Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

US government seeks to rein in executive pay


  • Please log in to reply
46 replies to this topic

#16 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,393 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:02 PM

haha, you were for goverment control of what companies do with their money before you were against it.

slipperyslopetipoftheicebergFEARFEARFEARRRRRRRRR!

Relax, this is not going to happen, and if it does it will just be a suggestion or non binding - to keep reminding the CEOS that they need to at least keep up the appearance of giving a crap. many corporate leaders have been shamed into doing whats right because of negative media coverage, but once that goes away you can bet they will hop right back on the gravy train of screwing people over as early and often as possible unless there is some kind of feeback loop reminding them that they too are only human, like the rest of us.


The difference is...I can choose to use the company that pays his CEO exhorbitant amounts...USUALLY. I have no choice w/ government...and that's my/our money. You should be more outraged at government salaries that are crazy. Car allowances. Pensions. Health insurance. Per diems. Let's really cut costs.

#17 Epistaxis

Epistaxis

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,182 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:03 PM

Everybody wants to be a fatcat.

Everybody hates the fatcat cuz they're jealous.

I don't resent them as much as I do the government appointed chickensh*t flunkie.

#18 Samuel L. Jackson

Samuel L. Jackson

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,407 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:05 PM

The difference is...I can choose to patronize the company that pays his CEO exhorbitant amounts...USUALLY. I have no choice w/ government...and that's my/our money. You should be more outraged at government salaries that are crazy. Car allowances. Pensions. Health insurance. Per diems. Let's really cut costs.


Yes... such as the State Legislators, who were not subject to the .5% salary decrease that I was, get $107 a day per diem, a salary, another monthly travel budget of over $500, get to have "closed" sessions (overtime), and somehow never finish the budget in their 100 day legislative calendar (allowing more overtime)...

#19 LiQuiD

LiQuiD

    Plumb Crazy

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,256 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:07 PM

The difference is...I can choose to use the company that pays his CEO exhorbitant amounts...USUALLY. I have no choice w/ government...and that's my/our money. You should be more outraged at government salaries that are crazy. Car allowances. Pensions. Health insurance. Per diems. Let's really cut costs.


Sure, but I doubt government salaries are really that big of a chunk of the government's total expenses.

I could have lived without bailing out some of these dipshits. Throwing good money after bad far outweighs the total amount of gov't salaries.

#20 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,393 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:08 PM

Yes... such as the State Legislators, who were not subject to the .5% salary decrease that I was, get $107 a day per diem, a salary, another monthly travel budget of over $500, get to have "closed" sessions (overtime), and somehow never finish the budget in their 100 day legislative calendar (allowing more overtime)...


I say if they can't balance the budget without tax increases they are in breach of contract with their constituents and don't deserve any perks...just a base $50k salary. Sound good?

Companies lay off...so should government...it's not the job lottery.

#21 Samuel L. Jackson

Samuel L. Jackson

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,407 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:09 PM

Sure, but I doubt government salaries are really that big of a chunk of the government's total expenses.


Don't let them fool you... They know how to hide it well...

#22 LiQuiD

LiQuiD

    Plumb Crazy

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,256 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:11 PM

Don't let them fool you... They know how to hide it well...


I'll give you that.

#23 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,084 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:15 PM

I'd love to say how mad I am at government salaries, but in my view there's not a hell of a lot to be pissed about, comparatively speaking. Far more disturbing is when government employees abuse expense accounts, accept bribes....the less you pay them, the more likely they will abuse the system, and we kind of have an unhappy medium for most jobs.

CEOs pay should be more focused on performance and less on contract negotiation - I feel the same way about football players. If anything ever comes from this (doubtful anyways), it will most likely be some kind of financial disclosure issue or something similar. The government can not tell a private company how much someone can get paid and that, despite PL shivering in fear in a corner of her trailer, is not going to happen.

#24 Panthers_Lover

Panthers_Lover

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,065 posts
  • LocationSpartanburg, SC

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:20 PM

I'd love to say how mad I am at government salaries, but in my view there's not a hell of a lot to be pissed about, comparatively speaking. Far more disturbing is when government employees abuse expense accounts, accept bribes....the less you pay them, the more likely they will abuse the system, and we kind of have an unhappy medium for most jobs.

CEOs pay should be more focused on performance and less on contract negotiation - I feel the same way about football players. If anything ever comes from this (doubtful anyways), it will most likely be some kind of financial disclosure issue or something similar. The government can not tell a private company how much someone can get paid and that, despite PL shivering in fear in a corner of her trailer, is not going to happen.


They're already doing it, sweetie ... welcome to my trailer.

#25 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,084 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:21 PM

You post an article saying that the government is seeking to do something, than halfway down the page you say they are already doing it.

Your trailer needs to be HAZMAT inpected.

#26 Epistaxis

Epistaxis

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,182 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:23 PM

I wonder if the "pay da man" crowd in professional sports is ok with "pay da man" for CEOs.

Why not? It is supposed to be about what the market will bear.

Don't like it? Don't pay it. Hire someone that will work for less. Will work based on performance. Dunno, all I know is, the government sucks at this kind of stuff.

#27 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,393 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:28 PM

I live in Raleigh...and know a lot of state gov workers. One guy I play softball with, was going on about CEOs...then in the same breath talking about guys (gov workers) that have retired then go to "conferences" after they've already retired. He wondered why I would get more upset over that than a CEO. CEO may or may not be using my money. The government worker IS using my money (reimbursement/possibly car to travel/etc). I work in the health industry and we are under HUGE compliance rules to insure we do not show favoritism or provide any benefit to a client over another. I'm sure with all the crackdowns on kickbacks in the government, there SHOULD be rules just as strict.

#28 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,393 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:30 PM

I wonder if the "pay da man" crowd in professional sports is ok with "pay da man" for CEOs.

Why not? It is supposed to be about what the market will bear.

Don't like it? Don't pay it. Hire someone that will work for less. Will work based on performance. Dunno, all I know is, the government sucks at this kind of stuff.


Yep. If you're gonna cap salaries...better start blocking them for everyone. Otherwise I see lawsuits in the near future. Equal protection?

#29 Jangler

Jangler

    Its gonna be just like they say, them voices tell me so

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 47,156 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:30 PM

If they excepted Government bailout money or begged for more. Then I have no problem with the government telling the companies how much they can pay CEOs or whoever, but if they are going to try and tell all companies what they can pay and not pay, well then that is another story. But I think this is about bailout companies, so I have no problem.

#30 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,066 posts

Posted 11 June 2009 - 02:33 PM

As long as it is "the other guy" that gets his salary controlled, nobody cares.

Until they regulate yours. By then too late.

Am skeered.



Weird that they have not been regulating yours, I need to check in on that.

Because every year I have FICA and SS taxes taken out of the money that i have earned.

PS they have been controlling our hard earned money for years.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com