Posted on 01/30/2009 11:55:19 AM PST by Red in Blue PA
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- One day after President Barack Obama ripped Wall Street executives for their "shameful" decision to hand out $18 billion in bonuses in 2008, Congress may finally have had enough.
An angry U.S. senator introduced legislation Friday to cap compensation for employees of any company that accepts federal bailout money. Under the terms of a bill introduced by Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, no employee would be allowed to make more than the president of the United States.
Obama's current annual salary is $400,000.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Annual bonuses based on commisions generated are the traditional way brokers have received most of their compensation, just like waiters depend on tips, not salary.
Merrill Lynch’s retail brokers generated tremendous profits for the company that almost completely offsetted the tremendous losses the company had on the bad mortgage investment portfolio.
To not pay these men and women for their outstanding work due to Congressional envy, is both wrong and very bad business.
Envy is really the deadliest of the seven deadly sins.
What a load of bull. Everyone I know who is a conservative would be behind a bill similar to this (all are sick of incompetent overpaid CEO’s).
If you want to know why Republicans are not in power, just read this thread.
THEY ARE OUT OF TOUCH!
I VEHEMENTLY oppose bailouts, and I VEHEMENTLY oppose salary caps of any kind for anybody.
But if you take the money, you’d damn well better be prepared for the strings that come with it. Notice that nobody’s telling Ford how much to pay their execs - they’ve not taken a dime, despite their losses.
Executive should be accountable to their Boards of Directors, who in turn should be accountable to the shareholders. It’s apparent that there is NO room for the government to be involved in this arrangement - unless you let them in.
Remember, once they set the rules, they get to change them...today 400,000, tomorrow 200,000, next day 100,000 and so on.
One reason people go into business, hard as this might be to fathom for the numskulls in the dem party whom have been nothing but 10 whores their whole lives, is once you kill the desire to exceed, it never comes back. Besides, when you kill off all the golden eggs, whom is going to pay the taxes your liberal utopia will require.
Put a fork in it, the USA is done.
How about a pay cap on “ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS TOO”
“Annual bonuses based on commisions generated are the traditional “
Guess what?
In the past year, there have been big changes, in case you didn’t see them.
These companies will need to respond accordingly.
Which would be....
...nobody.
Two problems. First, a few of the banks took the first round of bailout money unwillingly. Sec. Paulson didn't want the public to know which banks needed the money and which didn't so everyone had to drink the poison Kool-Aid.
Second, if the federales buy GM but Ford is able to avoid it, how hard will the regulators come down on Ford compared to GM. Will the capitalist company be crushed by the GM/government complex?
” I VEHEMENTLY oppose salary caps of any kind for anybody”
So you are perfectly okay with a CEO taking $50,000,000.00 on your dime?
Yes or no.
Are you F**king nuts? How far down the company ladder do you want them to micromanage these companies? Should the USG decide the salary of the guy in the mailrooom? Or decide what perks and non-monetary benefits can be offered? What about all that stimulus money being pumped into the schools? Should the USG decide on salary levels for teachers? And since when did the Messiah's salary become the gold standard in terms of salary? No one is allowed to make more than him?
You are Red thru and thru and I don't mean Republican or Conservative.
“Anyone who runs their company into the ground, and then takes govt money, all the while complaining it is not enough, can take a hike!”
The problem is not those that are accepting the money, it those that are giving it.
“First, a few of the banks took the first round of bailout money unwillingly”
Kind of a moot point.
Without the bailout, they would be defunct.
What would have been wrong with them going defunct?
“You are Red thru and thru and I don’t mean Republican or Conservative. “
Debate 101:
When logic and discourse do not work, resort to ad hominem attacks.
My sentiments exactly - limits on speaking fees, book deals, perks?
In my mind, nothing.
In many of these cases, the companies were forced to take the bail outs. Now that they have the rules are changing....wake up.
LOL!
Yeah, those Wall Streeters are brilliant in the way they can demolish 158 year old companies. Pure genius I tell you!
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.