• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Caterpillar: Bulldozing the American Dream

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,322
14
81
Funny, CEO pay doesn't follow an 'open market bargaining system' and i hardly ever hear righties complaining about it.
Sure they do. If a company was looking for a new CEO, and a candidate asked for $500 million a year, he'd be laughed out of the boardroom.

Even CEOs have a ceiling on their wages.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Sure they do. If a company was looking for a new CEO, and a candidate asked for $500 million a year, he'd be laughed out of the boardroom.

Even CEOs have a ceiling on their wages.
THAT is your retort? Of course they can't raid the company's treasury for every last dime. However, thanks to interlocking directorates, they get paid FAR more than they would in a true open market.

The stupidity of your average conservative is astounding.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
Funny, CEO pay doesn't follow an 'open market bargaining system' and i hardly ever hear righties complaining about it.
As long as CEO pay isn't governed, you won't hear righties or libertarians complaining. If government forced pay one way or another, then you'd hear complaining.

If their pay is derived from an unregulated and unrestricted process, then I have no problem with it. I'd prefer to keep government out of regulating pay of any kind as the distortions that it creates become disastrous.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
THAT is your retort? Of course they can't raid the company's treasury for every last dime. However, thanks to interlocking directorates, they get paid FAR more than they would in a true open market.

The stupidity of your average conservative is astounding.
Explain how a true open market would avoid interlocking directorates? This should be fun.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
As long as CEO pay isn't governed, you won't hear righties or libertarians complaining. If government forced pay one way or another, then you'd hear complaining.

If their pay is derived from an unregulated and unrestricted process, then I have no problem with it. I'd prefer to keep government out of regulating pay of any kind as the distortions that it creates become disastrous.
Oh, so you're fine with CEO pay being distorted by a distorted market thanks to interlocking directorates. You're the problem.
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,775
0
76
Oh, so you're fine with CEO pay being distorted by a distorted market thanks to interlocking directorates. You're the problem.
Obviously he doesn't know what it means...and yes he is the problem. IIRC this is the same guy who said we need to invade Iran yesterday.
 

theevilsharpie

Platinum Member
Nov 2, 2009
2,322
14
81
THAT is your retort? Of course they can't raid the company's treasury for every last dime. However, thanks to interlocking directorates, they get paid FAR more than they would in a true open market.

The stupidity of your average conservative is astounding.
/briefly checks labor regulations on CEOs in the U.S.

Hmm, that's weird. There doesn't appear to be any legal restrictions on who can become a CEO.

Care to explain how the market for CEO's is closed?
 

sunzt

Diamond Member
Nov 27, 2003
3,076
3
81
As long as CEO pay isn't governed, you won't hear righties or libertarians complaining. If government forced pay one way or another, then you'd hear complaining.

If their pay is derived from an unregulated and unrestricted process, then I have no problem with it. I'd prefer to keep government out of regulating pay of any kind as the distortions that it creates become disastrous.
What pay processes regulations are CEOs exempt from?
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,775
0
76
/briefly checks labor regulations on CEOs in the U.S.

Hmm, that's weird. There doesn't appear to be any legal restrictions on who can become a CEO.

Care to explain how the market for CEO's is closed?
^^^^^Still not getting it. These people all sit on each others' boards and vote to give each other raises. Basically wage collusion.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
Explain how a true open market would avoid interlocking directorates? This should be fun.
I didn't say it would. I'm saying if we lived in a pretend fairy tale world where interlocking directorates didn't happen in a true open market, we would get CEO pay that was aligned to market conditions. Say, if shareholders had a say on pay rather than the CEO stacking the board with puppets.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
Obviously he doesn't know what it means...and yes he is the problem. IIRC this is the same guy who said we need to invade Iran yesterday.
I don't want to invade Iran. I said that that is the path we are taking for our "national security". Do I believe that we should? Absolutely not.

I do know exactly what they are, and both of your resolutions to any conceived "problem" that they cause, is by government interference in private business board rooms.
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
/briefly checks labor regulations on CEOs in the U.S.

Hmm, that's weird. There doesn't appear to be any legal restrictions on who can become a CEO.

Care to explain how the market for CEO's is closed?
It's not closed, read above what i wrote. CEO's stacking the boards with cronies and transferring value to themselves far in excess of their actual worth on a theoretical open market where owners of the company decide pay is a feature, not a bug, of capitalism.
 

Pr0d1gy

Diamond Member
Jan 30, 2005
7,775
0
76
I do know exactly what they are, and both of your resolutions to any conceived "problem" that they cause, is by government interference in private business board rooms.
Of course it is, what were we thinking? :p
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
What pay processes regulations are CEOs exempt from?
Not sure I follow what you are asking. I just mean the process at which they arrive at their pay, if it is free from the restriction of government, I have no problem with it.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Why doesn't CAT just pay them what they're worth?
Because they're not worth what they think they are. And good luck with the strike, you'd think the union would have learned from their 1994 strike where they went without checks for 17 months and in the end went meekly back to work with none of the concessions they asked for, or the 1992 strike where they only lasted 5 months before going back with no concessions. The union may get broken permanently this time if they continue, the economy is a lot worse than it was in 1994.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
It's not closed, read above what i wrote. CEO's stacking the boards with cronies and transferring value to themselves far in excess of their actual worth on a theoretical open market where owners of the company decide pay is a feature, not a bug, of capitalism.
So you're basically saying that CEO pay is a free/open market failure, and you use the words "true" and "theoretical" to describe a world where their pay is arbitrarily less, according to basically you, and you consider that the true open market?

Mind boggling.
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
Don't worry, if they're hard working, they'll be able to get rich within their lifetime, so cut taxes for the rich to reward them!
Oh, they're just as hardworking and the company is doing well, but the company is pushing down wages now, instead of in a hypothetical future when the company is doing worse off and sacrifices are needed?
Well, if they end up poor, they must just be lazy! Hard working people get ahead and get rich! How do you know they're hard-working? Because they're rich!

/briefly checks labor regulations on CEOs in the U.S.

Hmm, that's weird. There doesn't appear to be any legal restrictions on who can become a CEO.

Care to explain how the market for CEO's is closed?
Here's a hint: There haven't been laws against having a black CEO for a very very long time, if ever depending on which state, yet the first black CEO of a Fortune 500 company got the job in 1999. The first woman CEO of a Fortune 500 was in 1972. Do you think that perhaps there are structural reasons people don't get jobs besides pure talent?
 

Phokus

Lifer
Nov 20, 1999
22,995
774
126
So you're basically saying that CEO pay is a free/open market failure, and you use the words "true" and "theoretical" to describe a world where their pay is arbitrarily less, according to basically you, and you consider that the true open market?

Mind boggling.
No, what's boggling is how you don't get it. You would THINK shareholders would be the ones who set pay - all the shareholders in the market would compete for the best CEO they could get. That's the theoretical market i'm talking about. That doesn't work because the average stock is traded rapidly and are you going to vote on pay for the thousands of shares of stock you own in your 401k? That's how ceo's take advantage.

But in a our ACTUAL open market, CEO's a) stack their boards with cronies b) sit on their own boards (when i worked for IBM, the CEO was also chairman of the board) and c) benefit the natural indirect interlocks of board members who don't want to rock the boat. Shareholders have little to no say. But come to think of it, congress passed a law recently that shareholders get a non-binding vote on CEO pay, so that may mitigate things some. The free market is too stupid/broken/corrupt that congress DOES need to step in to fix it.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
13,893
2,200
126
Because they're not worth what they think they are. And good luck with the strike, you'd think the union would have learned from their 1994 strike where they went without checks for 17 months and in the end went meekly back to work with none of the concessions they asked for, or the 1992 strike where they only lasted 5 months before going back with no concessions. The union may get broken permanently this time if they continue, the economy is a lot worse than it was in 1994.
"Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost." --Ronald Reagan

You should put that right above your Ayn Rand quote in your sig.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
No, what's boggling is how you don't get it. You would THINK shareholders would be the ones who set pay - all the shareholders in the market would compete for the best CEO they could get. That's the theoretical market i'm talking about. That doesn't work because the average stock is traded rapidly and are you going to vote on pay for the thousands of shares of stock you own in your 401k? That's how ceo's take advantage.

But in a our ACTUAL open market, CEO's a) stack their boards with cronies b) sit on their own boards (when i worked for IBM, the CEO was also chairman of the board) and c) benefit the natural indirect interlocks of board members who don't want to rock the boat. Shareholders have little to no say. But come to think of it, congress passed a law recently that shareholders get a non-binding vote on CEO pay, so that may mitigate things some. The free market is too stupid/broken/corrupt that congress DOES need to step in to fix it.
I get it, but the difference is I'm okay with a natural market that isn't regulated by government, and you maybe want some sort of reform. I'm not sure if you are just complaining or would like to see government initiated change.
 

momeNt

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2011
9,297
350
126
"Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost." --Ronald Reagan

You should put that right above your Ayn Rand quote in your sig.
A lockout is perfectly acceptable in collective bargaining. When freedom is lost is when the DOL gets involved and FORCES lockouts to end and brings companies and unions to the table.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
"Where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost." --Ronald Reagan

You should put that right above your Ayn Rand quote in your sig.
Just because labor is likely to lose this time doesn't mean free unions are forbidden, and collective bargaining doesn't guarantee you always get what you want.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY