too late, because trying to clarify the government will foot the bill is already turning the phrase into a programme, fiscal and moral.

Continue reading The Government Will Foot the Bill!

The Pay-for-Performance Myth

Last week, Eric Chemi and Ariana Giorgi published an interesting article on “The Pay-for-Performance Myth

With all the public chatter about exorbitant executive compensation and income inequality, it’s useful to look at the relationship between chief executive officer pay and corporate performance. Typically, when the subject of their big pay packages arises, CEOs—usually through their spokespeople—say they are paid for performance. Does data back that up?

An analysis of compensation data publicly released by Equilar shows little correlation between CEO pay and company performance. Equilar ranked the salaries of 200 highly paid CEOs. When compared to metrics such as revenue, profitability, and stock return, the scattering of data looks pretty random, as though performance doesn’t matter. The comparison makes it look as if there is zero relationship between pay and performance.

In the article, they produce a copula-type plot (since ranks – only – are considered). Ariana kindly sent me the dataset (that was used in The Pay at the Top) to play with it

> base=read.table("ceo.csv",sep=";",header=TRUE)

Here I normalize (dividing by the size of the dataset) to have uniform distribution on the unit interval (instead of working with ranks, i.e. integers). If we remove that scaling factor, the scatterplot is that same as the one mentioned in  the Pay-for-performance myth.

> n=nrow(base)
> U=rank(base[,1])/(n+1)
> V=rank(base[,2])/(n+1)
> plot(U,V,xlab="Rank CEO Pay",
+ ylab="Rank Stock Return")

This is the copula type representation.

If we visualize the density of the copula (using the algorithm described in the joint paper with Gery and Davy), we get either

> library("copula")
> library("ks")
> library("MASS")
> library("locfit")
> n.res=32
> ctilde1=probtranscopkde(UVs,p=1,
+ u.out=seq(1/(2*n.res+1),1-1/(2*n.res+1),
+length=n.res),plots=TRUE)

Continue reading The Pay-for-Performance Myth