One could say that if insolvency can only be averted by dismissing many employees, management has done something very wrong for a long time before. Especially since this is an argument often put forward by entrepreneurs, but you can tell just as many cases where mass layoffs follow the most successful business years in the company’s history. So we can find examples for everything.
Well, disruptive developments: electric cars instead of combustion engines, sanctions and export tariffs in important sales markets, pandemics, bans by politicians. All things that supposedly occur. And senior executives are not infallible either. And they don’t have crystal balls. But they mostly have a broader intellectual horizon (my experience!). However, from the armchair in front of the home fireplace in the KfW40 house (or in the socialist clubhouse), one can nicely rant about such things.
I don’t understand your second part. I explicitly pointed out that I don’t want to take anything away from managers (so I’m not criticizing companies that pay managers so much), but I would grant certain professions significantly higher earnings (this is to be understood as a criticism of society).
Think it through to the end for a change: “Money” is not an end in itself but a means to an end. The total sum of all goods and services is finite in an economy, regardless of how many zeros you append to the number at the end of a figure. And if one group receives more, it is at the expense of others. Since we already have the highest tax burden in the world and thus the highest redistribution rate, what would your proposal be: take everything from everyone and then pay out a small allowance? Pay out the rest of the money according to social scoring (usefulness to the body politic determined, for example, by the number of vaccinations and social work instead of “greed,” degree of wokeness, bicycle instead of car, smallest possible apartment, as little CO2 as possible). Would you then finally be happy?