Should the government cap actors' pay?

[chanel]

AFFLECK: That speaks so perfectly to people's feelings about our country. It's like it's just about getting by, or people can like let people go if they can get away with it, that there's no deeper sense of right or wrong. The banks shouldn't -- people shouldn't make such a giant profit off just moving money back and forth. And CEOs' pay shouldn't be 200 times the average worker. It used to be nine times.

Read more: Ben Affleck Goes on NPR to Complain About Overpaid CEOs -- Not Overpaid Movie Stars | NewsBusters.org

Affleck makes in the neighborhood of 125 times more than that on one movie. Factor in an entire year and he probably earns in the neighborhood of 500 times the “average worker” in his industry — maybe a lot more.

Before we start regulating CEO pay, maybe we should start with actors. The Hollywood left likes the idea of creeping socialism, just as long as it doesn’t creep any farther west than San Bernardino.

Michelle Malkin Heh: Actor Who Made $12.5 Million for ‘Gigli’ Says Corporate CEOs are Overpaid

Ah gotta love that celebutard hypocrisy.

 

[jillian]

Ah gotta love that celebutard hypocrisy.

corporate CEO's DO make too much money relative to employees further down the food chain. it used to be a disparity of something like 6 to 8 times. now it's something like 30 times.

actors are used BECAUSE they make money for corporations. If you starr Brad Pitt in a movie, how much does his name bring to the box office? He creates wealth for the production company much like Derrick Jeter does for his team's owners. I view it as profit sharing.

unlike failed CEO's who get golden parachutes. when you screw up like he or Carly Fiorina did, do you get a check for millions of dollars and a pension? Or does your butt get shown the door?

How much wealth did Tony Hayward produce for BP?

 

[chanel]

I have no idea, but isn't BP a British company?

Ben Affleck has made some pretty awful movies. But that's not the point. Not all CEO's suck at their job either.

 

[jillian]

I have no idea, but isn't BP a British company?

Ben Affleck has made some pretty awful movies. But that's not the point. Not all CEO's suck at their job either.

BP is a multinational corporation. But I mentioned Carly Fiorina, too. She screwed up at HP like nobody's business.

It's not just about not sucking at their job. It's about profit creation. And yes, Affleck has made some horrendous films, but in the main, he's a big box office draw...

How many people buy a product BECAUSE of who the CEO is? It becomes an issue for me when failed CEO's get so much money in golden parachutes that companies try to cut worker benefits. How do you hand a failed CEO a check for millions and then turn around and tell your workers you're cutting their pensions/health coverage/salary increases?

I think that's the point they were making.

 

[California Girl]

I have no idea, but isn't BP a British company?

Ben Affleck has made some pretty awful movies. But that's not the point. Not all CEO's suck at their job either.

BP is a multinational corporation. But I mentioned Carly Fiorina, too. She screwed up at HP like nobody's business.

It's not just about not sucking at their job. It's about profit creation. And yes, Affleck has made some horrendous films, but in the main, he's a big box office draw...

How many people buy a product BECAUSE of who the CEO is? It becomes an issue for me when failed CEO's get so much money in golden parachutes that companies try to cut worker benefits. How do you hand a failed CEO a check for millions and then turn around and tell your workers you're cutting their pensions/health coverage/salary increases?

I think that's the point they were making.

So, because some CEOs suck, we should punish them all? Perhaps the government should regulate everyone's pay?

 

[jillian]

I have no idea, but isn't BP a British company?

Ben Affleck has made some pretty awful movies. But that's not the point. Not all CEO's suck at their job either.

BP is a multinational corporation. But I mentioned Carly Fiorina, too. She screwed up at HP like nobody's business.

It's not just about not sucking at their job. It's about profit creation. And yes, Affleck has made some horrendous films, but in the main, he's a big box office draw...

How many people buy a product BECAUSE of who the CEO is? It becomes an issue for me when failed CEO's get so much money in golden parachutes that companies try to cut worker benefits. How do you hand a failed CEO a check for millions and then turn around and tell your workers you're cutting their pensions/health coverage/salary increases?

I think that's the point they were making.

So, because some CEOs suck, we should punish them all? Perhaps the government should regulate everyone's pay?

you're ignoring the point and going to the extreme...

you think a failed CEO should suck millions out of a corporation in golden parachutes? or you think their pay should at least be linked to profitability?

 

[editec]

If the stockholders of corporations are so lame they don't mind paying people to lose money for them what business is it of mine?

The government ought not to be the business of setting people's salaries, except in the case of setting a minimum wage, and of course deciding what compensation government workers get.

That being said, the fact that CEOs get enormous paychecks even when they lose money is sorta nuts.

But this entire system is sorta nuts so that fits the pattern.

 

[jillian]

If the stockholders of corporations are so lame they don't mind paying people to lose money for them what business is it of mine?

The government ought not to be the business of setting people's salaries, except in the case of setting a minimum wage, and of course deciding what compensation government workers get.

That being said, the fact that CEOs get enormous paychecks even when they lose money is sorta nuts.

But this entire system is sorta nuts so that fits the pattern.

thanks. you said it better than i did.

but... how much say do the shareholders actually have in CEO pay?

they care only about price per share, not whether workers health care is cut to pay some yahoo who got him/herself fired.

 

[California Girl]

BP is a multinational corporation. But I mentioned Carly Fiorina, too. She screwed up at HP like nobody's business.

It's not just about not sucking at their job. It's about profit creation. And yes, Affleck has made some horrendous films, but in the main, he's a big box office draw...

How many people buy a product BECAUSE of who the CEO is? It becomes an issue for me when failed CEO's get so much money in golden parachutes that companies try to cut worker benefits. How do you hand a failed CEO a check for millions and then turn around and tell your workers you're cutting their pensions/health coverage/salary increases?

I think that's the point they were making.

So, because some CEOs suck, we should punish them all? Perhaps the government should regulate everyone's pay?

you're ignoring the point and going to the extreme...

you think a failed CEO should suck millions out of a corporation in golden parachutes? or you think their pay should at least be linked to profitability?

I think I should mind my own business... unless I am a shareholder.

 

[chanel]

Well it disgusts me that these actors and athletes make such ridiculous amounts of money and then tell doctors making 250K that they aren't paying their "fair share"

But prob the grossest injustice is when class action lawyers rake in millions while the actual victims get peanuts. The govt should really put and end to that, doncha think?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Ah gotta love that celebutard hypocrisy.

corporate CEO's DO make too much money relative to employees further down the food chain. it used to be a disparity of something like 6 to 8 times. now it's something like 30 times.

actors are used BECAUSE they make money for corporations. If you starr Brad Pitt in a movie, how much does his name bring to the box office? He creates wealth for the production company much like Derrick Jeter does for his team's owners. I view it as profit sharing.

unlike failed CEO's who get golden parachutes. when you screw up like he or Carly Fiorina did, do you get a check for millions of dollars and a pension? Or does your butt get shown the door?

How much wealth did Tony Hayward produce for BP?

So...wow...I didn't know that actors gave back their earnings when a movie they starred in flopped.
Mighty white of them.

 

[daveman]

BP is a multinational corporation. But I mentioned Carly Fiorina, too. She screwed up at HP like nobody's business.

It's not just about not sucking at their job. It's about profit creation. And yes, Affleck has made some horrendous films, but in the main, he's a big box office draw...

How many people buy a product BECAUSE of who the CEO is? It becomes an issue for me when failed CEO's get so much money in golden parachutes that companies try to cut worker benefits. How do you hand a failed CEO a check for millions and then turn around and tell your workers you're cutting their pensions/health coverage/salary increases?

I think that's the point they were making.

So, because some CEOs suck, we should punish them all? Perhaps the government should regulate everyone's pay?

you're ignoring the point and going to the extreme...

you think a failed CEO should suck millions out of a corporation in golden parachutes? or you think their pay should at least be linked to profitability?

I think the company should abide by the terms of the contract it signed with the CEO.

 

[Si modo]

I think McNabb's pay is an atrocity. But, the Redskin's owner is an idiot. I have no problem with idiots being soaked because of really bad decisions. The market is both brutal and rewarding. It's its nature.

 

[Blagger]

To be totally honest, I think that there's an element of envy in this thread.

Does Ben Affleck make too much money for what he does? Intrinsically, yes, he does. But that's not the only reason he makes what he does. When an actor or actress makes a success of their career and are regularly cast in big-name productions, they're sacrificing any privacy they once might have had. Essentially, it's an unspoken trade-off - you appear in my films and attract and share the focus of the publicity my movie needs to be a success and I'll pay you millions of dollars.

Think about it this way. If, as a result of your profession, your face was splashed across magazines and billboards all over the world, and you were constantly criticised for your looks and talent by the media, wouldn't you demand/accept an exorbitant fee for enduring all that attention? And before you write/say it, yes, I'm fully aware that it's their decision and they're not forced in front of the camera, but they do know that in order to make it, they're going to be subject to more attention than you or I could possibly deal with. And as a result, they expect to be payed well for it.

To an extent, the same reasoning applies to journalists. As a result of putting their name to what they write, they're putting themselves in the limelight, and they garner fans in their own right. And if they scoop a breaking headline, the world is going to want to know who exposed who and what. So, like actors, they expect to be payed accordingly for putting their heads above the parapet.

Just one other quick point I'd like to make. I'm not entirely sure how it works with regards to Hollywood and the big screen, but writers who write a clever and original script that becomes a box office hit, should be payed proportionately to the actors who perform in their story.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Pheh...so how many actors have given truly vast sums to charity? I am talking more at least a 1/3 of their money.
There have been several, if you take the time to find them - you will see a pattern.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

AFFLECK: That speaks so perfectly to people's feelings about our country. It's like it's just about getting by, or people can like let people go if they can get away with it, that there's no deeper sense of right or wrong. The banks shouldn't -- people shouldn't make such a giant profit off just moving money back and forth. And CEOs' pay shouldn't be 200 times the average worker. It used to be nine times.

Read more: Ben Affleck Goes on NPR to Complain About Overpaid CEOs -- Not Overpaid Movie Stars | NewsBusters.org

Affleck makes in the neighborhood of 125 times more than that on one movie. Factor in an entire year and he probably earns in the neighborhood of 500 times the “average worker” in his industry — maybe a lot more.

Before we start regulating CEO pay, maybe we should start with actors. The Hollywood left likes the idea of creeping socialism, just as long as it doesn’t creep any farther west than San Bernardino.

Michelle Malkin Heh: Actor Who Made $12.5 Million for ‘Gigli’ Says Corporate CEOs are Overpaid

Ah gotta love that celebutard hypocrisy.

When they meant to cap peoples compensation they weren't talking about themselves, they were talking about the unarmed and/or stupid people who think what they say is worth a listen

 

[RetiredGySgt]

BP is a multinational corporation. But I mentioned Carly Fiorina, too. She screwed up at HP like nobody's business.

It's not just about not sucking at their job. It's about profit creation. And yes, Affleck has made some horrendous films, but in the main, he's a big box office draw...

How many people buy a product BECAUSE of who the CEO is? It becomes an issue for me when failed CEO's get so much money in golden parachutes that companies try to cut worker benefits. How do you hand a failed CEO a check for millions and then turn around and tell your workers you're cutting their pensions/health coverage/salary increases?

I think that's the point they were making.

So, because some CEOs suck, we should punish them all? Perhaps the government should regulate everyone's pay?

you're ignoring the point and going to the extreme...

you think a failed CEO should suck millions out of a corporation in golden parachutes? or you think their pay should at least be linked to profitability?

It is NOT the Government's business what private Companies pay their employees. If it is then it applies across the board. Shall Congress decide how much you Lawyers get paid? What a fucking joke.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How much does the average actor make, why should Ben Aflac make so much more, because he plays the Aflac duck?

 

[Blagger]

So, because some CEOs suck, we should punish them all? Perhaps the government should regulate everyone's pay?

you're ignoring the point and going to the extreme...

you think a failed CEO should suck millions out of a corporation in golden parachutes? or you think their pay should at least be linked to profitability?

It is NOT the Government's business what private Companies pay their employees. If it is then it applies across the board. Shall Congress decide how much you Lawyers get paid? What a fucking joke.

It becomes their business if they've bailed-out a private company with taxpayers money, because they are then share holders. Like what happened in the UK banking industry and Goldman Sachs in the US. But a government can't alter a private contractual agreement between an employer and employee that was signed prior to a government cash injection/bail-out.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

you're ignoring the point and going to the extreme...

you think a failed CEO should suck millions out of a corporation in golden parachutes? or you think their pay should at least be linked to profitability?

It is NOT the Government's business what private Companies pay their employees. If it is then it applies across the board. Shall Congress decide how much you Lawyers get paid? What a fucking joke.

It becomes their business if they've bailed-out a private company with taxpayers money, because they are then share holders. Like what happened in the UK banking industry and Goldman Sachs in the US. But a government can't alter a private contractual agreement between an employer and employee that was signed prior to a government cash injection/bail-out.

Those are Government owned business, at least till the loan is paid off. Which does not change the fact that Government has no legal business trying to tell private Business what it can and can not pay its employees.