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.
First of all as wonderful and awsome as America is, our government is not a 4 trillion dollar organization.
It is a 4 trillion dollar drain on the economy. The American government does not make anything of serious value. It takes money out of the economy, cycles it thru its guts and puts out some stuff that we want.
Now I dont say that to suggest that we shouldnt have a government. We should. Its a good thing. While I think the government should be smaller and less intrusive, I accpet the concept that government itself is not bad.
Now lets deal with the conservatives attitudes towards companies.
The issue is NOT what we think they should be paid. As a conservative, I think most of them are overpaid, and it is inslulting to middle class people when a failure of a CEO gets a 20 million dollar payout.
having said that, conservatives (myself included) understand that the MARKET makes the determination and the GOVERNMENT has no role to play.
simply put, we simply do not see where the federal government has a right to step into the discussion of executive pay. period.
its hard to fathom you libs are so ignorant of what we actually think.
I generally agree with what you're saying. You're right for the most part.
I'm not sure whether you were saying this or not, but CEO/Exec pay isn't market based in this country. Not even close. Hell, i don't know WHAT it's based on, but it's damn sure not the free market.
On the macro scale there is obviously a difference, but on the micro scale, the employee level, how can you claim such a thing? You hire people to do a job and to do it well. Just because someone works for the public sector they should be screwed over. Despite the claims the loon right, working for the government is not a public service. They are employees just like anyone at a private corporation. You can't have it both ways. You can't complain about government employees slacking off or being lazy, then claim they deserve little or no pay because they work for the government.
I didn't claim that. I've worked for a state agency and worked hard. First, there is a difference though in employment where money is taken by law and one where profits are driven by providing a product or service that people voluntarily puchase. I do think people should be paid for the job. The President gets a pretty good compensation package, and the office of the President should not be one that people seek on the basis of financial gain. They should be well compensated but that should not be the motive.
How about a commission on the funds saved by cutting demonstrably redundant or ineffective programs?
How about it Koch brother loving CEO worshipers? There are certainly a lot of you on this site so lets hear it. If an incompetent idiot like Ron Johnson can nearly drive JC Penny in to the ground and still walk away with $20 million a year, why should the CEO of the larger entity on the planet, the United States Government, make a mere $400k a year? If CEOs are so deserving of millions for running a relatively small(relatively speaking) corporation, how is the person in charge of a most powerful nation on earth not worth even more? I be waiting to hear the excuses as to why the CEO of a billion dollar corporation is worth 20x more than the CEO of a four trillion dollar nation.
Oh please.
Any office that serves the public should pay its holder enough to reduce the odds he will be tempted by monetary corruption. And no more.
Just because some CEOs are overpaid doesn't mean the president should be overpaid.
I didn't claim that. I've worked for a state agency and worked hard. First, there is a difference though in employment where money is taken by law and one where profits are driven by providing a product or service that people voluntarily puchase. I do think people should be paid for the job. The President gets a pretty good compensation package, and the office of the President should not be one that people seek on the basis of financial gain. They should be well compensated but that should not be the motive.
How about a commission on the funds saved by cutting demonstrably redundant or ineffective programs?
Actually, I would have no problem with a incentive plan. I think the issue with that is the same as CEOs. It causes the leader to focus on what is best for themselves, not best for the country or the company. This is the biggest problem I have with CEOs today. Despite the claims of their backers, many moves that CEOs make are actually bad for the company long term. I guess the same thing happens with politicians and elections. Congressmen and Senators routinely vote for laws that are demonstrably harmful to the nation yet will please some super PAC enough to guarantee them re-election.
Last edited by Velvet Jones; 12-18-2013 at 09:54 AM..
Actually, I would have no problem with a incentive plan. I think the issue with that is the same as CEOs. It causes the leader to focus on what is best for themselves, not best for the country or the company. This is the biggest problem I have with CEOs today. Despite the claims of their backers, many moves that CEOs make are actually bad for the company long term. I guess the same thing happens with politicians and elections. Congressmen and Senators routinely vote for laws that a demonstrably harmful to the nation yet will please super PAC enough to guarantee them re-election.
How about it Koch brother loving CEO worshipers? There are certainly a lot of you on this site so lets hear it. If an incompetent idiot like Ron Johnson can nearly drive JC Penny in to the ground and still walk away with $20 million a year, why should the CEO of the larger entity on the planet, the United States Government, make a mere $400k a year? If CEOs are so deserving of millions for running a relatively small(relatively speaking) corporation, how is the person in charge of a most powerful nation on earth not worth even more? I be waiting to hear the excuses as to why the CEO of a billion dollar corporation is worth 20x more than the CEO of a four trillion dollar nation.
Do you see government as "in business for profit"?
Do you see government as "in business for profit"?
Profit is not the only thing that an business or organizations are responsible for. There are plenty of NGOs, charities, health systems, and insurance companies that do not have a goal of profit but still pay their employees and CEOs well. My local BCBS pays their CEO a million a year. They have a surplus of over a billion in revenue. They're run better than 99% of the public corporations in this country. I just find it oddthat we try and make working for our government, which is generally one of the most important things in our lives(for good or bad), one of the least desirable things in the world. Not exactly the way to attract the best and brightest.
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.
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.
