Comments on: Executive pay is an out-of-control racket

By: sherry

sherry — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 20:56:24 +0000

I believe our congress should be paid the median income of the districts they represent.That might inspire some to take care of their constitutents rather than special interests.

By: Suzie

Suzie — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 03:48:42 +0000

Scott M #40.

So a guy sits around in his underwear, legalizes weed and gives away the country’s treasury, and that somehow makes him a great leader? Is the economy out of the toilet yet? No mention of that in the leftwing NYT.

By: Frank

Frank — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:50:37 +0000

good point, mike o.

however, libs have no affinity for introspection, and have no ability to do any critical thinking concerning barack hussein obama. anything he wants, they say, “yes, go for more”!

the fact that the whole ows was an obama-fueled creation (which was, well, a joke), which targeted wall street and big banks in particular, of which citibank was the biggest, and….Holy Cow! THAT’s where LEW worked! and drew a salary of like a gazillion dollars, and received a $1,000,000 bonus at the time he joined the white house…to, ah, OH! Now I remember! He pushed through the stimulous/jobs package which benefitted….wait for it….closer….the …BANKS!

Naw, libs are cool with lew.

By: Sandi Saunders

Sandi Saunders — Thu, 10 Jan 2013 02:18:15 +0000

I am trying to get my head around regulatory changes being “pro-capitalist / pro-free market”, when that is the exact opposite of what they beat me about the head and shoulders with daily. I don’t discard it as a good plan, I just think that it will not do anything for workers. Shareholders being screwed or CEO’s being squeezed might help one get more out of the other but I am not clear what it does for workers. You have way more faith in those shareholders than I do, but I can’t see what we have to lose since taxing such excess will never be voted in.

By: mike o

mike o — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:50:41 +0000

Admittedly I have not had the opportunity to read all the posts here, I will try tomorrow.
However from the title I wonder how all of those who believe that Obama is “different” from other politicians can square the fact that he is putting Lew up to lead the treasury dept. when he got 1 million “bonus” from wall street days before he became a cabinet member

By: Debbie

Debbie — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:37:10 +0000

Wayne Goodman, I think the gov’t going after the overseas bank accounts, as they recently did with the Swiss bank, will have an effect on CEO’s too.

By: wayne goodman

wayne goodman — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 20:18:43 +0000

MarkJ

Maybe they had it right in the 50′s. The way forward is to tax those ceo incomes at 70% and then put the money into deficit reduction and infrastructure improvements (ala the interstate highway system). If they don’t get to put 85% of that money in their pockets like the Jamie Dimons and Mitt Romneys do now, it might encourage them to give more of that money to the people who earn it for them,.

By: Kristen

Kristen — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:27:33 +0000

pammalla telling anyone to go to school is beyond priceless.

By: MarkJ

MarkJ — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:25:27 +0000

Sandi#37 – Its not so hopeless. Some huge funds have been fighting this battle for several decades, but the current regulatory environment on public corporate governance is outdated in this area so the cards are stacked against them.

The most famous is CalPERS, the giant fund manager for California Public Employees. They have been at the vanguard of shareholder activism, and there is plenty of information out there about the good stuff the do. There are many huge funds railing against this problem.

The next step really is to modernize this aspect of the regulatory framework of our capitalist system. Please note, what I am proposing is pro-capitalist / pro-free market.

It is doable and many huge equity funds support reform and are share-holder activists that rail against the current executive compensation system.

By: Old blue

Old blue — Wed, 09 Jan 2013 18:20:58 +0000

Boards of directors are supposed to provide oversight and look out for shareholder interests. If they actually performed that function, CEO pay would be tied to performance, I think that is a fine arrangement. In practice, many boards of directors just rubber stamp what the CEO wants to do. The poster boy for this is Rick Wagoner, ex-CEO of GM. Red Ink Rick blew through 80 billion dollars of shareholders’ money in 5 years. Not only did he not get fired, he collected bonuses! Really.