Obama administration plans to slash pay of executives at 7 bailed-out companies

[jasonk282]

Where people need to get pissed is if the government tries this with companies that haven't taken a red cent of the bail out money.

It has to start somewhere, why not where people won't bitch about it.

 

[AFA]

There must be limits even to capitalism. The average ceo asshole makes 234 times the amount of the entry level worker. The ceo does not generate 234 times *wealth* or success for a company. ceo pay SHOULD BE CAPPED at 10 times the lowest salary offered by the company. ceos get paid like kings whether or not the stock performs or tanks...that's the problem.

This is fine, but it's a distraction away from the bigger issue that the Obama Administration hasn't dealt with, and that is--REGULATION.

Obama needs to force Congress to pass MEANINGFUL REGULATION so these companies don't fuck up and take down the entire economy because of greed and selfishness.

Actually years ago I heard figures more into the 1,000's of times more than the entry level worker in the US, but that in Japan it's more like 1:10.

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executivepay06.html

The economy has already been taken down because of greed and selfishness.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Just baffles me how people can see that difference in compensation that the US has as being in anyway fair or just.The guys in the suits at the top are not worth 1000s of times more than the workers.The japanease and europeans get that and don't need laws to make that a reality,but obviously in the US we do need that.

I have been told before "you never will get rich working for somebody else".That obviously isn't true eithier.Exec's working for other people are getting unbeleivable sums in many cases.Millions in bonuses,not to mention millions in straight compensation.Bad enough privately owned companies might operate with such wage and compensation disparities,hired help at publically traded companies getting such extreme amounts is hard to justify IMO.

But don't expect any change by political action,they own the govt.The gov't even under an Obama is only going to to make baby steps and do marginal things to be seen as a populist.

 

[Rey C.]

For publicly owned/share companies, there needs to be the assurance that shareholders (the actual owners of the company) have a real say in how the board is formed and how it runs (including compensation). Too often the board is made up of stooges and lackies of the Chairman and CEO (often the same person). He's not exactly my hero, but one does have to admire people like Carl Ichan for how he attacks entrenched Boards of Directors, who do not follow the basic purpose of a for profit corporation: to enhance shareholder value. Ken Lewis certainly knew nothing about that at Bank of America. Robert Nardelli knew nothing about that while he was at Home Depot or at Chrysler (though it wasn't publicly traded at the time). The Chairman and CEO of one of my former companies knew absolutely nothing about that (his 35 year old +/- trophy wife probably distracted him). I think he made in excess of $10 million last year (including bonuses), while the stock dropped by roughly 80%.

There was an excellent book (the name of which escapes me right now) that I read about 25 years ago. It focused on the emerging "management class" in the United States. These are people who are the executive managers of corporations, but have no other link to that company. And it's like a club, or maybe a roving band of gypsies is a better description. They arrive, fatten their own pockets, whether the company is successful or not, and then leave for the next gig... to do the exact same thing.

When a group of people go into a room, have coffee, shoot the shit for a couple of hours and then decide that the Chairman of the BoD/CEO, and all of his yes men, will get outlandish bonuses based on fuzzy metrics that aren't tied to how the company does, or the share price... we know that the system is broken. And the system is broken right now.

Ken Lewis wrecked Bank of America. His retirement package is going to approach $70 million. That's not something I want the Government to "fix". That's something that I want shareholders to have more power to fix. The SEC needs to make sure that the game is not being rigged at the top.

It's just a shame that in some cases these institutions had been allowed to grow so large that their failure would have made life worse for the average Joe than any of these management class boys & girls. If we went in the tank, they would just move to Switzerland or Monaco. But since they had to beg for money to keep their firms afloat, they will now have to do as they're told. Because that's what they signed up for.

Benito Mussolini and Francisco Franco wanted to control private industry. And private industry resisted (for a short while). The end result is somewhat the same, but the road that got us to this result is very different in this case. I think Obama wants to dictate certain rules to the banking industry (too many, too few.. not for me to say just yet). But I see absolutely no indication that he wants full government control over banking. And that is a necessary component of actual fascism. IMO, people continue to remain fascinated with words that end in "ism", whether they apply to a situation or not.

 

[Will E Worm]

Yes according to Michale Bay he disbands NEST and the Deciptcons once again try to destroy earth.

That made sense...

Of course there is this little thing about them going to the government in the first place. If you want total control over your affairs, don't ask for tax payer money.:dunno:

I don't care. They over stepped their bounds yet again. I just don't care.

 

[donalddavenport]

I can see this issue from both perspectives. If the company is and has gotten government funds for the sake of survival, then while they are being supported the government, there should be reasonable spending constraints; that includes its payroll.

On the other hand, I believe that there could be unintended consequences, where some in government may feel that they can adjust the pay of companies that have never received government support money.

In all reality, the entire government should be very careful in how it spends all tax dollars. All members of congress and the executive branch should take a temporary pay decrease of no less then 10%, and all Czars that are not confirmed by the Senate with a defined job title and budget, should work for FREE, and act as more of an advisor and watchdog.

There should all so be a reduction in travel by the President, his cabinet and congress. Only essential trips should be made.

 

[knowone]

On one of the CNN news shows they said that their email response was 100% positive for this action.

 

[Facetious]

I pains me to see this but when YOU GO TO THE GOVERNMENT for help, the government has to have some say in how you use the people's taxes.

Moral of the story....don't fuck your affairs up so bad that you have to rely on the government to make you solvent.

Do you think that Chrysler brought Robert Nardelli aboard to bring that corp out of
the toilet ? :1orglaugh


"Chrysler Chief Executive Bob Nardelli said government loans would help speed the electric technology to market. But if they aren't approved, Chrysler will have to spend limited resources on developing new technology and would have to make cuts elsewhere, possibly in employment and development of conventional products. "Unfortunately we have had to furlough many families as a result of the economy turmoil and certainly the downward spiraling in the industry," he said. "I'd like to make sure that we don't have to go further to be able to support advanced technology work."[31] source: wiki

"On August 5, 2007, Robert Nardelli became chairman and CEO of Chrysler, which had recently been taken private by private equity firm, *Cerberus Capital Management. His current annual salary at Chrysler is $1, *with other compensation not publicly disclosed".



* Review the cast of characters over at Cerberus. :1orglaugh
* Ah haaa !

 

[CunningStunts]

On one of the CNN news shows they said that their email response was 100% positive for this action.

Well great, maybe we should let average Joe and Sally out there dictate US policy.

 

[georges]

and many people thought obama would take the economy out of the shitter.
what a bunch of bloody naive tools :wtf::lame::dunno:

 

[jasonk282]

I heard the they are NOT going to look into GE, but yet they got bail out money why?

Also why is the White House attacking the U.S Chamber of Commerce, which represents numerous business and small business?

 

[Friday on my mind]

I heard the they are NOT going to look into GE, but yet they got bail out money why?

Also why is the White House attacking the U.S Chamber of Commerce, which represents numerous business and small business?

The chamber of commerce has long history of of representing only the interests of employers at the expense of workers and the common good.Anti union,anti govt regulations of any kinds like on health and safety of workers etc.
Without more details I would bet the chamber is now speaking up for the interests of buisnesses like insurance companies in the health care debate.Probably out spreading their lies and propaganda to try to block again something for the people like health care reform which would cost their clients the insurance companies some of their profits.

Nothing too bad could happen to the people at the chamber of commerce.

Their really is a right and wrong in some cases and good and evil,and the chamber is EVIL!!!!:eek:

 

[jasonk282]

The chamber of commerce has long history of of representing only the interests of employers at the expense of workers and the common good.Anti union,anti govt regulations of any kinds like on health and safety of workers etc.
Without more details I would bet the chamber is now speaking up for the interests of buisnesses like insurance companies in the health care debate.Probably out spreading their lies and propaganda to try to block again something for the people like health care reform which would cost their clients the insurance companies some of their profits.

Nothing too bad could happen to the people at the chamber of commerce.

Their really is a right and wrong in some cases and good and evil,and the chamber is EVIL!!!!:eek:

So basicly the Us Chamber of commerce represents everything that Democrats are aganist.
Yet thousands of business belong to chambers of commerance through America.


what about the Fed?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...lamps-down-on-wall-street-pay/article1334618/

What about the Fed
"the Fed would not actually set compensation, but could veto pay policies that it thinks induce risky behaviour"
What about Alan Greenspan 0% intrest rate, oops he was Charman of the Fed.

 

[Friday on my mind]

So basicly the Us Chamber of commerce represents everything that Democrats are aganist.
Yet thousands of business belong to chambers of commerance through America.


what about the Fed?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...lamps-down-on-wall-street-pay/article1334618/

What about the Fed
"the Fed would not actually set compensation, but could veto pay policies that it thinks induce risky behaviour"
What about Alan Greenspan 0% intrest rate, oops he was Charman of the Fed.

Did you see my thread on the PBS show "Frontline" that was on the other night.You really should watch it.Greenspan was a disciple of a woman named Ayn Rand ,famous for her total anti govt regulation libertarian philosophy towards economics.Greenspan once said even outright fraud should not be regulated and that we should just let free enterprsie police it and that free markets would take care of such.Greenspan now see's he was wrong,after the mess the banks and others have gotten us in and says so in the show.

And let me say unfortuantely the chamber and the democrates are not at odds on issues nearly enough.This is shown very clearly in the frontline show.Both parties including Obama are at the mercy of these powerfull vested interests.If they were really going to do something for the common good ,things like minimum wage would much higher along with a whole host of other issues and positions that would be good for workers.Make no mistake about it, these powerfull vested interests while maybe more comfortable with republicans in power,still do very nicely with dems in charge.

 

[blakey]

Re: This is what should have happened years ago ...

Why?

When you take federal funds you are now being funded by the tax payer and a public servant. There is a level of expectations on compensation. If you don't want that, then don't take the money. Leave and find a job elsewhere with better pay in the completely private sector.

I love how Republicans bitch about ACORN and then bitch about this. I mean they want the same accountability out of ACORN as well, because they take public funds too. So why a double-standard?

And I say this as a Capitalist and a Libertarian. If you don't want the government with any say, then don't take their funds. If you do, then you are now forced to comply.

In the case where your firm was going to go bankrupt, but the government saved you, your existing employment contracts are null and void. Sorry, but the bullshit of using the existing compensation agreements are total bullshit when your firm would have gone bankrupt.

Again, if they don't like it they can leave and get another, true private sector job.

just lookin in on this thread after a while off the board,

and before i read the rest of it,

i gotta say,

good post prof :thumbsup:

how the fuck can this be wrong ...

i'm a capitalist, a liberal,
possibly a conservative (with a very small c, and uk version)
but any reasonable person can see the uk & us economies are
basically up sh*t creek because of investment bankers taking too
many risks
buying into mortgages sold to people who had no chance of
being able to pay them back, and that screwed up a few mainstream, some universal, uk banks
which had to take government handouts,
which would "literally" have been unthinkable
10 years ago ... :eek:

:wave2:

 

[Facetious]

The corporate bail out scheme is nothing more than a government special interest corporate acquisition scheme which has the potential to create moral hazard- like predicaments for corporate board of directorships, that is, for the ones that aren't already complicit with the program.

Just imagine, the federal government having to ability to "rescue" (bail out and assume control of) the very corporations that they themselves conspired to bring down ? :dunno: I'm just thinking about possibilities, folks.

This is the ultimate "we will destroy you from within scheme" if you ask me.

 

[jasonk282]

The corporate bail out scheme is nothing more than a government special interest corporate acquisition scheme which creates a moral hazard- like predicament for corporate board of directorships, that is, for the ones that aren't already complicit with the program.

Just imagine, the federal government having to ability to "rescue" (bail out and assume control of) the very corporations that they themselves conspired to bring down :dunno:

This is the ultimate "we will destroy you from within scheme" if you ask me.

Sounds like something Marx or Lenin would be proud of. Also the "hit list" http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28638.html#

Like how the White house tried to keep Fox news from a press untill the other MSM steped up and called BS.

Or maybe Mao, since the new Manufacturing Czar said "We kind of agree with Mao that political power comes largely from the barrel of a gun"


Remember Obama said: Judge him by those from whom he seeks advice
http://www.thecitizen.com/~citizen0/node/40069

 

[Rey C.]

So what solutions or measures do people see as appropriate going forward? Reinstate at least some portions of Glass-Stegall? Move back to the gold standard? Dissolve the Fed? Or take the "if the money center banks and bank holding companies get themselves in trouble again, let them all go under... won't affect me; I have all my money in a local bank/credit union" approach? Other ideas???

 

[jasonk282]

So what solutions or measures do people see as appropriate going forward? Reinstate at least some portions of Glass-Stegall? Move back to the gold standard? Dissolve the Fed? Or take the "if the money center banks and bank holding companies get themselves in trouble again, let them all go under... won't affect me; I have all my money in a local bank/credit union" approach? Other ideas???

Well it is NOT the 4th option that's for sure. Something has to be better then the goverment running our banks and businees'. I have not had a banking or economics class since college, 9 years ago, but like I said beofre we can't have the goverment controling our banks and business'.

 

[titsrock]

Courtesy of Wiki---here is what Marx basically believed: Marx argued that capitalism, like previous socioeconomic systems, will inevitably produce internal tensions which will lead to its destruction.[2] Just as capitalism replaced feudalism, he believed socialism will, in its turn, replace capitalism, and lead to a stateless, classless society called pure communism.

Marx was right that Capitalism wouldn't last. America no longer practices capitalism. We practice Corporatism. Our Gov't whores itself out to Corporate interests.

So, the "tensions" that Marx predicted are occuring now as our Corporations fail.

HUMANISM will replace Corporatism in the U.S. :thumbsup: