Excessive CEO pay, part of the problem for American Corporations.

[Zoomie1980]

We saw recently, the Home Depot, give a large seaverence bonus to a departing CEO, when the Home Depot had been loosing money for the last 2 years.
I tell you all, excessive CEO pay is part of the problem for American corporations.

Many of these CEO,'s don't know what the hell they are doing, the workers are never paid a livable wage, and are not really motivated. Corporations would be better served by paying their workers,not the CEO.Take care of your workers, is
why Japan continues to make better cars, and products than America.The Japanese corporate focus is on the Workers, not the CEO.! It is the workers that
ultimately make or break the corporation in the long run, not the CEO.

ABout as wrong headed as anyone can be. The decisions the CEO and executive staff make are what makes or breaks a company. Most workers, work hard, no matter what the business decisions are. But the directions the business takes are what makes it or breaks it.

No one in a free and open market system is "entitled" to ANYTHING, including a "living wage". You get what the market pays for a skill set. If your skill is hard to find you will make a lot, if you do what a trained monkey can do you get what a trained monkey gets, period. That's how it works.

In this life, under the current human condition, the ONLY things your are "entitled" to are what you can take and what you can keep. Nothing more.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Sure, but I research things that are actually MY business and affect me. I fail to see what business it could POSSIBLY be of yours how much a company decides to pay its CEO or why, unless you happen to be a stockholder.

But again, if you want to get your panties in a ruffle about it, then by all means, only do business with those companies who pay their CEOs like they pay their janitors. I don't care. I just don't understand why YOU care.



What's not to get is why you mind ANY of them. What's it to you?

It's up to the SHAREHOLDERS, and ONLY the shareholders as to what any particular CEO or other executive gets paid. Shareholders, generally, are as lazy as the electorate. We all HATE Congress. Congress has a 10% approval rating. 90% of us think Congress does a bad job. But we send almost EVERY incumbent back!!!! Why???


Same with shareholders. If you are a shareholder,

Do you send your proxy card in?

Do you go to your companies shareholder meetings?

Do you revolt at paying your CEO a bonus when the company loses money?

Or do you just do nothing? 95% of all shareholders....DO NOTHING!

It is not up to you or any non-shareholder to dictate what a CEO makes. CEO's do NOT work for the employees, they work for the SHAREHOLDER's. But if the shareholders don't care, why should the executive staff?

I think a LOT more shareholders care a great deal more nowadays.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It's up to the SHAREHOLDERS, and ONLY the shareholders as to what any particular CEO or other executive gets paid. Shareholders, generally, are as lazy as the electorate. We all HATE Congress. Congress has a 10% approval rating. 90% of us think Congress does a bad job. But we send almost EVERY incumbent back!!!! Why???


Same with shareholders. If you are a shareholder,

Do you send your proxy card in?

Do you go to your companies shareholder meetings?

Do you revolt at paying your CEO a bonus when the company loses money?

Or do you just do nothing? 95% of all shareholders....DO NOTHING!

It is not up to you or any non-shareholder to dictate what a CEO makes. CEO's do NOT work for the employees, they work for the SHAREHOLDER's. But if the shareholders don't care, why should the executive staff?

I think a LOT more shareholders care a great deal more nowadays.

Voters tend to be lazy because many of them don't realize just how much Congress truly affects their own, individual lives. They think someone ELSE is footing those bills. Also, they tend to think "Every Congressmember . . . except mine", which is why they keep sending lousy incumbents back.

Shareholders, on the other hand, tend to be a lot less lazy, because they're more aware of just how directly their money is affected by the CEO. And the board of directors, which actually chooses the CEO and has to answer to the shareholders, is even more conscious. Still, business is risky and people screw up. It happens, and every BOD and investor is aware of it.

 

[Paulie]

Sure, but I research things that are actually MY business and affect me. I fail to see what business it could POSSIBLY be of yours how much a company decides to pay its CEO or why, unless you happen to be a stockholder.

But again, if you want to get your panties in a ruffle about it, then by all means, only do business with those companies who pay their CEOs like they pay their janitors. I don't care. I just don't understand why YOU care.



What's not to get is why you mind ANY of them. What's it to you?

I didn't complain about it. I'm not sure why you're jumping all over me. I merely stated that the market will determine a CEO's ultimate worth. I couldn't care less what a CEO makes, but hell yes if I'm a shareholder I certainly don't want a CEO making millions of dollars while the company is going to shit and I'm losing money.

You're showing that you have an itchy trigger finger and decided to jump on me before grasping the context of what I was saying.

 

[RodISHI]

I have a problem with corporate bank CEOs getting up to $124,000,000.00 in a yearly salary when the country just shelled our money out to bail them out. i mean shoot i am not entitle to own and operate a business unhindered and these robber barons get away with taxpayer theft. I have a problem with it when we have people struggling to live day to day and the country has to subsidize multi-million dollar paychecks to these bankers and investment fund thugs.

Total amount committed for investment as of Dec 16, 2008 01:05:38 PM: $246.85 billion

 

[52ndStreet]

ABout as wrong headed as anyone can be. The decisions the CEO and executive staff make are what makes or breaks a company. Most workers, work hard, no matter what the business decisions are. But the directions the business takes are what makes it or breaks it.

No one in a free and open market system is "entitled" to ANYTHING, including a "living wage". You get what the market pays for a skill set. If your skill is hard to find you will make a lot, if you do what a trained monkey can do you get what a trained monkey gets, period. That's how it works.

In this life, under the current human condition, the ONLY things your are "entitled" to are what you can take and what you can keep. Nothing more.

Well according to your logic, a lot of these "CEO", are doing a terrible job and are not entilted to the excessive saleries that they are receiving now. A lot of these American corporations are in fact "Broke", or are bleeding cash.Or are you going to blaime the Workers for this economic mess that many American corporations find themselves in.?

 

[Zoomie1980]

Well according to your logic, a lot of these "CEO", are doing a terrible job and are not entilted to the excessive saleries that they are receiving now. A lot of these American corporations are in fact "Broke", or are bleeding cash.Or are you going to blaime the Workers for this economic mess that many American corporations find themselves in.?

Most American companies are fine and will weather the storm. Some won't. Those that won't mostly have lost control of their costs to do business and can no longer compete in a global market. As in every downturn the business that cannot adapt and compete, die. And they should.

 

[pegwinn]

I have a problem with corporate bank CEOs getting up to $124,000,000.00 in a yearly salary when the country just shelled our money out to bail them out. i mean shoot i am not entitle to own and operate a business unhindered and these robber barons get away with taxpayer theft. I have a problem with it when we have people struggling to live day to day and the country has to subsidize multi-million dollar paychecks to these bankers and investment fund thugs.

Total amount committed for investment as of Dec 16, 2008 01:05:38 PM: $246.85 billion

Agreed. MY tax dollars should never be used to encourage continued incompetence. And that should include the elected incompetents as well. As to taxpayer theft, you will need to substantiate that.

Well according to your logic, a lot of these "CEO", are doing a terrible job and are not entilted to the excessive saleries that they are receiving now. A lot of these American corporations are in fact "Broke", or are bleeding cash.Or are you going to blaime the Workers for this economic mess that many American corporations find themselves in.?

IMHO they are not worth the salaries being paid. But, I don't get to make those decisions. I do think that union issues must be addressed though. One of the key expenses of any business is payroll and benefits. If it isn't under control from the top guy down to the janitor the company will not be competitive and will die.

The executives prove one point...... The average employee only works hard enough not to get fired, and the average employer only pays enough to keep the worker from walking off the job.

 

[RodISHI]

Agreed. MY tax dollars should never be used to encourage continued incompetence. And that should include the elected incompetents as well. As to taxpayer theft, you will need to substantiate that.



IMHO they are not worth the salaries being paid. But, I don't get to make those decisions. I do think that union issues must be addressed though. One of the key expenses of any business is payroll and benefits. If it isn't under control from the top guy down to the janitor the company will not be competitive and will die.

The executives prove one point...... The average employee only works hard enough not to get fired, and the average employer only pays enough to keep the worker from walking off the job.

As far as a bank's policies I already did substantiate the taxpayer rip-offs at one point (per one bank's "standard banking practices". Other major players have the same policies.). Fact is nobody at the time really wanted to hear it.
At this point it is a matter of getting back into the records on hand and pulling them out of the twenty-five boxes and getting them online.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Agreed. MY tax dollars should never be used to encourage continued incompetence. And that should include the elected incompetents as well. As to taxpayer theft, you will need to substantiate that.



IMHO they are not worth the salaries being paid. But, I don't get to make those decisions. I do think that union issues must be addressed though. One of the key expenses of any business is payroll and benefits. If it isn't under control from the top guy down to the janitor the company will not be competitive and will die.

The executives prove one point...... The average employee only works hard enough not to get fired, and the average employer only pays enough to keep the worker from walking off the job.

In general I do believe executive compensation has gotten out of line. But given that, it is responsibility of the shareholders, and no one else, to reel it back in. It is corporate shareholders who are to blame for allowing CEO comps to get so far out of line and not hold them and their own boards responsible for poor performance.

Most workers in my experience work a good deal harder than the minimum to keep a job and are motivated to do well, because many want to get promoted, not just keep their current job.

 

[pegwinn]

Most workers in my experience work a good deal harder than the minimum to keep a job and are motivated to do well, because many want to get promoted, not just keep their current job.

I'm glad that your experience is different. I wish they were as motivated about being a citizen and managing their share of politics as well.

 

[user_name_guest]

We saw recently, the Home Depot, give a large seaverence bonus to a departing CEO, when the Home Depot had been loosing money for the last 2 years.
I tell you all, excessive CEO pay is part of the problem for American corporations.

Many of these CEO,'s don't know what the hell they are doing, the workers are never paid a livable wage, and are not really motivated. Corporations would be better served by paying their workers,not the CEO.Take care of your workers, is
why Japan continues to make better cars, and products than America.The Japanese corporate focus is on the Workers, not the CEO.! It is the workers that
ultimately make or break the corporation in the long run, not the CEO.

You don't reward failure. I do not support golden parachutes to individuals who made the company in a worse-off position. I also don't support handing out taxpayers money to inefficient players in the auto industry.

 

[Richard-H]

Anyone who believes that most shareholders have any power over executive compensation is full of shit.

The vast majority of the shareholders do not hold enough shares to have any influence over CEO compensation. The stupid proxy forms are nonsense. They don't have the slightest say whatsoever.

Many stockholder's ownership only comes thru 401k funds & derivatives that are so spread out across companies that they themselves don't know what companies they're invested in.

Since only the company's executive have a list of who the stockholders are, it's almost impossible for the vast majority of stockholders to organize any stockholders rebellion.

Saying that the stockholders control executive compensation, much like most conservative's arguments, sound pretty but if ya look at it closely you'll find that it stinks like shit!

No, the vast majority of stockholders do NOT have any say in executive compensation.

Besides which, most people invested in 401ks, unlike corporate executives, are a little to busy do constructive work to have time to organize any stockholder rebellions.

Here's a better idea:

Since almost every working person in this country is invested in 401k plans, the government has a responsibilty, in the name of the general welfare of the people of the United States, to regulate executive compensation for all publicly traded companys.

Protecting the common people from the abuses of the powerful is exactly why the U.S. Government was formed in the first place.

Death to Kings!

 

[RodISHI]

Good points Richard. Many corporate boards have also rigged the game to prevent shareholders from being able to request accountable by the CEO's.


Responsible Wealth has been advocating for "awareness that concentrated wealth and power undermine the economy, corrupt democracy, deepen the racial divide, and tear communities apart. We support and help build social movements for greater equality."


Corporate Watch is working also to hold corporate interests accountable.

 

[Zoomie1980]

Anyone who believes that most shareholders have any power over executive compensation is full of shit.

The vast majority of the shareholders do not hold enough shares to have any influence over CEO compensation. The stupid proxy forms are nonsense. They don't have the slightest say whatsoever.

Many stockholder's ownership only comes thru 401k funds & derivatives that are so spread out across companies that they themselves don't know what companies they're invested in.

Since only the company's executive have a list of who the stockholders are, it's almost impossible for the vast majority of stockholders to organize any stockholders rebellion.

Saying that the stockholders control executive compensation, much like most conservative's arguments, sound pretty but if ya look at it closely you'll find that it stinks like shit!

No, the vast majority of stockholders do NOT have any say in executive compensation.

Besides which, most people invested in 401ks, unlike corporate executives, are a little to busy do constructive work to have time to organize any stockholder rebellions.

Here's a better idea:

Since almost every working person in this country is invested in 401k plans, the government has a responsibilty, in the name of the general welfare of the people of the United States, to regulate executive compensation for all publicly traded companys.

Protecting the common people from the abuses of the powerful is exactly why the U.S. Government was formed in the first place.

Death to Kings!

Good thing that will never happen, as it is illegal. So long as a corporation does not seek any help from the government the government has no say. It is 100%, without any doubt or reservation, the role of the shareholders to set executive compensation, period. It is simply how it works and how it will ALWAYS work. And that is a GOOD thing.

 

[pegwinn]

Since almost every working person in this country is invested in 401k plans, the government has a responsibilty, in the name of the general welfare of the people of the United States, to regulate executive compensation for all publicly traded companys.

Interesting. It's anti-constitutional to say the least. But I'd be interested in your quoting chapter and verse the authority to do such a thing.

 

[editec]

Two words...

interlocking directorships.

 

[pegwinn]

Are you saying that for informational purposes only or is there a point you are trying to make?

 

[RodISHI]

Two words...

interlocking directorships.

Something like this? Mapper, VISA, CITI, Wells Fargo, etc... Click on each representation logo or name to expand map.

 

[Richard-H]

Interesting. It's anti-constitutional to say the least. But I'd be interested in your quoting chapter and verse the authority to do such a thing.

Uhm...

I guess you've never actually read the Constitution or you would have recognized my rather obvious reference to the 'General Welfare' Clause of the constitution. This clause gives the government almost unlimited power.

There is NOTHING in the U.S. Constitution barring the government from regulating executives compensation.

If there is please point out the section, article or amendment.

(Note: The U.S. Constitution isn't divided into chapters and verses, that would be the Bible, I know it's hard, but please try not to mix two of them up.)