U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-02-2013, 03:56 PM
 
9,665 posts, read 8,640,621 times
Reputation: 3225

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sol11 View Post
Just as shareholders pay CEOs.

Nothing wrong with people being rewarded for their talent,...whether it be a CEO, an actor, or a major league athlete. There's really no difference.
Yes, talent that leads to bankruptcy and begging the government to give them money. Yes, that TALENT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2013, 03:57 PM
 
20,978 posts, read 16,231,718 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by sol11 View Post
Just as shareholders pay CEOs.

Nothing wrong with people being rewarded for their talent,...whether it be a CEO, an actor, or a major league athlete. There's really no difference.
Exactly.

Four decades ago, most major athletes had to have a job on the side in order to make ends meet.

Pay for talent seems to have skyrocketed all around....however, the guy who sweeps up after a Springsteen concert still makes minimum wage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 03:58 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
1,802 posts, read 1,641,861 times
Reputation: 1630
Quote:
Originally Posted by sol11 View Post
Just as shareholders pay CEOs.

Nothing wrong with people being rewarded for their talent,...whether it be a CEO, an actor, or a major league athlete. There's really no difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
I think it's awesome!

I hope that the CEO of my company makes 10 million times what I do, it won't make my value any greater.

Again I ask....why don't leftie loudmouth millionaires buy companies and pay what they feel the value of labor should be?

Bruce Springsteen makes how many times what he pays his road crew? Yet he blathers on about income inequality.

Look it up.
Not sure how I'm ending up on this side of the debate, but what justifies the disparity increasing from a 20X ratio between CEO/worker compensation 40 years ago and a 350X ratio today? Just because they can? Especially examples like Ron Johnson (JCP) and others who were spectacular flops...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 03:58 PM
 
20,978 posts, read 16,231,718 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHurricaneKid View Post
Yes, talent that leads to bankruptcy and begging the government to give them money. Yes, that TALENT.
That's crony capitalism, not true capitalism.

and, it doesn't happen but rarely.

If you're a donor to obama, you'll get paid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 04:02 PM
 
2,931 posts, read 1,909,808 times
Reputation: 1023
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheHurricaneKid View Post
Yes, talent that leads to bankruptcy and begging the government to give them money. Yes, that TALENT.
So,...it's the CEOs' fault that the government gave them money?

Seems to me that would be the GOVERNMENT's fault.

Chrysler and GM both failed,...and it was the CEOs' fault?

Solyndra failed,...and it was the CEO's fault?

Fisker is seeking bankruptcy,...and it is the CEO's fault?

The Postal Service is almost bankrupt,...and is a CEO's fault?

Social Security is almost bankrupt,...and its a CEO's fault?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 04:03 PM
 
20,978 posts, read 16,231,718 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
Not sure how I'm ending up on this side of the debate, but what justifies the disparity increasing from a 20X ratio between CEO/worker compensation 40 years ago and a 350X ratio today? Just because they can? Especially examples like Ron Johnson (JCP) and others who were spectacular flops...
That's the responsibility of the shareholders.

What did Henry Ford or Rockerfeller earn compared to their employees?

There were always those at the very top of their profession who earn thousands of times what their lower end employees earn.

For instance, what should a CEO of a multinational corporation with 100,000 employees earn over the floor sweeper?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 04:15 PM
 
9,665 posts, read 8,640,621 times
Reputation: 3225
Quote:
Originally Posted by sol11 View Post
So,...it's the CEOs' fault that the government gave them money?

Seems to me that would be the GOVERNMENT's fault.

Chrysler and GM both failed,...and it was the CEOs' fault?

Solyndra failed,...and it was the CEO's fault?

Fisker is seeking bankruptcy,...and it is the CEO's fault?

The Postal Service is almost bankrupt,...and is a CEO's fault?

Social Security is almost bankrupt,...and its a CEO's fault?
The way I understood it is, the CEO's and bankers claimed that the economy will collapse (essentially holding the economy hostage) unless they don't get paid.

...And that's how it turned out, they got paid, they are every bit as responsible for using the taxpayer money as the government.


...And isn't it the CEO who assumes the risk of business failure? Isn't it the CEO who is supposed to use their talents to keep the company up and running profitably?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 04:26 PM
 
805 posts, read 1,009,883 times
Reputation: 718
There are a few solutions to the problem:

Cap the deductibility of executive compensation.

Allow shareholders to hold binding votes on executive compensation.

End the bailouts of failing companies.

Raise taxes on incomes in excess of 1 million.

Reinstate Glass-Steagal and end "too big to fail" by breaking up mammoth banks.


The truth is the Board of Directors decides the CEO's compensation. Who typically sits on the Board? Why other CEOs. It should come as no surprise that CEO compensation is so high.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 04:31 PM
 
9,665 posts, read 8,640,621 times
Reputation: 3225
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_the_facts View Post
There are a few solutions to the problem:

Cap the deductibility of executive compensation.

Allow shareholders to hold binding votes on executive compensation.

End the bailouts of failing companies.

Raise taxes on incomes in excess of 1 million.

Reinstate Glass-Steagal and end "too big to fail" by breaking up mammoth banks.


The truth is the Board of Directors decides the CEO's compensation. Who typically sits on the Board? Why other CEOs. It should come as no surprise that CEO compensation is so high.
Isn't that similar to anti-trust legislation? Some people are against that type of legislation, because it restricts the freedom of the CEOs to do what they want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Where they serve real ale.
7,249 posts, read 6,651,780 times
Reputation: 3497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finley01 View Post
In the 1950's an average corporate executive earned 20 times what a line worker earned.
Ron Johnson, JC Penney CEO earns 1800 times what his typical employee earns. The average CEO makes 600 times what an ordinary worker earns.

Unbridled greed exists in this country and only someone with zero compassion and a cruel heart can attempt to justify a minimum wage of $7.25 per hour with little or no benefits.

GUESS WHAT...The Republicans want more tax cuts for the wealthy. Grover Norquist of the T Party has even got a majority list of Republicans who have signed a pledge to never vote for another tax increase.....not a dollar.

[MOD CUT/hotlinking]
I have never understood the right wing conservative position that claims tax benefits for the rich will make them work harder but benefits for the poor will make the poor work less hard. The reality is even without the endless rounds of tax cuts for the wealthy we've had in the last 30 years the rich would still be making record money but since unions have been so damaged by waves of anti-union legislation workers no longer get as much benefit from their work as they used to. Now it all goes to the top and workers get an ever small slice of the pie. This country would be much better off if we required labor representation on corporate boards the way Germany does.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:43 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top