Are highly-paid CEOs actually sociopaths?

Considering their decisions often have rough ramifications for so many people, says Thom Hartmann:

So why is executive pay so high?

I’ve examined this with both my psychotherapist hat on and my amateur economist hat on, and only one rational answer presents itself: CEOs in America make as much money as they do because there really is a shortage of people with their skill set. And it’s such a serious shortage that some companies have to pay as much as $1 million a day to have somebody successfully do the job.

But what part of being a CEO could be so difficult-so impossible for mere mortals-that it would mean that there are only a few hundred individuals in the United States capable of performing it?

In my humble opinion, it’s the sociopath part.

CEOs of community-based businesses are typically responsive to their communities and decent people. But the CEOs of most of the world’s largest corporations daily make decisions that destroy the lives of many other human beings.

Only about 1 to 3 percent of us are sociopaths-people who don’t have normal human feelings and can easily go to sleep at night after having done horrific things. And of that 1 percent of sociopaths, there’s probably only a fraction of a percent with a college education. And of that tiny fraction, there’s an even tinier fraction that understands how business works, particularly within any specific industry.

Thus there is such a shortage of people who can run modern monopolistic, destructive corporations that stockholders have to pay millions to get them to work. And being sociopaths, they gladly take the money without any thought to its social consequences.

Too harsh? Not harsh enough?

If women carried the first child and men carried the second…

…would any family ever have more than two children?

Probably not. This guy wore an “empathy belly” and barely made it three hours. I have several reactions to this, and none of them friendly. You?

Dr. Tiller’s self-confessed killer says his actions are justified

Scott Roeder, who in May gunned down abortion doctor Dr. George Tiller at the doctor’s Wichita church, told the Associated Press that the shooting was justified. He said:

Violence is not wrong in all situations, so if it takes that – then if it is done righteously – then, if it’s done, it is OK.

He summed up his motivation:

…he was in the business, and had been for many years, of taking the lives of unborn children. So if the lives of born children are worthy of protection, why would not the lives of unborn children be worthy of protection? That is really what it comes down to.

Some of Roeder’s family members say he is mentally ill, but Roeder says any diagnosis he may have had earlier was brought on by drug use, and he hasn’t used drugs in years.

Roeder faces a preliminary hearing Tuesday. Given the circumstances, he won’t be eligible for the death penalty in Kansas. Meanwhile, Operation Rescue insists Roeder is not a part of their group, which angers Roeder.

We are starting this conversation in another thread (about war). Let’s move the conversation here. Is there such a thing as justifiable violence? And if so, under what circumstances would it be justified?

Should a wall divide the genders at the Kotel?

(That’s also known as the Western Wall, the remaining wall of the Temple Mount, the part of the structure nearest to the Holy of Holies, the most sacred part of the building.)

Observant Jews go pray at the wall, and slip notes to God between the huge stones — but they do so divided by genders, and Lilit Marcus wonders why.

It’s hard to believe your prophets

More on Jenny Lewis here.

Dang! We should have been aerospace engineers!

See what they make? Buttloads of cash!

Now run your finger down the list. That’s right. Keep going…going…going. See journalism? Now keep going…going…see theology? Right near the bottom? Now go all the way to my second career choice. Social work. At the bottom.

Are you on the list? And if you are, and you rank higher than any of my interests, can I borrow some money? Thanks, much.

And thanks, Feminist Philosophers, for the link.

Tim Tebow is a virgin

The University of Florida quarterback (and ‘07 Heisman trophy winner) answered a reporter’s question at a press conference with no small amount of grace — and stunned the press (and angered others).

Tebow is a Christian humanitarian, and veering away from premarital sex is part of that first label. Weird that a standout college athlete’s virginity would be news, but there you are.

Because it worked so well for Jon & Kate…

…the Octomom has signed a deal for each of her 14 children to receive $250 a day to star in a reality television show.

Or maybe it’s each of her 250 children will earn $14 a day. Either way, the money is less than staggering — considering – and having watched the implosion of the Gosselin family on their own reality show, you have to wonder.

You remember the Octomom, yes? Nadya Suleman?

Nekkid women need not apply

A group of Scottish hairdressers wanted to make a donation to an anti-domestic violence organization, but the organization said no thank you. Seems the hairdressers, The Hair Bares, had earned the money from their (tastefully) nude calendar.

Seems simple enough, but Mandy Van Deven cries foul.

Is it paternalistic to ban a burqa?

Nursel Guzeldeniz says yes.

Rather than bad the burqa — as French president Nicolas Sarkozy has done — she suggests;

Wouldn’t it be more productive if we put all our energy into genuine feminist projects to empower women from all backgrounds through education, employment, generating a critical understanding of women’s issues and creating public awareness about women’s rights rather than preaching women what-to-wear or what-not-to-wear?