New Rule: If your a CEO and your company

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: winnar111

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Can anyone tell me how much a CEO should make??

Well, if you receive federal grants for research, you are currently capped at executive level 1 of the federal executive pay scale. What is that? $196,700 per year. I bring this up since there is already a well defined cap for people and companies that receive federal dollars. Why should bailout dollars be any different?

Heck, the president of the US (in charge of nearly 300 million people and trillions of dollars) is capped at $400k (plus perks such as free housing but those perks really aren't too expensive). Edit: should have read the thread first, this presidential salary issue was already brought up.

The hundreds of people who work in the White House, Secret Service protection for his wife, children, and mother in law, private air travel for all his personal affairs, etc? He's in the tens of millions.

Hundreds of people work in the White House for his private personal support? As I understand it he has a maid service and people do his laundry, but what else would you possibly be talking about? He pays for the food he eats. (and while it's top quality, apparently a unifying aspect of most presidents is sticker shock at how much it costs) The remainder of the staff is there for his professional duties, not his personal ones. Do you count the CEOs secretary and staff as compensation for him? I sure wouldn't.

The security and all is a bit more gray, but its primary purpose is to protect the chief executive, the person with the job title, not Barack Obama per se. Sure the presidency has tons of perks that are above and beyond his salary, but tens of millions in personal compensation? My ass.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
A bit too late for this now, isn't it? So much of the money has already been released.

You're right, Obama should have kicked Bushes corrupt ass out of office sooner.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
-snip-
He pays for the food he eats. (and while it's top quality, apparently a unifying aspect of most presidents is sticker shock at how much it costs)

Really?

D@mn, that blows.

I think his food outta be provided at no charge.

Fern

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Can anyone tell me how much a CEO should make??

Well, if you receive federal grants for research, you are currently capped at executive level 1 of the federal executive pay scale. What is that? $196,700 per year. I bring this up since there is already a well defined cap for people and companies that receive federal dollars. Why should bailout dollars be any different?

Heck, the president of the US (in charge of nearly 300 million people and trillions of dollars) is capped at $400k (plus perks such as free housing but those perks really aren't too expensive). Edit: should have read the thread first, this presidential salary issue was already brought up.

Wow, I didn't realize the president was in charge of me and my life.

 

[GTaudiophile]

I just got off the phone with my best friend who was laid off from Goldman back in November. He was in Chicago interviewing at one American bank and one Canadian bank.

Of course both banks were talking about this salary cap business.

American bank: Well, what do they mean by "executives?" How do they define that? Perhaps we can redefine that?

Canadian bank: Bring on the caps! It will just drive more talent to our bank!

Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

 

[frostedflakes]

Seems like the talented execs are already at the Canadian banks. Their financial system is solid and solvent -- ours in in shambles.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I just got off the phone with my best friend who was laid off from Goldman back in November. He was in Chicago interviewing at one American bank and one Canadian bank.

Of course both banks were talking about this salary cap business.

American bank: Well, what do they mean by "executives?" How do they define that? Perhaps we can redefine that?

Canadian bank: Bring on the caps! It will just drive more talent to our bank!

Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

If these "best and brightest", being the ones heading the companies that begged for and got the taxpayer bailouts go elsewhere ...

WE WIN! Fuck those cocksuckers, hell I'd kick them in the nuts myself if I met them in person. Go to Canada you fucking wankers. Let some honest Americans make up the damage you've done.

 

[evident]

when taxpayer money is used to pay these a-holes, it's a totally different game. obama is absolutely right in what he's doing. there should be complete outrage that these exec's got the bonuses they did

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

:roll: (just for you- the new dave! )
Obviously it wasn't exactly clear what was going to happen - hell the news was asking the question. If there are stings being attached NOW - BHO didn't make it clear that it was ONLY for new requests in his announcement this morning(which is when I posted because I watched his little presser). AND, I posted to clear up my question since I figured out the answer to my own concern over this - something no one answered and some of YOU tried to twist into some moronic suggestion that I was suggesting that they'd have to give the bailout back.

Awww CAD, nice try. I can tell you're starting to get mad if you're flailing badly enough to try and call me the new Dave. Did you ever notice that you and our good friend actually have a lot in common, as you are some of the only guys on here who are regularly dogpiled by large groups of posters? Something to chew on.

You are - in another thread I just read you were suggesting/accusing someone of getting paid to post. Hmm....

Yes, there are tons of liberals on here - it's been that way for quite a few years. Just because there are more of you doesn't make you correct.

 

[NeoV]

I'm going to guess that CEO's don't use 'your' and 'you're' the way you do....

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
... Just because there are more of you doesn't make you correct.

oh yes it does, the circle jerk mentality has always ruled these forums.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
... Just because there are more of you doesn't make you correct.

oh yes it does, the circle jerk mentality has always ruled these forums.

It wasn't that way before Bush!!!!

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile

Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

Best and brightest? As in the same clowns who contributed to the downfall of their own company's well being? Good riddance! Maybe a lower salary will bring someone in who actually cares about doing a good job and isn't more concerned about cashing in than they are about doing what's best for their employer.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I just got off the phone with my best friend who was laid off from Goldman back in November. He was in Chicago interviewing at one American bank and one Canadian bank.

Of course both banks were talking about this salary cap business.

American bank: Well, what do they mean by "executives?" How do they define that? Perhaps we can redefine that?

Canadian bank: Bring on the caps! It will just drive more talent to our bank!

Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

Nonsense.

If you think only the best and the brightest make it to the top of company management, you unfortunately have a far more optimistic outlook than reality suggests.

Like free markets in general, they work if and only if there is no interruption of the system. Interruption can come in the form of intervention in any form, be it government or other company stakeholders, outside influences (even natural, for which people love to impose windfall taxes). In the case of many companies, those that make it to the top largely do so due to their connections with the board, kickbacks and everything else.

This isn't tin-foil hat paranoia, it's just the way it is. It's part ol' boy network, part people legitimately trying to do the right thing and bringing in unqualified people because they know and trust them.

Philosophically, I am not for government intervention. Likewise, I am not for caps; instead, I'm for allowing the best ideas to surface and to ultimately win, an evolution of corporate memes so to speak; unfortunately, this isn't possible in the largest companies and the old, bad ideas simply get recycled by people on the board and the company leadership that are far, far past their prime.

So, while I don't like the idea of caps, there are plenty of talented people willing to work for $500k. I think the suggestion that they're not is preposterous. What we don't need are these tired, ineffective company leaders sucking in their millions without a profitable idea in their brain. The majority of America's businesses have CEOs working for significantly less than $500k (without bonuses) and run profitable businesses.

 

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I just got off the phone with my best friend who was laid off from Goldman back in November. He was in Chicago interviewing at one American bank and one Canadian bank.

Of course both banks were talking about this salary cap business.

American bank: Well, what do they mean by "executives?" How do they define that? Perhaps we can redefine that?

Canadian bank: Bring on the caps! It will just drive more talent to our bank!

Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

salary caps are only for senior executives at the companies, not for the average worker. Considering it was the senior executives that ran the company to the ground, i would not consider them America's best and brightest. Since salary caps wont affect the worker bees, we dont have to worry about mass exodus from American companies to Canadian ones

 

[SMOGZINN]

All this argument is for naught. The CEO's already have their loopholes ready. If anything their compensation is going to increase for this little fiasco.
They are simply setting up privately owned companies that are funded by parent company and then that company (that has not received any government bailout) pays CEO?s and other top execs for consulting work. It gets around all the governments regulations and allows the major companies to pay anyone they want anything they want.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
All this argument is for naught. The CEO's already have their loopholes ready. If anything their compensation is going to increase for this little fiasco.
They are simply setting up privately owned companies that are funded by parent company and then that company (that has not received any government bailout) pays CEO?s and other top execs for consulting work. It gets around all the governments regulations and allows the major companies to pay anyone they want anything they want.

:laugh: that'd be hilarious.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
All this argument is for naught. The CEO's already have their loopholes ready. If anything their compensation is going to increase for this little fiasco.
They are simply setting up privately owned companies that are funded by parent company and then that company (that has not received any government bailout) pays CEO?s and other top execs for consulting work. It gets around all the governments regulations and allows the major companies to pay anyone they want anything they want.

:laugh: that'd be hilarious.

Wouldn't be funny, and should be a felony w/20year mandatory minimum, ineligible for parole for all involved.

I also support SEVERE new rules for our gov't representatives, which I have outlaid earlier in the thread.

I find it disturbing that you think these jackasses who have driven their corporations into the ground, now after they come begging for bailouts from the taxpayer, should laugh all the way to the bank with the money. They sooner deserve a cigarette and a firing squad than any kind of remuneration.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Wouldn't be funny, and should be a felony w/20year mandatory minimum, ineligible for parole for all involved.

I also support SEVERE new rules for our gov't representatives, which I have outlaid earlier in the thread.

I find it disturbing that you think these jackasses who have driven their corporations into the ground, now after they come begging for bailouts from the taxpayer, should laugh all the way to the bank with the money. They sooner deserve a cigarette and a firing squad than any kind of remuneration.

You gave them that money, we told you not to do it. Now you want to throw them in jail. Maybe it is you who should go to jail for irresponsibly wasting our money on these companies.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Wouldn't be funny, and should be a felony w/20year mandatory minimum, ineligible for parole for all involved.

I also support SEVERE new rules for our gov't representatives, which I have outlaid earlier in the thread.

I find it disturbing that you think these jackasses who have driven their corporations into the ground, now after they come begging for bailouts from the taxpayer, should laugh all the way to the bank with the money. They sooner deserve a cigarette and a firing squad than any kind of remuneration.

You gave them that money, we told you not to do it. Now you want to throw them in jail. Maybe it is you who should go to jail for irresponsibly wasting our money on these companies.

I'm not a politician, and I've never supported these bailouts. If bailouts pass, there's not a damn thing I can do about but complain and ask that they be used with the strictest possible oversight and regulation.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

Depends on the cap and nor is it that simple. Not everyone's puts money as a priority well above everything else. I think plenty will stick around for their families and friends for instance. Not to mention that many do not want to deal with the hassle of learning how to live well in other countries. Many of which also have laws which are not very favorable towards their interests.

 

[ericlp]

I think it should have been capped at 80K. It's not free money or is it?

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: GTaudiophile
I just got off the phone with my best friend who was laid off from Goldman back in November. He was in Chicago interviewing at one American bank and one Canadian bank.

Of course both banks were talking about this salary cap business.

American bank: Well, what do they mean by "executives?" How do they define that? Perhaps we can redefine that?

Canadian bank: Bring on the caps! It will just drive more talent to our bank!

Salary caps = America's best and brightest will go elsewhere.

Well, no... salary caps from tax payers money (CAN GO ELSEWHERE) the rest of the Brightest can go get a real job where the establishment doesn't need a handout.

 

[Geekbabe]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: Jaskalas

Originally posted by: Arkaign
Wouldn't be funny, and should be a felony w/20year mandatory minimum, ineligible for parole for all involved.

I also support SEVERE new rules for our gov't representatives, which I have outlaid earlier in the thread.

I find it disturbing that you think these jackasses who have driven their corporations into the ground, now after they come begging for bailouts from the taxpayer, should laugh all the way to the bank with the money. They sooner deserve a cigarette and a firing squad than any kind of remuneration.

You gave them that money, we told you not to do it. Now you want to throw them in jail. Maybe it is you who should go to jail for irresponsibly wasting our money on these companies.

I'm not a politician, and I've never supported these bailouts. If bailouts pass, there's not a damn thing I can do about but complain and ask that they be used with the strictest possible oversight and regulation.

I think companies like Citibank should be shown the exact same mercy that they'd extend to the average Joe holding one of their credit card products who's late on his payments because he's been laid off from his job.