White House Aides Complain That Executive Salary Caps Are Too Tough
White House Aides Complain That Executive Salary Caps Are Too Tough
During final negotiations on the $787 billion economic recovery package last week, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-CT) “slipped in a provision to limit bonuses for executives at institutions receiving government bailout funds to a third of their salaries.” The limits go beyond what President Obama had proposed. The caps also apply to a wider circle of employees at financial firms, rather than just the senior executives.
The White House is concerned that the stringent limits “could prompt financial institutions to repay the government too quickly.” Financial firm lobbyists are also worried that they will lose personnel, “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”
On the Sunday shows this morning, White House aides David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs indicated that they wanted Congress to loosen the executive pay provision. On Fox News Sunday, Axelrod said the White House plans to work “with the Senate to come up — and the House — to come up with an appropriate approach to this.” On Face the Nation, Gibbs similarly said, “We look forward to working with Congress as we go forward on all measures of executive compensation,” but wouldn’t say whether the White House is “satisfied” with the pay limits.
It doesn’t appear Congress is too willing to revise its legislation, however. On Face the Nation, Republican Sen. Richard Shelby and Democratic Rep. Barney Frank both expressed their approval of the executive pay limit:
SCHIEFFER: So, even though you voted against this bill, you sound like you’re very much for this provision.
SHELBY: I — I am. I think we need that. [...]
FRANK: Let me be very clear. Mr. Gibbs may not like it, but it’s gonna be enforced. … This is not an option. This is not, frankly, the Bush administration where they’re going to issue a signing statement and refuse to enforce it.
Watch it:
Commenting on the issue of “executive compensation,” The New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg recently wrote, “I have to say, I get a little dizzy with disgust whenever I hear that word used to describe some C.E.O.’s pay envelope. … What, exactly, are these people being ‘compensated’ for? Are they victims of crime? Or is it the long hours, the loneliness, the inability to spend time with their children—so much more terrible than the plight of a middle-aged immigrant mother working double shifts as an office cleaner?”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
This limitation hits at the core of the Wall Street and Economic meltdowns – Greed!
If you ran your company into default and require American taxpayers and government to bail you out; why do you deserve rewards and more compensation than the President of your bail-out organization??
February 15th, 2009 at 12:11 pmOk,
Here are some of the geniuses thinking on how a car company should be run.
The 65-mpg car Ford won’t sell in US
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/Extra/the-65-mpg-car-ford-won%27t-sell-in-us.aspx
From the article, the rationale (in all its loveliness):
But Ford, whose Fiesta ECOnetic compares favorably with European diesels, can’t make a business case for bringing the car to the United States.
First of all, the engines are built in Britain, so labor costs are high. Plus the pound remains stronger than the greenback. At prevailing exchange rates, the Fiesta ECOnetic would sell for about $25,700 in the United States.
By contrast, the Prius typically goes for about $24,000.
A $1,300 tax deduction available to buyers of new diesel cars could bring the price of the Fiesta to around $24,400. But Ford doesn’t believe it could charge enough to make money on an imported ECOnetic.
Ford plans to make a gas-powered version of the Fiesta in Mexico for the United States. So why not manufacture diesel engines there, too?
Building a plant would cost at least $350 million at a time when Ford has been burning through more than $1 billion a month in cash reserves. Besides, the automaker would have to produce at least 350,000 engines a year to make such a venture profitable.
“We just don’t think North and South America would buy that many diesel cars,” Fields says
Let me see if I got this straight. Make engines in Britain with high costs. Make engines in Mexico for low cost. And Ford would continue to ONLY make the engines in Britain because….? Could not MEXICO become your GLOBAL engine source for this car?
Is it just me? Can I have my $500,000 now?
February 15th, 2009 at 12:13 pmWaitpeople have been alarmed by their salary cap for years. Below minimum wages plus tips might be the way to go with these folks as well. Sort of an evening of the playing field. Oh and don’t give me that shit about skill sets. Let’s see that CEO manage 3 two topps, 2 four tops, and that birthday party with those ridiculous waspy service expectations…
February 15th, 2009 at 12:16 pmJust a tic here..arent these some of the same people that said union wages were to high?
Know what the difference between a banking cartel and a union is?
Only about 350 billion
February 15th, 2009 at 12:20 pmGet some bank tellers in those jobs — their families would appreciate the extra bucks, and they know how to balance their drawer at the end of the day.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:23 pmThe message these people are sending is loaded with hypocrisy.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:27 pmObama’s financial advisers are tied directly into the banks that have been bailed out (Citibank, Goldman-Sachs) or are even under investigation (UIB). For instance, Goldman-Sachs received $10 billion in funds, but laid off 10% of it’s workforce, while paying their CEO $125 MILLION in compensation. That would have paid a lot of salaries of those who were laid off. Seems to me that banks need to “lose” that kind of “talent.” Frankly, I think we should just nationalize the banks temporarily and be done with it.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:30 pmFirst of all, stringent, not strident (stingent: tight, harsh, etc; strident: shrieking, piercing, loud, etc).
Second ofall, how stringent is a bonus no greater than 30% of your income? Honestly, we did away with our tiny $500 bonuses a few years ago, and have been working with pay cuts disguised as “no overtime” and “recalculation of overtime according to rules we can get away with” for a while.
You get awfully tired of the government comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted ( from JKGalbraith).
February 15th, 2009 at 12:32 pm“driving talented employees to companies”
Say what? What “talented” employees are these lobbyists talking about? I mean if “talented” employees have driven their respective banks into the ground who would want to hire them? This is part of the argument about pay caps that I have never understood. Does it take “talent” to drive a bank to insolvency?
February 15th, 2009 at 12:34 pmI’m beginning to think Obama has no intention of changing the status quo. I’m beginning to think we’ve been had. I’m already a little embarrassed that I so aggressively supported the “change” we were promised.
Things we will not get:
Justice
Fair markets
Fair taxation
An end to our current wars (although, it looks like we might get some new ones)
Accountability
Should have gone with Kucinich.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:37 pmthey will lose personnel, “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”
What aquarius2 said. And can someone explain why an overseas bank would hire a discredited American banker, when everyone in the world is blaming us for the global financial meltdown?
February 15th, 2009 at 12:40 pmAdam Putnam, another republican, said last week that the market should set salaries, but if the public’s dollars are used it should be on the public’s terms.
We already have a problem with shareholders not having a say in executive compensation; the opposition to the public having a say comes at no surprise. The big corporations take the capital and forget your name.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:41 pmI’ll take the job at the reduced cap level.
¶ AIO
February 15th, 2009 at 12:42 pmWell, hey, I’m available – I got laid off last Tuesday. I need a job, and I’ll gladly work for $500,000 year.
Call me!
February 15th, 2009 at 12:49 pmEven a Troll doesn’t get this one. I live a very comfortable life on a teacher’s salary. In a 30 year career I calculate that my total income will be somewhere around 1.5 million – in my life! And yet, $500,000 for a single year is a hardship for these guys. Cripes, I could retire if my next year was like that!
And yet it is not enough. I just don’t get it.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:49 pmdriving talented employees to companies
I wouldn’t want them at my company. Their only job is to think too highly of themselves. Jack Welch admitted they aren’t in it to cure cancer or serve the public, they’re in it to make money. Manipulate money to make money, that’s it.
You’re all a dime a dozen, certainly not worth even approaching the $500,000 cap. Shut your yap and be stewards of the public’s money.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:49 pmObama to Work on Executive-Pay Limits After Industry Complaints
The Obama administration pledged to work with Congress on implementing tough executive-pay limitations at banks that get federal bailout money as critics said the new restrictions in economic- stimulus legislation will prompt talented managers to leave.
The limits, championed by Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, were tucked into the $787 billion fiscal stimulus bill approved Feb. 13 by Congress. President Barack Obama plans to sign the stimulus bill into law Feb. 17 in Denver, said his spokeswoman, Jen Psaki.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=amfHbQOMk1Ho&refer=home
February 15th, 2009 at 12:52 pmAnother thing I don’t get – why are Axelrod and Gibbs even for one tiny little instant sniffing around backing off this cap for CEOs being bailed out by the public? Are they doing it to ingratiate themselves to the Republicans? Cause the Left wing of the Dems is going to flip if they do this. Terrible politics combined with terrible polciy – why?
February 15th, 2009 at 12:54 pmThe White House is concerned that the strident limits “could prompt financial institutions to repay the government too quickly.” Financial firm lobbyists are also worried that they will lose personnel, “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”
1) Repay us too quickly? How is us getting our money back a problem?
2) What talented employees? For $500,000, I’d do the job, and I bet that even without an MBA from Havard, I’d do a much better job! Sheesh! These idiots got us into this mess – let them leave!
I agreed with a cranky old man in the airport who said that what was wrong with Wall Street today is that people used to get out of college and start at the bottom where they earned their way up, and got to know the company and its employees – whereas today they get out of school and think they are entitled to a million dollars. What we really need most is CEO attitude adjustment reform!
3) Let the CEO compensation bubble burst too. There’s plenty of talent in England, France, and Switzerland where CEOs only make 15-24 times the average worker’s salary – not the 475 times they get here.
4) Enough with the fear mongering. We at the bottom don’t care to hear anymore – we have little left to lose…
February 15th, 2009 at 12:55 pmKeltoi at Night Says:
February 15th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
I don’t get that either. If these guys have gone “off the reservation,” I hope Obama smacks then down hard. If not, then I’m concerned about the WH motives in this.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:56 pmI suppose this is coming from Geithner’s (mini-Paulson’s) braintrust, right? Geithner’s a terrible pick and needs to go. He’s a pretty good corporatist for someone who didn’t have a career in any corporation.
I think Obama should be looking to non-Governmental organizations (i.e., progressive think tanks) to fill these top posts. (He’s picked a few from CAP, and that’s a good start.) They’re independent, likely to be free of conflict, and they understand government even if they’ve never worked in government.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:56 pmSeems these “Business Makers and Shakers” had NO problem sitting on each others Board granting HUGE salaries and BONUSES to EACH OTHER, but now they are on MY payroll . . . and it’s the TAXPAYER setting the SALARY . . . live with it or get a REAL job in some outsourced country . . . assuming ANY company would consider FAILED TALENT worth anything . . . only on AMERICA’S Wall Street can a BILLION DOLLAR FAILURE command a MILLION DOLLAR RETENTION REWARD . . . bye boys . . .
February 15th, 2009 at 1:00 pmMy sympathies to you for your job loss, Annie. The carnage on the ground is really bad as Washington worries itself about offending those who got us in this mess.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:00 pmI suppose you resent the big red nose and the floppy clown shoes you are forced to wear while busing tables at Chucky Cheese too. Finish your education and get a real job if you are unhappy with your career choice.
Whine whine whine.
Today’s republicans don’t create any real jobs. They root for a low wage workforce. Funny you talk about education — you neither invest in it nor do you think highly of it.
Nor have you received one.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:02 pmFRANK: Let me be very clear. Mr. Gibbs may not like it, but it’s gonna be enforced. … This is not an option. This is not, frankly, the Bush administration where they’re going to issue a signing statement and refuse to enforce it.
Barney pretty much has job security, so he can afford to carry out this promise. I hope he does. I hope this isn’t just another empty promise from Congress.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:05 pmdbadass, I’d offer our resident troll a cuisine that gets inserted in other end.
Swordfish will do.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:05 pmThe levels of pay these executives draw is nothing short of theft from the employees, shareholders, and customers of the companies. I don’t know why anyone would expect someone who draws such a large salary that they negatively impact the bottom line of their company to actually run the company well. An executive’s compensation package is a good litmus test for how ethical they are generally.
Congress should not *need* to act to limit executive compensation. If the shareholders and boards of these companies were doing proper diligence they never would have allowed these robber barons to take over. Until the corporations of America fire these tyrants and get some adult leadership they are going to continue to have most of their profits stolen by this high flying con men.
At the least, we could roll back the tax cuts which make it cheaper to pay these ridiculous salaries. One of the goals of the progressive tax code is to make it disproportionately expensive to pay employees large salaries. This drives the creation of more moderate salary jobs. You can pay one employee $500,000 and withhold $175,000 of it as payroll tax or you can pay ten employees $50,000 each and withhold $125,000 total. That’s under the 2009 tax code. If you rolled it back to REAGAN era tax brackets it would be even more progressive.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:06 pmbenmaller Says:
I suppose you resent the big red nose and the floppy clown shoes you are forced to wear while busing tables at Chucky Cheese too. Finish your education and get a real job if you are unhappy with your career choice.
Whine whine whine.
February 15th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
And Ball Mauler has the nerve to call US elitist snobs.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:08 pmbenmaller Says: Finish your education and get a real job if you are unhappy with your career choice.
In case you hadn’t bothered to pull your head out of your arse for long enough to notice: People with college degrees are also getting laid off… 3.6 million jobs are gone in all areas of industry.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:09 pmMoth worthless degree for the coming 25 years (and all will be worthless when the cost/benefit analysis is done): MBA/Finance.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:11 pmThe White House is concerned that the stringent limits “could prompt financial institutions to repay the government too quickly.”
And this is a bad thing why?
Financial firm lobbyists are also worried that they will lose personnel, “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”
Do they mean the “talented people” who ran their companies into the ground. I’m sure there are plenty of talented people out there who would be happy to receive $500,000 a year as a CEO.
On his one, I disagree with the White House. Any financial institution who receives money from the government deserves to have their executive pay capped.
Why does the Obama Administration think it is OK to cap the salaries of executives in the auto industry but not in the financial industry?
February 15th, 2009 at 1:13 pmUnbelievable, the repubs are still doling out the advice that hard work is automatically linked to success, when they altered the landscape a long time ago. It’s no longer what you know, it’s whose ass you kiss. It’s whose clique you’re lucky to be a part of.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:16 pmMcWars Says: It’s whose clique you’re lucky to be a part of.
Ain’t that the truth!
February 15th, 2009 at 1:20 pmIt’s the old Horatio Alger myth that they want us to believe so that we will remain wage slaves.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:23 pmunbelievable Says:
benmaller Says: Finish your education and get a real job if you are unhappy with your career choice.
In case you hadn’t bothered to pull your head out of your arse for long enough to notice: People with college degrees are also getting laid off… 3.6 million jobs are gone in all areas of industry.
The Republicant’s will always say that if you don’t have a job go work at a fast food joint. The problem is, if you have a college education they are not going to hire you. Why would they when they have their pick of uneducated unemployed. I have a friend who has a college education and was laid off her job. She applied at every fast food joint in town and every retail store and she was turned away by each and every one of them. She was actually told by an HR person at a retail store that they don’t hire people with college degrees if they can help it because they won’t stay long if they can get a job in their field of study.
So the myth that anyone can get a job at a fast food restaurant is just that, a myth.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:26 pmMarcus Aurelius Says:
Moth worthless degree for the coming 25 years (and all will be worthless when the cost/benefit analysis is done): MBA/Finance.
Yet it’s the commonly most popular concentration. Some generations never learn…
MBA/Finance from Wharton? Pffff.
Master’s in Teaching from UVa? Sound choice!
February 15th, 2009 at 1:27 pmBall Mauler….?
Still looking for your masculinity?
February 15th, 2009 at 1:44 pmFK those guys.
Parasites, one and all.
Name one of them who invented something beneficial.
Overpaid pricks who justify their existence flying around to circlejerk on golf courses together.
Pathetic.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:47 pmMarcus Aurelius Says:
——————————————————————————–
I’m beginning to think Obama has no intention of changing the status quo. I’m beginning to think we’ve been had. I’m already a little embarrassed that I so aggressively supported the “change” we were promised.
Marcus, I feel you are right. Seems to me it is just more of the same.
February 15th, 2009 at 1:52 pmFinancial firm lobbyists are also worried that they will lose personnel, “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”
As many above have noted, Who. Gives. A. Flying. F**k?
The jerkoffs making the big bucks got us here. HELLO? Anybody pushing the case for the failed Masters of the Universe paying a bit of attention here? The MotU’s are incompetent. The MotU’s are financial terrorists either because they don’t know their asses from holes in the ground or they purposely subverted they system to feather their own nests. Either way they screwed over the American people and the whole world economy.
If the White House feels its so important that the financial jerkoffs get big bucks then they can give them money from their own pockets. Otherwise, STFU! Really. Just jump in a f**king lake. Just get the hell out. Jeezus.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:03 pmSome WH aides need to understand that the nation is increasingly progressive. Putting a D- after your name and coupling that with an appetite for corporatism is not an option.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:09 pmIs Melody Barnes having a say in any of this or is Lawrence Summers still running wild?
February 15th, 2009 at 2:09 pmI personally have experienced, as have MANY MANY others, the negative effects from these overpayed asswipes greed driven descisions. After having worked hard, saved, planned and invested my Entire working life. ONE HALF of my PERSONAL wealth and assets has been EVAPORATED!.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:09 pmAnyone sticking up for these criminals are in serious need of some reality.
Get a CLUE!
Would anyone have expected manballer — er, I mean benmaller — to understand the value of a liberal education?
No, I didn’t think so.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:13 pmbenmaller Says:
Right up there with Native American studies, Sociology, Political Science, Womens Issues and a Psych major.
Or how about a self directed, interdisciplinary, liberal arts degree? WTF is up with that?
Dedicated Liberal Arts majors have broad sway over a number of career fields and tend to be tremendous thinkers.
Just what is education, since you’re playing Mr. Encouragement? What is an education in your weasel mind, mauler?
February 15th, 2009 at 2:15 pm“Thinkin and learnin about stuff is stupid and gay”
-benwaball
February 15th, 2009 at 2:26 pmThe Liberal arts require imagination and using areas of the brain that are far removed from the bottom line of a spread sheet.
The MBA is a tool of enablement for the sociopathic manager.
Scratch that last thought. Totally inaccessable areas of their minds.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:28 pmHey all – Comedy Central is airing “Idiocracy” tonight.
Tune in, and see the glorious future “conservatives” want to lead us into.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:46 pmLet me guess — Vince McMahon paid for benmaller’s MBA in Wrasslin’ Management.
February 15th, 2009 at 2:50 pmHere’s a Radical Thought.
What if the steady Decline in Jobs is INEVITABLE?
What if the High technology revolution results in such a high level of Productivity that the world does just not have enough work for its people?
What if computers, robotics,telecommunications, and other high technologies are replacing human beings in virtually every sector and industry?
The much applauded recent gains in Productivity just means that Corporations can do the same amount of Work with Fewer Employees.
Perhaps these Overpaid Captains of Industry are not even interested in Economic Growth and Job Creation. Perhaps they are only Interested in a bigger slice of a Non Growing Pie.
February 15th, 2009 at 3:06 pmYeah we wouldn’t want to loose any of those “talented employees” who got us into this mess!! I say pay ‘em all minimum wage. That’s what the rest of us are doing, more or less.
February 15th, 2009 at 3:07 pmThe limits only limit salaries. The execs can still get massive stock options. And if the execs lead the corporation back to solvency, the value of these options is astronomical.
Doesn’t it make sense to have people who have the knowledge to lead things back into solvency ?
February 15th, 2009 at 3:33 pmBoth the White House and Barney Frank put forth dismally inadequate caps on executive pay. In fact Barney Frank /Chris Dodd didn’t even have a $$ cap on pay! Way to go Barney! See a big gaping loophole perhaps?
Obama will not be an effective leader until he realizes that all the people advising him will consistently act in the interest of the industries they come from. They will not act in the interest of the American people until they are forced to.
February 15th, 2009 at 4:06 pmSaty – you’re right – guess I should’ve just voted for Nader.
February 15th, 2009 at 6:35 pmCan someone help me out? I am missing something. The media floated the CEO PAY CAP earlier as a $500K per year salary. Then we learn that the final “pay cap” is actually only a cap on the bonuses to a third or so of the CEO’s actual salary. This is watered down and means that CEO salary is actually unlimited and their bonus caps, being based upon salary are also now unlimited, basically, but the Obama Adminstration is complaining that Congress went too far? What happened to the $500K per years salary cap? Why is Obama complaining over a watered down non-cap as being too strict!?
PLEASE SOMEONE POINT OUT WHAT I AM MISSING HERE! This looks like a class A SHAM.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:29 pmMapleStreet Says:
The limits only limit salaries. The execs can still get massive stock options. And if the execs lead the corporation back to solvency, the value of these options is astronomical.
Doesn’t it make sense to have people who have the knowledge to lead things back into solvency ?
ANy stock options, can only be sold AFTER all monies borrowed from government is paid back. So, there iS a motive to get the company back to solvency directly in their pocket. But, I am sure some weasel CPA/lawyer type will figure out a loop hole somewhere. They always do.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:35 pmWe need to pick up pitchforks and axes and kill a few of these scumbags right on Wall St. That will get some attention. HANG a muddafugga or two.
ENRON was the wake-up call. The smartest guys in the room are not so smart after all, and this “star” power theory of management has been proven to be WRONG.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:35 pmSaty,
Obama will not be an effective leader until he realizes that all the people advising him will consistently act in the interest of the industries they come from. They will not act in the interest of the American people until they are forced to.
You make a case for an “at large member” to the President’s inner councel. It could be someone picked at random from the good citizens who ACTUALLY DO SIT for jury duty across the country, and it would come with a nice stipend to offset the loss of work. Maybe, this could prove to be incentive for that beleaguered aspect of public citizenry.
February 15th, 2009 at 7:39 pmTHIS IS NOT A SALARY CAP! It’s a CAP only on BONUSES! The NYT Saturday 2-14-09 “One unintended consequence could be higher salaries.”
What happened to the $500K per year salary cap that was floated in teh media some weeks back???
February 15th, 2009 at 7:50 pmPresident Obama has been in office for less than ONE month, and has had the Congress pass the biggest spending bill ever!
Do give the man half a chance and sufficient time to accomplish many of his stated intentions.
Obama ‘12
February 15th, 2009 at 7:53 pmMy problem is with the shareholders of these corporations. Allegedly they are the ones who should be demanding pay cuts, resignations, censure, removal etc. Where are they in this; demanding proxy votes immediately???? Why aren’t they standing up to their supposed leadership and demanding answers???? Or is it that the shares are held in trusts by the same people that run the company and thus pure selfish profit becomes the circular motive in charging fees, increasing bonuses, removing barriers to sheltering funds, and so forth????
February 15th, 2009 at 8:23 pmHi benmaller:
February 15th, 2009 at 8:30 pmWanna compare resumes? I’m down if you are. Big red nose/floppy shoes? I am more of a slim black tie and dance shoes type of mod sort of like the guys in the Specials…
spyder Says:
My problem is with the shareholders of these corporations. Allegedly they are the ones who should be demanding pay cuts, resignations, censure, removal etc. Where are they in this; demanding proxy votes immediately???? Why aren’t they standing up to their supposed leadership and demanding answers???? Or is it that the shares are held in trusts by the same people that run the company and thus pure selfish profit becomes the circular motive in charging fees, increasing bonuses, removing barriers to sheltering funds, and so forth????
Oh don’t get me started. We need to revise the way corporations are incorporated. First, it should NOT be state issuing an incorporation. Since the SCOTUS has supposedly given civil rights to corporations, Free speech, freedom of commerce, etc, etc. THEN, for states to control unequal constructs as to how corporations are structured goes against the equality of civil rights for the corporations. So, incorporating should be a FEDERAL process, not a state procress, UNLESS, the corporation is ONLY going to do buisness with that one state.
February 15th, 2009 at 9:08 pmThis now changes the whole complexion of the corporation. If this equality mindset is to be taken seriously then we need to look at the shareholders. As it is now, shareholders only get ONE vote per share. Which if you think about it, is the same as getting one vote for each acre of land you owned, or dollar you had. WHich is totally uneeual. I propose to change ALL shareholder status to a more democratic construct and EACH person/entitiy holding the shares gets ONE VOTE, irrespective of the number of shares that person/entitiy holds. This now takes a TOTAL different complexion to the way the corporation is managed and goings on within the corporation’s board etc are voted on by the shareholders.
Those senators makes millions of dollar why dont we cut thir salary little bit and help our citizens who needs help
February 15th, 2009 at 9:32 pmNo one is buying youtube
February 15th, 2009 at 9:46 pmyoutube Says:
Those senators makes millions of dollar why dont we cut thir salary little bit and help our citizens who needs help
February 15th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
I’ve seen some ignorant comments here at TP, but this one has to rank among the top ten. If you think Senators get paid millions of dollars, then you need to learn some things before posting comments in public again.
February 15th, 2009 at 9:54 pmTime to cut the crap, If the President of the United States makes somewhere around half a million dollars a year, and he’s the head of one of the most powerful and influential entities on this planet, and he does this with no real “bonus”. What makes these bozos that head up any of these failed corporations, ANY of them! think they deserve such incredible( see the dictionary:
February 15th, 2009 at 9:59 pm
??????
February 15th, 2009 at 10:59 pmWholesale jewelry
February 15th, 2009 at 11:07 pmFashion jewelry
Pandora jewelry
Titanium jewelry
Trendy jewelry
Did someone leave the barn door open?
February 15th, 2009 at 11:44 pmWoo Hoo!! a sales troll.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:01 amHawking their wares here is a waste of time. They should try the Sarah Palin blogs, they would get a much more receptive audience.
These are the same cats that stifle creativity
the same ones that killed the electric car.
F”k ‘em
They should be happy they aren’t in jail right now.
February 16th, 2009 at 7:28 amI’ll buy all the jewelry if you just go away. Why do I get the distinct impression that it is junk?
February 16th, 2009 at 7:56 amWhy on earth are we not nationalizing the insolvent banks?
When UK banks were nationalized, the “skills” that the axed bankers manifested were NOT technical monetary mechanics skill, but rather were revealed to be merely “salesmanship”. Why give Citibank $306B in guarantees, when we can buy the company for $25B? We should have done the same with Ford Motor Co.
BTW, these salesmanship skills are the skills Hank Paulson and Tim Geithner posses, NOT technical economic skills.
February 16th, 2009 at 9:12 amI think that these CEO’s should be happy that they still have jobs, aren’t they the ones responsible for the finances in their companies? I find it very hard to believe that it will be hard for them to survive on $500,000 to $1.5 billion a year when there are people in America that live on less than $1 per day. We are in the middle of a financial crisis and these CEO’s are more worried about making money for themselves than trying to fix what they have helped to create. The whole world is being affected by the downfall of our economy; Japan’s economy is failing even quicker than ours. Japan has the largest number of residents living in poverty in the world. I hope that at some point people will start to care more about what is going on in the world instead of just themselves. I hope that we can help the 800 million people that go to sleep hungry every night. We were $30 billion short of helping the world’s poor, why not try to help them? In the long run don’t you think it would be beneficial to have all of those 800 million people working? Wouldn’t that help with making food or more energy efficient cars? I would like to see the world reach the Millennium Goals by the target date.
February 16th, 2009 at 12:17 pmWasn’t it Obama who first floated the idea of punishing the people who were going to come in and clean up the mess? NOW it dawns on him that it won’t work. The guy hasn’t been president a month and already I have lost complete confidence in him. Not just him, everyone surrounding him. There wasn’t one person who could point out that the best and brightest need to get paid? This is high school freshman stuff.
Professor: If you are the very best at what you do(think Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, etc.), will you receive large or small compensation?
Colombia Educated Student: Small compensation!
Barack Obama: Listen. That’s absolutely right!
Dumbo and Dumboer
Cougar says: I think that these CEO’s should be happy that they still have jobs, aren’t they the ones responsible for the finances in their companies?
Yes, Cougar, and those CEO’s made millions and have now jumped ship. What is being proposed is that the best CEO’s America has to offer can now go in, fix the mess and get paid $500,000. Of course the other option is that they continue to work with their highly profitable companies, make tens of millions of dollars and avoid the stress of rescuing a dying animal. Hmmm, that’s a tough one. What to do, what to do?
February 16th, 2009 at 12:50 pmIsn’t odd that we no longer use A-Rod as our example? Coincidence?
February 16th, 2009 at 1:51 pmThe thieves that “work” in banks are just the same as medieval tyrants, using their positions of power to loot and steal millions of dollars each year from the stockholders and the American people.
February 16th, 2009 at 2:19 pmRE: “driving talented employees to companies that aren’t subject to the regulation or to overseas banks.”
talented employees is bankspeak for best thieves.
February 16th, 2009 at 10:57 pmdrew3rd Says:
Another brainwashed idiot carrying water for wealth and privelege. We HAVE to give the rich EVERYTHING they want the sychophant whines. Havent you kissed enough rich butt yet? Think if you kiss up enough you will get some crumbs off the table? Its not like this is Quantum Mechanics. Plenty of people can do this job. If WE stop letting them make personal greed more important than the health of the industry it wont be that hard. Just do their job and if they arent willing there are plenty who CAN do the job for half a mil. You and those like you have been brainwashed into believing these guys are the smartest guys in the country. Actually many of them arent that bright they just went to the right college were born into the right families and have the connections. Then of course they have brainwashed sychophants carrying their water for them.
February 17th, 2009 at 2:41 amSo Eugene, A-Rod will play for your suck team for half the money? That would be 13 million per year. No he won’t. Go take his job since it’s so easy. Now try and get the CEO position of AIG, Countrywide or Bear-Stearns. You haven’t got the chops. There really are people who are BETTER THAN YOU. Accept it, move on and be the best YOU can be. If you don’t want to make lots of money, fine, but bagging on those that do only cements in everyone’s mind how theoretical your world is. Who knows, maybe your world is entirely virtual? Online dater, perhaps?
February 17th, 2009 at 9:09 amThat’s a laugh, drew3rd giving advice. EugeneDebs, try as you may this troll has only one-way dialog fed to him by hate radio. Just don’t tell it the picture it has of Limbaugh was not really signed by the spewer himself. Reality escapes this one.
February 17th, 2009 at 11:41 amI’m sorry, but this whole mess is about Alan Greenspan’s greatest realization… that the banks would operate in their own best self interest. Lesson learned. So why haven’t all of the people that got us into this mess been fired by their owners, the Stock Holders? I remember the good ‘ol days when you were held accountable for your actions. Ahhhhhhh, memories.
Reorganization begins top down, the new stake holder, the American Taxpayer, should be slimming the expense sheet by demanding reduction in wages of 10% -50% (Minimum)for the first 3 tiers of upper management, save the poor working stiffs at the bottom from being laid off and further drawing on an already drained unemployment and welfare system.
Should those VALUABLE employees not like the current terms, they can do what every other American is forced to do… QUIT and go find a job that suits their valuable skill set – short term profits, long term failure.
Of course the best option is to let bad businesses fail, oh wait, no that would be capitalism, and NOBODY wants that. Quite frankly, I think that if we are going to make these nearly failed entities socialized, we should just create1st GIANT BANK CORPORATION of America with many divisions, and when those divisions are stable, they can be sold off again for a profit.
We’re already headed there with these rapidly approved mergers, that normally would take years to approve and implement.
Alright, enough on that.
PORKULUS – Isn’t that Emperor Limbaugh’s official title?
Sorry, just needed a little levity.
February 17th, 2009 at 3:20 pm