As if you know dick about what Fiorina did as CEO of HP. She didn't do "well for herself and the shareholders", during her tenure, the stock value dropped 50%. Which means that she lowered the wealth gap a shit ton by cutting in half the net worth of HP investors (and her own), that is why she got shit canned. That is what happens when stock prices fall, companies run out of cash. When stock prices are rising, employees might not directly benefit if they own no stock, but a company doing well is going to hire more, pay more generously and offer better benefits. That is why nobody turns down Google when they come a knocking. 

Layoffs aren't done because a CEO decides the stock price needs to go up. It is like an amputation, they are cutting off the wounded portion in the hopes that they can save what is left. It is usually an act of last resort and desperation. Sometimes, it works and the company stems its losses, but the shareholders aren't going to get richer for it overnight. It often takes years for the stock to get back up to value after extreme layoffs. 

Any proof of that? Do you have a lot of experience in corporate board rooms? Do you read the financial blogs daily and track the decisions these boards make? Have you ever even voted in a board election?

Well yeah, that is blindingly obvious. Numbers don't lie and her numbers were terrible. Though to be fair, the ceos after her haven't done a much better job. HP is in a death spiral and failed to modernize, as large as it is, its death will take decades, but eventually it is going to be bought up by a new player and absorbed out of existence. I'm not investing in it. 

Since when have you ever accepted the free market?

The most successful and best paid CEOs don't make a salary at all. They are paid almost entirely in stock, and I think it is important that the CEO is directly impacted by the success or failure of the company. My point was that when workers are "fucked over", the shareholders aren't pleased because the stock probably isn't performing. Workers, CEOs and the board have the same interests- a profitable company is better for every single person who works for it, from the janitor to the CEO. 

You really shouldn't talk about history because you always fuck it up. Carter started deregulation and deregulated far more than Regan ever did. My idea of global competition is to increase productivity, which is good for everyone. We ought to be able to virtually eliminate manual human labor in the next century.