You have a choice......but not on my dime.
The better answer is to not hand out bailout money.
My I suggest that you should be opposed to bailouts AND salary caps? When a used car salesman sells you a rusted out lemon, don't buy the undercoating with it.
More hate-filled bigotry from the left.
They didn’t complain when Clinton got $20 million for brokering the Dubai port security deal.
Give back your pay raise too, sweet heart.
If there is any more doubt that we are on the brink of being a socialist nation, then read this legislation.
For a small fraction of a corporation’s value, in the form of a “stimulus loan” from the federal government, the government will now be able to set salary caps.
I guarantee that green rules will be next.
Then union-friendly rules.
Then gay-friendly rules.
And conservatives seem to be accepting this first step...which will only result in mid-level managers running corporations that were formerly ran by experienced presidents and CEOs.
Did it occur to you that the whole reason for the bail out was so the gubmint could control free enterprise?
And you're all for it.....that was the plan all along
|
Pure insanity and socialism/communism. Where does this end? Do we set such restrictions/limitations on any entity or individual who receives taxpayer money? Do we have the USG decide how someone can use food stamps? Do we have the USG decide that anyone receiving food stamps would not be allowed to buy $200 sneakers for their kids? Or foods with transfats?
Your dime? Do you have the same proprietary feelings about how the $850 trillion stimulus bill that provides hundreds of millions of dollars for digital converter boxes, WWII Filipino vets, condoms, ACORN, etc. Who sets limits on the USG salaries? And since when does Obama's salary become the benchmark as to what is fair and just payment? What happened to the marketplace?
You are no conservative.
I agree with you on this one. If you take the bail out money, you get no bonus. As a taxpayer, that means I am a stockholder now in these companies and I vote that NO bonuses get paid until we get paid back first. Ford is not taking any bailout money, if those execs turn Ford around and make them profitable then they deserve huge bonuses. Same as any other successful business.
I always kinda thought that bonuses were meant to reward and reinforce success. But then, I'm just an idiot, I guess.
I'm hoping there is legal cause for going after the directors for breach of trust, or fiduciary responsibility or something.
Frankly, I would like to see many of them made paupers for the way they sat drooling in the board room instead of exercising leadership.
Unfortunately I sure they are well insured through the companies they are responsible for corrupting. The insurers will pay and then ask for a bailout.
Argghh.
This is to stop rewarding success.
the government can’t compete with real salaries so they cap merit pay.
This is Senator Jealousy.
No wonder the democrats want to protect unions. Unions are about protecting the poor workers.
BTW card check requires NO secret ballot to form a union but the unions want secret ballots to decertify a union?!
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.
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”
Which would be....
...nobody.
Political overlords don’t need their salaries when they can make a killing in so many other ways.
After Joseph Stalin died, they found decades worth of his paychecks stuffed into his desk drawer. When you own the whole country already, why bother even cashing your entirely symbolic paycheck?
You miss the bigger point- we should not have been bailing people out in the first place. Giving government the power to enact wage controls doesn't make things better.
Will professional athletes be included? My state pays dearly to keep a football team from leaving. So in a way, we have been bailing them out since 1984. Being that this is the case, why should an athlete on that team make more than the president?