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.
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration will call for increased oversight of executive pay at all banks, Wall Street firms and possibly other companies as part of a sweeping plan to overhaul financial regulation, government officials said.
"One proposal could impose greater requirements on company boards to tie executive compensation more closely to corporate performance and to take other steps to ensure that compensation was aligned with the financial interest of the company.
The new rules will cover all financial institutions, including those not now covered by any pay rules because they are not receiving federal bailout money. Officials say the rules could also be applied more broadly to publicly traded companies, which already report about some executive pay practices to the Securities and Exchange Commission".
Should I dare to presume from the post heading that you have a damning view of socialism? I don't, because I understand that socialism takes many forms and there is great diversity of thought between even those who label themselves socialists.
In any case, I would think it obvious that the suggested reforms are necessary and should in fact have been implemented a long time ago. Financial institutions are handling MY money and I'd like to think that anybody involved is earning a decent living but not squandering taxpayers' dollars on an obscenely lavish lifestyle akin to that of a Middle Eastern oil sheikh. Cheers!
This isn't socialism -- it's called oversight (something that has been lacking for too many years). Oversight is the government's job, after all (that's one of the reasons why we elect our politicians in the first place).
This isn't socialism -- it's called oversight (something that has been lacking for too many years). Oversight is the government's job, after all (that's one of the reasons why we elect our politicians in the first place).
This is just the pendulum swinging back. From unfettered to fettered. It's not socialism for Pete's sake.
Is he going to "oversee" professional athletes' and entertainers' pay, too?
B/c I think Oprah is severely overpaid.
I don't see Hollywood, or professional sports teams getting any form of bailouts, nor do the decisions made by those companies affect the economy to the same level as decisions made by banks / Wall Street firms.
He wants to over see everyones pay but those in congress
This is on the road to socialism
Telling people what they can and cant earn.
Open your eyes
Actually, the closest thing to socialism I've seen thus far would be the nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both of which occurred during George Bush's presidency.
Does that make George W. Bush a socialist too, by your logic?
Given that every single National bank in the US must conform to any and all over sight demanded by the appropriate regulatory authority they could literally demand bank execs tap dance for an hour every Tuesday and it would be 100% legal provided the appropriate regulatory authority demanded it. The reason is they can revoke a bank's charter at any time at their discretion. It's been that way since about 1910.
They can literally shut down any nationally chartered bank for any reason including "bringing disrepute upon the industry" or "undermining confidence in the banking sector". It is 100% left to the 2 main regulators to decide (one regulator covers major banks and the other national thrifts) if that is the case and there are no appeals. It's really a do what I say or go out of business situation. If they want they can send a letter saying in three days your charter is revoked and you may no longer function as a bank in this country. It's totally legal and has nothing to do with socialism, genius.
I don't see Hollywood, or professional sports teams getting any form of bailouts, nor do the decisions made by those companies affect the economy to the same level as decisions made by banks / Wall Street firms.
LOL! I don't think it was the salaries that killed the economy. They have been making ridiculously high salaries since the beginning of time. It was the bad policies coupled by the greed of those who wanted things they couldn't afford (see: general public). And I would argue it is the ridiculous salary/benefit demands of the unions that is killing the auto industry (vs the corporate salaries).
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.
