Hey YOU you make too much money !

[SteamWake]

US government seeks to rein in executive pay

Democrats want to push administration on US corporate pay strategies



If that doesent smack of anti capitolisim I dont know what does.


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Administration-Rein-in-pay-apf-15500519.html?.v=6 (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Administration-Rein-in-pay-apf-15500519.html?.v=6)

[CastleBravo]

If that doesent smack of anti capitolisim I dont know what does.


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Administration-Rein-in-pay-apf-15500519.html?.v=6 (http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Administration-Rein-in-pay-apf-15500519.html?.v=6)

Its an attack on business from someone who appears to be further to the left than Khruschev.......Obama.:damn:

[Letum]

It seams a little odd to my European ears when Americans say things like this.
Am I the only one?

[Aramike]

It seams a little odd to my European ears when Americans say things like this.
Am I the only one?Why?

[CastleBravo]

It seams a little odd to my European ears when Americans say things like this.
Am I the only one?

Two peoples seperated by a common language:DL

[Letum]

Why?

Accusing someone of having priorities other than capitalism doesn't really raise an eyebrow here.

[SteamWake]

Wasent there a recent shift towards capitolisim in the EU?

Seems like were headed in opposite directions.

[GoldenRivet]

Accusing someone of having priorities other than capitalism doesn't really raise an eyebrow here.

perhaps, but here in america we have spent our entire history thriving in a business model wherin what YOU earn is rightfully YOURS.

sure the government will place a tax on your earnings and the items you sell... no kidding.

but Obama now has his hands on my wallet... he wants to increase and implement federal programs that will take unprecedented amounts of MY MONEY and freely give it to those who are not willing to work or earn for themselves.


that is not fair in any sense of the word... capitalism socialism arguments and raised eyebrows aside.

i dont know - maybe in the nation you reside - its is considered normal to work a full month and have a signifigant percentage of your wages taken from you and given to drug addicts, welfar recipeints and lay abouts... if so, i feel very sad for you... seriously.

what you work for you and you alone should be entitled to.

if you wish to be a philanthopist and dedicate your life savings to a charity - thats admirable... damned admirable

however when the government FORCES you to do it - thats oppression... its annoying... its infuriating - and here in America its a dangerous proposition.

[SUBMAN1]

Well said GoldenRivet. I'd cut Letum some slack though. When you live a lifestyle that you get used to, it becomes hard to see things unless someone points them out to you.

-S

[Letum]

I'd cut Letum some slack though. When you live a lifestyle that you get used to, it becomes hard to see things unless someone points them out to you.

Now, now; no need to patronize.
I'm sure the same could well be said of your point of view.

[mookiemookie]

what you work for you and you alone should be entitled to.

if you wish to be a philanthopist and dedicate your life savings to a charity - thats admirable... damned admirable

however when the government FORCES you to do it - thats oppression... its annoying... its infuriating - and here in America its a dangerous proposition.

Except that's not what happened. The interests of executives were not aligned with the interests of shareholders. In many cases the board of directors couldn't or wouldn't act to correct the situation. When it got bad enough that these companies came begging to the government for money, then the government damn sure has the right to act to correct the situation, now being the largest shareholder in many cases.

You act like this is unprecedented. The FDIC for YEARS has had the ability to come into any bank and take it over if they're operating in an unsustainable way.

[Skybird]

Payments at the very top level have gone through the ceiling, lacking any reason, health, morals and scruples. Even more, many managers agreed to company politics crippling their very employer - for their own income maximisation, then moved on and left the wreck behind after receiving a golden handshake. Even those obviously failing, get payed stellar ammounts of money for nothing else than just to move out of the way.

Greed knows no limits, demands know no scruples, money does not know morals, egoism knows no self-restraint. but if you aim these truths about materialism at the very prophets themselves, you get called a communist.

A limiting of wages at these top levels just is a command of reason, and a logical reaction to the excesses we have seen, and these were not only excessive, but also crippling to the national economic health and the global economic health as well.

That extreme ultra-capitalists does not like it and hysterically yell that now the heaven is falling, is to be expected.

The system of the past has failed miserably, not only in the banking sector. Now corrections are a natural consequence. But some agree to such corrections only if they do not correct anything at all and leave the flawed ways of goings as they have been. In other words: they want lip confessions only, but nothing real getting done.

[Platapus]

The only people who should be determining executive pay should be the stockholders in that company.

If the stockholders are dumb enough to pay a guy millions of dollars without any accountability that is their decision.

If they are dumb enough to reward failed executives, that is their business.

However, when their decision results in the failure of the company, they should not suddenly turn to the government for help.

As Porky Pig used to say: They buttered their bed, now they can roll in it.

[SteamWake]

The only people who should be determining executive pay should be the stockholders in that company.

While I agree 100% there is a small problem.

The vast majority of share holdings are through mutual funds. A large percentage of those holding interests in these 'funds' are relatively cluess as to what is even in their portfolio let alone what there doing.

[mookiemookie]

The only people who should be determining executive pay should be the stockholders in that company.

After the bailouts, that's now the government. So what's the problem here?