bonus cap

bonus cap (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

philosophy -> bonus cap (2/4/2009 9:03:05 AM)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090204/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bailout_executive_pay ...well, this is all very interesting. i'm sure that some, like me, will welcome this. i'm equally sure that some wil see this as a precursor to the end of the American way of life. To the latter group, why do you think that?

Mercnbeth -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 9:14:30 AM)
Well, philo, pragmatically it represents 'nationalization'. Doubtful that many will see it for what it is; most are clamoring for it and welcome it. It's like the frog in the pot of warming water; "shit yeah - limit those bastards!". Then when it comes to limiting them on the assembly line, the service phone, or wherever; they'll wonder; "how the hell did this happen?!" No doubt, these entities deserve it. If they were permitted to die, as they should have been, it wouldn't be an issue. It's a perfect tool to accomplish something and get support that as recently as 5 years ago - would be seen as 'un-American'; whatever that means. So the question back to you is, is this a conspiracy play, or happenstance?

philosophy -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 9:19:03 AM)
....arguably the bail-out itself was nationalism. This cap on bonuses just seems to me to take that nationalisation seriously, instead of doing it half-assed. Worth noting too, that the cap only applies to cash. Stock options can also be issued as bonuses with no limit on how many.....the limit there is that they can't be cashed in until the bail-out money is paid back. Got to be honest though, i'm not sure what you mean by conspiracy play or happenstance. i shall go put on a second pot of coffee and then reread your post........[:)]....i'm so not a morning person....lol

Mercnbeth -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 9:37:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy ....arguably the bail-out itself was nationalism. This cap on bonuses just seems to me to take that nationalization seriously, instead of doing it half-assed. Without question. The 'conspiracy' issue takes that into consideration. I don't remember seeing anyone bring up the issue back when President Bush proposed it. The speed at which it passed and was implemented inhibited that discussion as much as it didn't allow for limitations for the use of funds. I'm always of the opinion that people are much smarter than they seem, especially in positions of power in government. Granted they are lackeys for PAC pay-masters, but if I ever find myself believing they've done something stupid, like the stimulus, I tend to look deeper until determining what agenda I missed. In this case - nationalizing businesses was the the conclusion I reached. This 'from the top' method is probably the best case to implement, mandate and limit employee compensation. I think its very bad, you may think its very good - but it is. Call it what you will, but when the government dictates employee compensation, at the executive or executive washroom levels, that's a significant change in philosophy in the USA. Surprised? No - after all, the stated goal of the political party in power announced by one of its leaders was for the government to be involved in everyone's every day life. Start at the top - and the sheep will follow.

Coldwarrior57 -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 1:40:13 PM)
I had this idea when W was in office and he was behinde the bail outs. I called it pass or play.

slvemike4u -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 1:56:16 PM)
I would of thought this one line itself would have you up and dancing a jig or something Merc. "This is America. We don't disparage wealth. We don't begrudge anybody for achieving success," Obama said. "But what gets people upset — and rightfully so — are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers." Damm,it sounds like you wrote it for him.......

corysub -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 2:23:18 PM)
I always was afraid that Obama's lack of business experience and radical liberal training would cause him to do some stupid things during his Presidency. However, I didn't think he would signal just how ill prepared he is to lead the largest capitalistic country the planet has ever known within the first "two weeks" of his administration. Obviously, this "cap" on financial executives sounds like the wonderful music of YoYoMa to the liberal masses and to a guy like Obama whose background is as a community activist. They can say "gotcha" to those big bad men in Wall Street and that will make all their lives better. How cute..how childlike and innocent....NOT! Obama and his "team" (edit) don't seem to have any idea what "rich" means in the world of Wall Street? Do they understand that hundreds of millions of dollars have already been cashed in by these folk...and they hold millions of stock options as well as shares that, in a few years, will make them even richer. These people pay $500,000 for their houshold help and drivers for goodness sake....It would be funny but the country is going down the tube and we have a President who caps the income of wealthy people...and is going to save the nation by putting 5 million people to work building windmills and grids to connect them....Thank you Jesus..I mean thank you Obama!

Vendaval -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 2:41:55 PM)
Well, you have the carrot or the stick methods to choose from for the bail-outs. Some of the companies are getting hit with a stick for their greediness. I am wondering what will happen with the purposal of a federal level "bad bank" too. From the OP's link - "Officials are considering a government-run "bad bank" that would take on the bad debts and investments of financial institutions. In addition, the Treasury could seek help from the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to provide banks with guarantees against losses on assets backed by residential and commercial real estate loans."

Mercnbeth -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 4:08:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u I would of thought this one line itself would have you up and dancing a jig or something Merc. "This is America. We don't disparage wealth. We don't begrudge anybody for achieving success," Obama said. "But what gets people upset — and rightfully so — are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers." Damm,it sounds like you wrote it for him....... Wow - he got my letter! Either that or he must have read the message I sent to his Blackberry. Frankly, I would have capped the salary at $1.00 to each and every one of those failures, and billed back the last three year's of compensation as a caveat for taking the first mountain of taxpayer money. You put conditions on funding before you fund.

MistresseLotus -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 5:48:36 PM)
Not to worry.. the buggers will find a way around it..it's the American way.

TheUtopian -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 6:41:36 PM)
quote: Stock options can also be issued as bonuses with no limit on how many.....the limit there is that they can't be cashed in until the bail-out money is paid back. Stock options in the form executive compensation, is, in my opinion, the heart of the problem as it surrounds bad decision making within the corporate hierarchical structure. When you compensate those in the hierarchical structure with stock options, we're now seeing/realizing that these executives plan/strategize in an operational mode that is more representative to that of your typical non-institutional investor class. And anyone who knows/ understands this class of folks knows that they are mainly stimulated through/by-way of short term profit taking. In essence, what I'm saying, is that stock options as a large/primary-form of executive compensation, causes the hierarchical structure to behave more like short term investors---focused mainly on quarterly numbers/profits---instead of an old-school managerial structure, that would normally think/strategize in a far expanded/long-term mode. As far as excutive pay in general : It should be unlimted as far as profitability in privately held companies/corporations. However, those companies/corporations which are pubicly traded/funded through share-holder investment - should have their hirarical structure's wage/compensation packages completely determined by share-holder vote. - R

Louve00 -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 6:42:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth In this case - nationalizing businesses was the the conclusion I reached. This 'from the top' method is probably the best case to implement, mandate and limit employee compensation. I think its very bad, you may think its very good - but it is. Call it what you will, but when the government dictates employee compensation, at the executive or executive washroom levels, that's a significant change in philosophy in the USA. Surprised? No - after all, the stated goal of the political party in power announced by one of its leaders was for the government to be involved in everyone's every day life. Start at the top - and the sheep will follow. I would agree 'from the top' is probably the best. If these executives of these failing companies are asking for gov't money (tax-payer money), its good business practice for the lender to set the stipulations of the grants/loans. I also think, while some might associate it with socialism and the like...it has to start somewhere. These companies took billions of dollars to pay for bonuses that went to people that failed at their job. In fact, the 6th highest bonus Wall St had, despite the collapse of it. Their decisions are that of children run amuck, negligent of responsibility and what they should be doing. If they can't make prudent business decisions, someone has to make them for them. Their pocketbooks might be a good place for them to start to 'get it'. My only real concern in this, is if these caps were placed on companies that didn't ask for bail-out money. As far as I know, this applies to companies who have held their hands out for tax-payer money. Those terms should be limited. Or find your own way to save your ass, IMHO.

corysub -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 10:07:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Vendaval Well, you have the carrot or the stick methods to choose from for the bail-outs. Some of the companies are getting hit with a stick for their greediness. I am wondering what will happen with the purposal of a federal level "bad bank" too. From the OP's link - "Officials are considering a government-run "bad bank" that would take on the bad debts and investments of financial institutions. In addition, the Treasury could seek help from the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. to provide banks with guarantees against losses on assets backed by residential and commercial real estate loans." Only "officials" of a bad government would be dumb enough to consider a "bad bank"...of course it will be a bad bank...Can you imagine a bank run by bureacrats with oversight from Maxine Walters, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangle and the ever popular Speaker of the House, Nancy ( I'm saving the planet) Pelosi. What a group of losers. They got us into this mess and now they can't even get a stimulus Bill right withhout trying to load it up with pork and waste. And this at a time when the economy needs a dose of intelligent allocation of money that we are "borrowing"! "Change"....?? Change anyone!! Does anyone see "Change"....I know..they should have a rock group warm up the Senate before the Vote on the "Recovery Act"....did wonders for Obama in the primary.

Owner59 -> RE: bonus cap (2/4/2009 11:29:55 PM)
Rep. Franks introduced a bill some years ago(when cons were in control of congress)that would require executive compensations and bonuses to be approved by a shareholder vote and not just a board of trustees(who aren`t always trustworthy). He recalled being called a "socialist" and worse, when he mentioned it the other night. Why would introducing a little democratic reform and transparency into the boardroom be such a bad thing?

Louve00 -> RE: bonus cap (2/5/2009 4:26:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: corysub Only "officials" of a bad government would be dumb enough to consider a "bad bank"...of course it will be a bad bank...Can you imagine a bank run by bureacrats with oversight from Maxine Walters, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangle and the ever popular Speaker of the House, Nancy ( I'm saving the planet) Pelosi. What a group of losers. They got us into this mess and now they can't even get a stimulus Bill right withhout trying to load it up with pork and waste. And this at a time when the economy needs a dose of intelligent allocation of money that we are "borrowing"! "Change"....?? Change anyone!! Does anyone see "Change"....I know..they should have a rock group warm up the Senate before the Vote on the "Recovery Act"....did wonders for Obama in the primary. If I'm not mistaken, a 'bad bank', so to speak was established in the 1930's, to buy up all the bad mortgages that happened the last time the stock market crashed. It did work. It was NOT designed to help big business. What it did was save them from having to eat bad loans...and American people from losing their houses. We could've learned alot from our mistakes back then. But do we ever learn from our mistakes?

corysub -> RE: bonus cap (2/5/2009 4:28:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Rep. Franks introduced a bill some years ago(when cons were in control of congress)that would require executive compensations and bonuses to be approved by a shareholder vote and not just a board of trustees(who aren`t always trustworthy). He recalled being called a "socialist" and worse, when he mentioned it the other night. Why would introducing a little democratic reform and transparency into the boardroom be such a bad thing? Simply put, private or publically owned corporations are owned by individuasl., either singly or via mutual funds, bank trust department etc. It's called capitalism and eventually shareholders to vote on compensation. In an economy based on marxist philosophy, the business of business is controlled by government. It's a simple choice with horrendous ramifications. The Presidents program goes even further to the left than Barney Frank. What would Obama or Barney Frank know about the proper level of executive compensation? What would some bureacrat running a "Federal Office of Executive Compensation" know about the proper level to hire and maintain top executives in multi-billion dollar companies? While it's true that some boards are in the pocket of management, that control only works when things are good. Shareholders these days are importantly large institutions, mutual funds, State Pension Funds, Trust department of Banks, Investment Advisors, etc who are not afraid of voicing a strong opinion and even change, if not the people on BOD's, change top management. The California Retirement Board and Teachers Insurance & Annuity are leaders in this regard. The marketplace "caps" executive compensation. The government arguement for transparency (there's that word again) is valid since these days taxpayers are putting up hundreds of billions...trillions....to keep a number of these institutions in business. However, unless you want to also repeal the Emancipation Proclomation" we no longer have slavery in this country, and key executives who are worth their weight in big dollars will just walk and the "dead wood" will stay. Not a good thing for investors and the taxpayer funding them these days. As far as Barney Frank is concerned, the man is a general in the "claass warfare" insighted by liberal democrats for decades. Barney is an intelligent, clever politician, has a great sense of liberal humor. Ok, lets not call him a socialist, lets not go further on the left than to say he has a"radical leftist liberal, re-distribute the wealth, agenda. He also like to re-distribute your wealth and my wealth to his friends. He wrote into the TARP legislation a provision that gave $12 million to a bank in Mass. that is under investigation for fraud and abusive lending. Funny, isn't it, liberals expect everyone to be patriotic and support their programs, pay their taxes, but liberals are above all of those rules that apply to us. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123258284337504295.html I would pick another pol for advice on how to get us out of this quagmire. Particularly true in the case of Barney Frank who was in the hip pocket of FannieMae and FreddieMac and actually attacked the government agency responsible solely for oversight of these criminally run businesses that got us into this mess we are in today with sub-prime. Democrats on the oversight Congressional commitee such as Frank, Maxine Walters and a many others beat up and tarred and feathered the people in that agency who submitted a report in (edit 2004) blasting FNM and FRE and warning about major problems in the sub-prime area. These liberal democrats were only interested in legislating social change and didn't give a flying fuck about the health of these GSE's and the danger they posed to our financial system. There slogan seemed to be "Not only a chicken in every pot, but a house to cook it in". And now these same people are in control of Congress and we have a President who is even further to the left.. Anyone who doesn't buy gold and keep their head down until the republicans come back in two years is in for a very rough road ahead. If Obama, Frank, Pelosi and Reid have their way it's not "Change' we will get but "Change" we will be left with in our pockets! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

MmeGigs -> RE: bonus cap (2/5/2009 5:03:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: corysub They got us into this mess and now they can't even get a stimulus Bill right withhout trying to load it up with pork and waste. Hold your horses there, pardner. The Democratic leadership didn't get us to where we are today. This has been building up for decades, through both D and R administrations and congresses. Greed got us into this mess. Investors wanted double-digit returns, Wall Street created them, and none of the people making the money stopped to think about the fact that high returns go hand in hand with high risk, or that double-digit returns were not sustainable. It was called the IBG theory of investing - I'll Be Gone. They were chasing profits and forgetting the fundamentals of what makes the market work. It amazes me that so many folks want to patch up the holes and get right back to that kind of thing.

housesub4you -> RE: bonus cap (2/5/2009 5:17:50 AM)
Wow, you still feel that this whole thing is only the fault of the DEMS? Talk about a closed mind. "Anyone who doesn't buy gold and keep their head down until the republicans come back in two years is in for a very rough road " Sure, cause the GOP did such a great job when they where in charge.

Sanity -> RE: bonus cap (2/5/2009 6:11:46 AM)
I like the way Conservative posters like corysub post factual history complete with links to news articles and in this case even video of Liberal politicians in their own words to back up what they're saying - and then you progressives (or whatever you're calling yourselves these days) come back and spit out some kind of empty nothings about Bush or the GOP or whatever. It is so extremely rare to hear people on the Left discuss actual facts, and even more rare to see them back them up in any meaningful way. Great post corysub, as always. [sm=applause.gif] quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you Wow, you still feel that this whole thing is only the fault of the DEMS? Talk about a closed mind. "Anyone who doesn't buy gold and keep their head down until the republicans come back in two years is in for a very rough road " Sure, cause the GOP did such a great job when they where in charge.

housesub4you -> RE: bonus cap (2/5/2009 6:21:47 AM)
Conservatives find the news sources that support their point of view as do the Liberals. Simply posting a link does not mean it is factual or nothing more than an opinion piece. The sad fact is, in truth no one gets the whole story. The news media feeds us what creates viewers so they can sell ad space. Finding the truth has little to do with modern day media, it's all about creating a buzz to generate veiwers. Each party creats a spin to keep everyone confused instead of answering questions directly.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.640625E-02