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

Skip to comments.

Stuffing Their Pockets (For America's CEOs, a very lucrative recession)
Newsweek ^ | 09/06/2010 | Rana Foroohar

Posted on 09/06/2010 6:10:06 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

One of the most startling things about the post-crisis landscape is how tone-deaf the wealthiest Americans remain to outrage over their Croesus-like pay packages. The award for complete obliviousness would have to go to Blackstone cofounder Stephen Schwarzman, who earlier this summer compared government attempts to raise taxes on financiers such as himself to Hitler’s invasion of Poland. Silver medals should certainly be handed out to the many executives and corporate lawyers who were grousing last week about the new Dodd-Frank bill, which includes a rule requiring companies to disclose the difference in pay between their chief executive and their lowest-level workers. It would be a “logistical nightmare,” these titans of industry wailed, for firms to compile this information.

Well, maybe, but if you issue pay stubs, surely you can tally them up (and perhaps keep a few more workers on board to do just that). The real nightmare will be when the public sees the numbers, which will illuminate just how egregious the U.S. pay gap has become. According to the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal think tank based in Washington, the average S&P 500 CEO takes home 263 times what his cheapest laborer does. While CEO pay is indeed down from its pre-crisis highs in 2007, it’s still double what it was in the 1990s, and eight times the level in the 1950s.

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


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ceo; layoff; lucrative; recession
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last
To: Oceander

RE: it’s none of your (or anyone else’s) business if you’re not a shareholder of one of those companies.


It is my business as my 401(K) is tied to many index funds that track these company’s performance.


21 posted on 09/06/2010 7:00:09 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

AGREED! We may not like it, but it sure is not the government’s business to tell anyone what to do. We need to knock this out now!


22 posted on 09/06/2010 7:02:31 AM PDT by Mikmur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user

A lot of the CEOs are probably stockholders, and if they collude with the board of directors, they loot the company, sell the assets, and walk away with a big fat lump of money. Simple enough.


23 posted on 09/06/2010 7:06:06 AM PDT by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Then you're a shareholder - great, you're precisely the sort of person whom I was speaking of - so there's no need to get yourself all twisted up. As a result, if you don't like what the CEOs of the companies you are invested in are getting paid, you have two options: (1) convince enough of your fellow shareholders to demand that the CEO get paid less, or (2) get out of that stock.

Demanding that the government "do" something for you is not a viable alternative, in no small part because, once the government does something for you, it is only a matter of time before the government does something to you, as the disaster known as Obamacare should have made abundantly clear.


24 posted on 09/06/2010 7:08:32 AM PDT by Oceander (The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Oceander

RE: Demanding that the government “do” something for you is not a viable alternative, in no small part because, once the government does something for you, it is only a matter of time before the government does something to you, as the disaster known as Obamacare should have made abundantly clear.


Read my posts and you might even read this Newsweek article, there is NO HINT of any demand for government action.

There are lots of QUESTIONS, which is a natural reaction in the scheme of things given how the performance of companies are so out of whack with CEO compensation.


25 posted on 09/06/2010 7:12:56 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GenXteacher

RE: if they collude with the board of directors, they loot the company, sell the assets, and walk away with a big fat lump of money. Simple enough.


It’s not going to be worth it. The long arm of the law will get them in the end. SEE: Madoff, Bernard


26 posted on 09/06/2010 7:14:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Then ask yourself this - why haven't you taken your money out of those corporations (since you're obviously dissatisfied with the pay their CEOs receive)? If you don't, then you have an answer to your question that is both necessary and sufficient - shareholders still see the exchange as being economically beneficial. Do we really need some thinly-disguised political propaganda from a rag like Newsweek to answer a question that should be self-evident?



27 posted on 09/06/2010 7:19:14 AM PDT by Oceander (Tag. You're it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

With Regulator approvals, financial corporations are dramatically overstating the value of assets (loans, debt instruments) on their balance sheets and are still not disclosing massive off-balance sheet liabilities.

As a result, they are way over reporting net income and are fraudently taking bonuses on those false earnings.

This will continue until an end comes to “extend and pretend” accounting. It is a mega scam that people deliberately ignore.


28 posted on 09/06/2010 7:19:17 AM PDT by JustTheTruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

“the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal think tank “

I think we’ve had enough stories about their ‘report’.


29 posted on 09/06/2010 7:19:32 AM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Crime doesn’t pay....although in this case I remain skeptical :)


30 posted on 09/06/2010 7:21:46 AM PDT by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Oceander

RE: Then ask yourself this - why haven’t you taken your money out of those corporations (since you’re obviously dissatisfied with the pay their CEOs receive)?


I can’t because most of my investments are in 401(K). Most of these are tied to index funds that INVEST in these companies. My company only has a limited number of choices.

For the past 10 years the S&P 500 and the NASDAQ Index have put on very poor returns.

QUESTIONING the performance of a company’s CEO is not (repeat NOT ) an attempt at demanding government action.


31 posted on 09/06/2010 7:28:31 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

(a) I’m perfectly happy to concede the government interference issue (for the time being);
(b) If you don’t like the options available to you in your 401(k), (i) lobby your employer’s HR deparment to add other options, (ii) stop contributing and put your money elsewhere (and make contributions to an IRA instead), or (iii) find a new employer.

Again, with all due respect, the answer is still self-evident.


32 posted on 09/06/2010 7:31:42 AM PDT by Oceander (Tag. You're it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Oceander

ONE OTHER OPTION:

I can also, like thousands of others — QUESTION the compensation in the public square.

There is such thing as PUBLIC OUTCRY to a point where some companies are SHAMED into taking action.

An analogy -— can we LEGALLY do anything about the ground zero mosque ? NOPE. The constitution allows people the freedom to practice one’s religion.

Can we PUBLICLY QUESTION the motives and sources of funding of the mosque? We sure as hell can.

Same principle applies.


33 posted on 09/06/2010 7:42:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user
Rarely do shareholders have much of a voice in executive compensation. The rules are frankly stacked against the shareholder and in favor of the compensation committee (red: CEO cronies.)
34 posted on 09/06/2010 7:50:41 AM PDT by starlifter (Sapor Amo Pullus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: proxy_user
What do the stockholders have to say about this? Are these CEOs worth the money, or not?

Stockholders don't have a say because the rules make it almost impossible to have competitive elections to corporate boards. CEOs get their hand picked cronies as directors, the cronies set CEO compensation and the shareholders get fleeced.

35 posted on 09/06/2010 7:52:10 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: starlifter; GenXteacher; Alter Kaker

There’s one vote that they can’t dodge, and that’s the ‘sell’ button. If investors used it more often, you might be surprised at how quickly they respond.


36 posted on 09/06/2010 7:59:09 AM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Oceander
That's a silly argument - investors invest in companies that they believe will generate a profit (or shareholder value).

That doesn't mean they're getting the most bang for their buck. A company may be profitable AND waste hundreds of millions on excessive executive compensation.

37 posted on 09/06/2010 7:59:11 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If people don’t like where they work, leave. To paraphrase Reagan, the only thing worse than not making enough money is the government stepping in to “help” you make more money. Think of the past and present economic crises...caused by gov. meddling.


38 posted on 09/06/2010 8:07:13 AM PDT by driftless2 (For long-term happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

This entire article is a class warfare screed disguised as statement of concern. I disagree with the entire premise.

This is part of a “death by a thousand cuts” of American industry, ONE more regulation in a bundle of regulations that must be thousands and thousands of pages long.

If I start my own company, and I pay myself 1000 times as much as someone I hire at minimum wage, whose business is that, and why should I submit (via a legal requirement) that ratio?

What career government/party bureaucrat or union organizer put the bug in someone’s ear that the metric of the ratio of highest-to-lowest pay is something that will determine...what? The “fairness” of a CEO’s salary? What does THAT have to do with anything?

You may like or dislike Steve Jobs of Apple, but doing a calculation of his compensation package relative to that of a minimum wage person whose job may involve emptying the trash says nothing, absolutely nothing about the performance of that company, which is stellar.

If a person owns a company and is the CEO, THAT person should be able to decide compensation. If compensation is determined by a board of trustees, board of governors, board of managers, or executive board, then they should do what they are tasked with doing. I don’t agree with putting this in the hands of every single shareholder in a publicly traded company. That isn’t going to “fix” it if it isn’t working, all it is going to do is make the process so unwieldy as to be unworkable.

This ratio concept is a LIBERAL creation, this metric of pay ratios. Liberals always like to be the smartest ones in the room, and they expect everyone to accept their logic on these matters. However, as Thomas Sowell so accurately points out, they are a party of “one-stage-thinking”. If they come across something like the ratio of pay between highest and lowest paid employees, and it fits their template, then it becomes law.

LIBERALS SHOULD HAVE THIS TATTOOED ON THEIR FOREHEADS AND INSIDE OF THEIR EYELIDS: CORRELATION DOES NOT EQUAL CAUSATION!

Letting liberal premises go unchallenged (such as the ‘fact’ that abortion is allowed due to a penumbra in the Constitution) then they build a huge and horrible edifice on the foundation of that one concession. In this case, agreeing that this bogus ratio should be something that law should be based on is another piece of liberal tripe that should automatically disqualify anyone from serious consideration as a conservative thinker.

Marx would be just fine with this concept, as are nearly all leftists, but that does not make it right.


39 posted on 09/06/2010 8:10:08 AM PDT by rlmorel (The New Oval office: If all you see is brown, you should probably pull your head out.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
you might even read this Newsweek article, there is NO HINT of any demand for government action

"the new Dodd-Frank bill, which includes a rule requiring companies to disclose the difference in pay between their chief executive and their lowest-level workers"

What are you talking about?

40 posted on 09/06/2010 8:10:28 AM PDT by gusopol3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 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