Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush assails 'income inequality'
Washington Times ^ | February 1, 2007 | Stephen Dinan

Posted on 02/01/2007 10:42:36 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

President Bush yesterday said there is a growing "income inequality" gap between rich and poor Americans, and told companies they should rethink the giant compensation packages they offer top executives.

The markedly populist message, a divergence from the past, in which Mr. Bush has accused critics of practicing class warfare, was all the more noteworthy given his venue -- a speech at Federal Hall in New York, in the middle of Wall Street, the capital of capitalism.

But the president called for conservative market-based answers, including demanding that Congress renew trade-promotion authority, which allows him to negotiate trade agreements then present them to Congress in a take-it-or-leave-it fashion.

Mr. Bush said he expects a bruising debate before his current trade-promotion authority expires July 1.

"Bashing trade can make for good sound bites on the evening news," Mr. Bush said. "But walling off America from world trade would be a disaster for our economy. Congress needs to reject protectionism."

In what was billed as his update on the state of the U.S. economy, Mr. Bush took credit for the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, promised to submit a budget next week that eliminates the deficit in 2012, and asked Congress to give him a version of line-item veto authority.

"When people across the world look at America's economy, what they see is low inflation, low unemployment and the fastest growth of any major industrialized nation," he said. "There is one undisputed leader in the world in terms of economy, and that's the United States of America."

But Democrats said Mr. Bush's rosy picture of the overall economy was out of focus.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; ceos; charlesschumer; classwarfare; democrats; economy; enron; executivepay; freetrade; incomeinequality; politics; populism; tradepromotion; unions; wallstreet
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last
To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

It's not really "populist" to warn executives that if they keep throwing money at non-performers, the workers will revolt and the resulting democrat majority will destroy our country.


21 posted on 02/01/2007 11:00:08 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wjcsux
According to this BBC article, President Bush is against the overpaid CEOs but recognizes that the government should not impose limits to how much they get paid:
But shortly after the figures were released President George W. Bush took aim at the large salaries being awarded to company executives, saying they should be awarded for performance and performance alone. The comments, made in a speech to Wall Street bosses, matched those made in a White House report on the matter. "Government should not decide compensation for America's corporate executives," the report said. "But the salaries and bonuses of chief executives should be based on their success at improving their companies and building value for their shareholders."
.
22 posted on 02/01/2007 11:00:56 AM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( WND, NewsMax, Townhall.com, Brietbart.com, and Drudge Report are not valid news sources.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wjcsux

I agree, but the Board needs encouragement, particularly in the unrealistic climate that has been established. I don't understand why boards feel the need to give insane amounts of money to people who are doing a bad job, for example; it would be one thing if the swollen salaries were performance based, but I think unfortunately the boards often are not representing the shareholders very well. Maybe a little outside encouragement will give them the courage to buck the trend and tie the salary to successful performance.


23 posted on 02/01/2007 11:00:56 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Egads, what other Dem platitudes is this president going to co-opt? Maybe he wants to make abortions "safe, legal, and rare" too?

You mean he is morphing into Guilni? (OK that was a cheap shot :)

24 posted on 02/01/2007 11:01:07 AM PST by redgolum ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" -- God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

Agreed, but isn't that a matter for the board of directors and the shareholders to resolve?

I once had to try and keep order at a board meeting during a shareholder revolt - when the CEO was getting paid HUGE bucks, yet flying the company (and therefore the shareholders' fortunes)into the ground. No violence, but the level of anger and screaming and cursing was amazing.

The CEO found himself unemployed shortly thereafter.


25 posted on 02/01/2007 11:02:05 AM PST by SargeK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LIConFem

I'm a true conservative, and I think a LOT of executives are way overpaid. If I had a meeting with them, I'd tell them they were way overpaid.

If I was king of America, I would NOT sign a rule requiring them to be paid less.

Bush is NOT advocating the government do anything about pay inequity. But you don't have to be a liberal to denounce people getting paid for bad performance, or to point out that pay inequity can be bad for business because it can demoralize workers, making them less productive.


26 posted on 02/01/2007 11:02:30 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Congress needs to reject protectionism.

Granted, but Congress should also reject totally barrier-free trade as well. That hasn't served us particularly well in the 15 years.
27 posted on 02/01/2007 11:03:22 AM PST by JamesP81 (Eph 6:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: livius

I say let the stockholders vote. They are the owners of the company.

Not just on what the board recommends either, but on what the actual amount should be.


28 posted on 02/01/2007 11:03:37 AM PST by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SargeK
Comment 22.
29 posted on 02/01/2007 11:05:19 AM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( WND, NewsMax, Townhall.com, Brietbart.com, and Drudge Report are not valid news sources.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
President Bush yesterday said there is a growing "income inequality" gap between rich and poor Americans, and told companies they should rethink the giant compensation packages they offer top executives.

"When people across the world look at America's economy, what they see is low inflation, low unemployment and the fastest growth of any major industrialized nation," he said. "There is one undisputed leader in the world in terms of economy, and that's the United States of America."

Gosh I wonder who provided that corporate leadership or did it happen by magic?

FDR wanted to limit salaries to $25,000. When someone asked Babe Ruth home come he was paid more money than President Hoover, he replied, "I had a better year."

Corporate execs get ego stroking salaries but how much does the government let them keep. Also, you might not like what they have to do to earn that money. It's not all skittles and beer.

30 posted on 02/01/2007 11:06:01 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine's brother (Jane Fonda was type cast in the movie "Klute")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

OK who is this joker and what have they done with the real President Bush?


31 posted on 02/01/2007 11:06:32 AM PST by NeoCaveman (Say No to Missus Clinton, I mean Biden is FUnnier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu
Some CEOs get paid waaaaay too much, even if they do bad work.

And that should be of concern to the government why, exactly?

32 posted on 02/01/2007 11:06:58 AM PST by Maceman (This is America. Why must we press "1" for English?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Is this what to expect in the era of "post-partisanship"?
33 posted on 02/01/2007 11:07:35 AM PST by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Shermy
George Bush has been a class warrior throughout his presidency

Uh...right.

That's why he lowered the capital gains tax, huh?

34 posted on 02/01/2007 11:08:24 AM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

"Dem platitudes " ??? NO -= A FACT OF LIFE
W is RIGHT again


35 posted on 02/01/2007 11:09:51 AM PST by aumrl (Robber Barons = good republicans??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Maceman
Comment 22.
36 posted on 02/01/2007 11:11:55 AM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( WND, NewsMax, Townhall.com, Brietbart.com, and Drudge Report are not valid news sources.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

"Some CEOs get paid waaaaay too much, even if they do bad work".

...obviously, from the looks of your tag line, you're an a$$ sucking, unemployed, Stalinist slacker that's obviously upset that ANYONE makes more than someone else. You don't understand economics because you went to publick skools and your parents were too busy listening to "Peter, Paul & Mary" and braiding each others hair to realize that they did the world a grave injustice by allowing a child to be born in the midst of such a lifestyle. Good try though!


37 posted on 02/01/2007 11:12:00 AM PST by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: albie

'bye.


38 posted on 02/01/2007 11:12:47 AM PST by Jedi Master Pikachu ( WND, NewsMax, Townhall.com, Brietbart.com, and Drudge Report are not valid news sources.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: SargeK
Agreed, but isn't that a matter for the board of directors and the shareholders to resolve?

Yes, and Pres. Bush has called for more transparency for shareholders so they can be more informed.

The President has not called for any Gov't intervention legislatively yet many freepers are almost calling him Stalin over his comments.

For the President to go onto Spitzer's turn as a Repub and preempt one of Spitzer's issues by saying this...wise move IMO.

39 posted on 02/01/2007 11:13:36 AM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: what's up

"Uh...right.

That's why he lowered the capital gains tax, huh?"

Let me guess...you're definition of "class warfare" means only perceived attacks on the rich, but not the other way around on the middle class.


40 posted on 02/01/2007 11:13:55 AM PST by Shermy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson