President Obama’s New Rules on Executive Compensation

How soon will these executives quit these companies?
Remember the stories of the cooks that spit in the food because they felt they were underpaid & undervalued – guess what executives are going to do in the companies they work for.
This is just socialist political tactic by Obama to put the government in control of everyone’s lives.
It is getting close for a Revolution!

Sally J:”This is just socialist political tactic by Obama to put the government in control of everyone’s lives.”
I love the straight-man jokes! (Of course, the most immediate impact of this has been banks feverishly rejecting any government money or ownership. In reality, the impact of this is the exact OPPOSITE of socialism.)

“So what’s the problem with this? Scaring private industry away from having the government bail them out? Oh no.”
ROFLMAO!
Seriously, banks are paying back TARP money early with the gov’t turning a slight profit on them and this is a bad thing?

“It’s not that conservatives are against common sense w/ these salaries (I know I am), it’s just we don’t like the government stepping in – in any way – to try to regulate this! It’s none of their business! You let the market take care of itself.”
While I am not a proponent of laizze faire capitalism, the above is a reasonable position applied to the wrong circumstance.
In this situation, companies in the market are seeking government assistance and with that comes government restrictions. They are free to not ask for government helps.

Interestingly when the left made arguments about civil rights and the Patriot Act and warrantless eavesdropping on American citizens, they were called unAmerican by right wingers.
But Obama setting executive compensation limits on companies that accept government bailout money is somehow beyond pale and the beginning of government control of our lives.
Kind of shows you exactly where the priorities of the right wing are.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 11, 2009 12:49:47 PM
_________________________________
No Ryan, a lot of us conservatives were leery of that too, but “let it go” because, especially at the time of it’s creation, it was specifically targeted at saving American lives. And to a far degree, that appears to have worked. We also (I know I did) watched very closely to ensure these new powers went no further, and were not abused. If it ever went further, trust me, I’d be out there fighting it. This compensation thing though – if expanded past companies that take gov. bailout cash – is far more troubling in what it could lead to. Keeping tabs on what terrorists are up to can make common sense. Regulating the free market economy that has made this country what it is past the point of common sense can lead to disruption of our entire society. First, CEOs are regulated, then middle management, then ….. us. And when Obama regulates radio, where will the voices against such action come from? See my point! Live and let live! Don’t kill, don’t cheat, play fair, help out where help is truly needed, and everything else will take care of itself more often then not!

The number one priority of a business is to turn a profit–the larger the profit the better. Businesses are not in business to improve the economy. They are not in business to satisfy the whims of politicians.
Some executives believe the best way to generate a profit is with employees who are well compensated (salary, bonuses and benefits, including healthcare benefits)–giving an incentive to produce better quality of goods and services to their customers. Happier employees will eventually lead to more satisifed customers, which leads to more sales. Thus a higher profit.
Some executives believe the best way to generate a profit is to cut expenses to the bone, pay minimum compensation and give minimum benefits, if at all. The downside is that unhappy employees generally do not perform as well, thus the goods and services may suffer. And that may lead to less satisifed customers, which leads to less sales. Thus a lower profit.
Some executives believe the best way to generate a profit is to cut corners, even if illegal.
What the Obama Administration wants to do is to punish the first group. They want to stifle the American Dream and encourage businesses to place the public welfare as their number one priority. This will actually harm the economy. That’s because the businesses in the first group will ultimately become like those in the second group. There will be less satisfied customers and less profits. AND this will eventually translate into less revenue for the federal government as there will be less business profits to tax and certainly far less employee compensation to tax.
Finally, this will ultimately result in many more executives taking up the philosophy of the third group.

The linguists said National Security Agency interceptors routinely monitored and recorded the private calls of U.S. military personnel, Red Cross and other humanitarian workers; personal discussions that had entertainment value — pillow talk or phone sex —were shared among intercept operators, they said.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 11, 2009 1:18:23 PM
_________________________________
And these people were arrested and thrown into jail when? Now THAT would be an abuse of power! Not saying it’s right, it’s wrong and the people involved should be canned. And I would like to think they were listening in the first place because they thought they might get something related to national security. Pillow talk? They should not be sharing that, but there are pervs in all aspects of society. My overall point, there’s no abuse of power there. Privacy violated? Yeah, a bit, and that should be dealt w/ on a case by case basis. What Obama wants to do, however, invades our privacy in far greater ways. By impacting what people can charge for their services! Who is he to say so? (again, disclaimer: if businesses take a bailout, regulate away … serves ‘em right).

Why would it be extended beyond the companies taking bailout funds?
So basically you were fine with every American call overseas being monitored just in case someone was talking to a terrorist but Obama limiting executive compensation for companies receiving bailout money is the beginning of a slippery slope to total government control of our lives.
Posted by: Ryan C | Jun 11, 2009 1:36:48 PM
__________________________________
Gee, I don’t know …. because he said he wants it to go beyond those companies receiveing bailout money. To all public companies I believe was the statement. That’s the slippery slope!!

“And these people were arrested and thrown into jail when? Now THAT would be an abuse of power!”
I see. The government listening in on private phone calls for no reason with no warrant is perfectly ok provided you are not then jailed.
Interesting line in the sand you draw in defense of one’s freedoms and liberties.
“What Obama wants to do, however, invades our privacy in far greater ways. By impacting what people can charge for their services”
By limiting executive compensation on companies
So we’re clear, you could care less about the government spying citizens provided the citizens are not then summarily jailed but for executives taking bailout money, limiting their executive pay is a civil rights travesty.

We can’t vote directly on Congress’ salary either, Ryan.
Why not? We’re all shareholders.

“We can’t vote directly on Congress’ salary either, Ryan.
“Why not? We’re all shareholders.”
Directly? No.
But Congress stands for reelection and their voting themselves pay raises (even cost of living adjustments) has been an issue from time to time.

Congress should accept the same compensation package that is offered to lower level retail sales clerks..
“Minimum wage plus all that you can steal”