Posted on 07/04/2015 8:52:43 AM PDT by conservativejoy
They try but the compensation committee of the BOD usually makes the decisions. It is usually a good ‘ol boy’s club of you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours where they go along to get along.
What you believe is great and if within youryour power as an owner, do it. But should the government redistribute your wealth as a business owner?
No that is not my point. Greed and irresponsibility lead to economic imbalance and then the confiscation of which you speak or the inability of the masses to even earn a living such that the economy can remain in action. When the ledger is stacked to one side the economy smothers.
You may manufacture all you want in your factory but if you have progressively accumulated all the money and no one can afford to buy your product whom do you sell to? You may hire the former manufacturing employee for something else but how much of his time and skill can you consume and how quickly?
It is a long discussion. Consider the microcosm of the company town where the company absorbs all the payroll in company housing and mercantile.
With great ability and success comes great responsibility. Few rise to the occasion.
Today I’m wondering why my physical now costs twice or more what it did two years ago.
Have a nice day.
Some of the hardcore Mexican nationalists and cultural Marxists say Bernie is too tough on immigration —
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/19/politics/bernie-sanders-immigration-reform-2016/index.html
Bernie Sanders and immigration? It’s complicated
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-and-immigration-its-complicated-119190.html
“But in 2007, Sanders was part of the charge from the left to kill an immigration overhaul bill.
“Back then, the Vermont independent warned that the immigration bill — a product from then-Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) — would drive down wages for lower-income workers, an argument that’s been used by hard-liner reform opponents. He paired with conservative Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on a restrictive immigration amendment. And Sanders backed provisions characterized as poison pills to unravel the bill, while voting to block the final measure in June 2007.”
“Don’t stockholders set the pay rate for CEO, and other board members?”
ROFLMAO!!!
You obviously don’t understand stocks or corporations. Rare is it that a corporation has any public control over it. Corporations have a handful of stockholders that own controlling interest of the corporation and they set their pay and benefits. You, the lowly stock holder, mean nothing to them. In fact, only the law requires them to hold “stockholder meetings” that are symbolic with no controlling interest by those pesky stockholders.
they can set their pay to whatever they like and they like to drain all profits to themselves.
But my question is on it’s face fact. Just because stockholders have enough stock to have controlling interest doesn’t mean they’re not stockholders.
Having the money to buy enough stock is nobody’s business but theirs, directing the course of a business is one of the benefits of becoming wealthy. How much money people earn, or have is none of our business.
It’s also true as well that if a group of “everyday” stockholders don’t like what’s happening, they can join together pool their stocks, and appoint a proxy to vote against the individual “rich” stockholder. Dependent upon the corporate rules of the company.
The thing is that most don’t care as long as their stock is increasing in value. They are more worried about daily life, and in some cases are willfully ignorant to their rights as a stockholder.
So your gripe should be with them, not the rich people who are exercising their corporate duties.
“It’s also true as well that if a group of “everyday” stockholders don’t like what’s happening, they can join together pool their stocks,”
That’s my point. No, it is NOT “true”. They don’t collectively have enough stock or ANY stock in the “preferred” class that gets to vote.
The vast majority of companies have Preferred and Common class of stocks. Most public companies also do not offer enough shares for a collective vote against the controlling interest shares. Toss in the institutional share holders and you haven’t got a prayer to outvote them.
For instance, Charter Communications (Ticker: CHTR) (I like to pick on that lousy company every chance I get):
% of Shares Held by All Insider and 5% Owners: 26%
% of Shares Held by Institutional & Mutual Fund Owners: 77%
% of Float Held by Institutional & Mutual Fund Owners: 104%
Number of Institutions Holding Shares: 319
You don’t have a prayer to outvote them using any amount of common class stock shares.
Publicly traded companies are rarely ever actually “public companies”. That term is a misnomer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.