Capt.Slog 0 #126 March 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteRe: CEO/worker pay... Gotta love that class envy. FACT != ENVY And the fact is that economic growth rate is uncorrelated with CEO/worker pay. The execs, through their good old boy networks (you sit on my board and I'll sit on yours), have come up with a sure fire way of enriching themselves, and stockholders have been asleep at the switch. We see this very clearly when they still award themselves huge bonuses while their corporations are tanking. ENVY != FACT, either. Your outrage over CEO compensation is illustrative of what, exactly? A firm belief that if you drive your company into the ground you should not reap a huge reward for doing so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,588 #127 March 5, 2009 The CEO generally has a disproportionate influence on how much he's going to be paid. And paying that much to one often is not good corporate stewardship. One guy generally just isn't all that good. You can't ascribe everything good that happens to a good CEO, just as you can't ascribe everything bad that happens to a bad one. That said, I still wonder what the spread is if you look at the median instead of the average. I have a feeling that a small number of incredibly well-paid folks are really dragging the average up. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #128 March 5, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteRe: CEO/worker pay... Gotta love that class envy. FACT != ENVY And the fact is that economic growth rate is uncorrelated with CEO/worker pay. The execs, through their good old boy networks (you sit on my board and I'll sit on yours), have come up with a sure fire way of enriching themselves, and stockholders have been asleep at the switch. We see this very clearly when they still award themselves huge bonuses while their corporations are tanking. ENVY != FACT, either. Your outrage over CEO compensation is illustrative of what, exactly? A firm belief that if you drive your company into the ground you should not reap a huge reward for doing so. And I don't disagree with that viewpoint - HOWEVER - that is for the company and their stockholders to decide, not you or I.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #129 March 5, 2009 QuoteThe CEO generally has a disproportionate influence on how much he's going to be paid. And paying that much to one often is not good corporate stewardship. That's a good point, but I would think that the board of directors would still have to approve the salary, would they not? I'm certain the CEO would have SOME influence in that, but by the same token, a crappy CEO probably isn't going to get the support needed for approval. QuoteOne guy generally just isn't all that good. You can't ascribe everything good that happens to a good CEO, just as you can't ascribe everything bad that happens to a bad one. I agree. QuoteThat said, I still wonder what the spread is if you look at the median instead of the average. I have a feeling that a small number of incredibly well-paid folks are really dragging the average up. Wendy W. I think you have a very good point, there.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #130 March 6, 2009 Quote So you are saying if you are born stupid or lazy, you have earned hand outs from the government which comes directly from the highly motivated? Actually I was just having fun at the expense of a bone headed (no offense to Bonehead) criminal. But to address your question, I think that a civilized society benefits as a whole from investing in a healthy and well educated society. I don't mind being taxed in order to help the less fortunate help themselves. Blind handout? No. Helpful incentives? Yes. Quote I'm not sure if I'm letting you guys in on this little secret... but you don't have to be very bright to make it in this country!!! Look at GWB, and especially in the music and entertainment industry! I agree but it's interesting that you put those folks together in the same example. GWB had connections that few people have which paved his way. Many in the entertainment industry get similar connections handed to them (insert Brady Bunch reference) if "the suit fits". (damn I feel old). In both cases, those connections were utilized by the connectors for their own benefit, mostly at the expense of the public's best interest. Quote You don't have to go to princeton in order to be a CEO, all you need is motivation which is exactly what milton has. He just worked REALLY REALLY hard and studied REALLY REALLY hard. It isnt like he woke up one day and said, hmmm I think im smarter than everyone so i'll be a doctor today. he just busted his @$$ since he was young, that's all it takes. being lazy or complacent doesn't pay big bucks, and shouldn't be rewarded with money that someone else earned. But someone also should not be rewarded with someone else's money simply by being connected to the political donor class. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #131 March 6, 2009 I totally agree with you on the aspect of getting paid just by having the right connections. The sad truth is that does happen sometimes. The vast majority- especially at the top tier executive level in the corporate world- have had to work their way to that spot and were not handed anything. Also, with regards to Wendy's comments: I absolutely think that a great CEO can make a substantial difference in how well a company does. These guys dont just sit up there and collect, they have a vision for a direction of where a company should go and take it there. When they are right the pay off for everyone can be HUGE- whether it is massive growth and job creation, or higher salaries for all, or investors making money off the stock. A bad CEO can do the exact opposite, cost people money and jobs. In this scenario he certainly doesnt deserve the huge bonuses, but he is entitled to his severence just as the hourly employee is. It just happens to be much larger than the hourly employee.So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #132 March 6, 2009 QuoteAlso, with regards to Wendy's comments: I absolutely think that a great CEO can make a substantial difference in how well a company does. These guys dont just sit up there and collect, they have a vision for a direction of where a company should go and take it there. When they are right the pay off for everyone can be HUGE- whether it is massive growth and job creation, or higher salaries for all, or investors making money off the stock. I agree. My point is that executive compansation in the last decade has grown significantly faster than corporate results. To your earlier comment that CEOs are just driven to win and have no regard for compensation. If you truly think that, I'll just have to believe you naive. To the poster who commented about board approval, you may want to look into how boards are assembled and who sits on them and which stockholders have voting control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #133 March 6, 2009 There is an amazing sense of entitlement among the ultra-wealthy, as exemplified in this clip: abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=7010100If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #134 March 6, 2009 CEOs won't work for free, yes they are ENTITLED to higher pay than everyone else in the company, because they take significantly higher risks than EVERYONE else in the company. So in that sense, they are motivated by money, as we all are. But what I am saying is what TRULY drives them is to maek the company successful and beat the competition. Sure, there may be extra incentive by way o fbonuses and/or stock options, but at the end of the day it is the success that drives them, and the success is measured by numerous factors which include company growth and yes, compensation. The compensation is not the main driving force for these guys though, it may be a factor, but their sole focus every day they wake up and motivation for being CEO is NOT compensation- the big bucks just happen to go to the top execs that win, and that makes sense in every field of work, the top guy gets paid the most for doing a good job. he also gets paid the most if he does a bad job but not nearly as much as if he did a good job. He (or she) also does not last as long...So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #135 March 6, 2009 It's generalisation like that that have me pissing myself laughing. People and CEOs are people (hard to believe, I know) do not all come out of the same mold. What motivates some won't motivate others..... The real world is not the same as Wall Street (The film). (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
carmenc 0 #136 March 6, 2009 QuoteCEOs won't work for free, yes they are ENTITLED to higher pay than everyone else in the company, because they take significantly higher risks than EVERYONE else in the company. So in that sense, they are motivated by money, as we all are. Really? When was the last time a CEO was killed in a coal mine disaster or a crane collapse? Who was the last CEO to be killed in a steel mill accident? Who was the last CEO to die on an oil rig? I suppose risk of death or injury doesn't count in your world. You sure write some rubbish. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #137 March 6, 2009 you absolutely can generalize certain types of people. If you believe otherwise, youre from another planet. Why do you think politicians spend so much time with statistics on varying demographics? there is the black vote, the white vote, the latino vote, the lower class vote, republicans, democratics, green party, young vote, middle age, baby boomers, college educated people... we're all individuals but we CAN be broken down to groups that do act on trends as a whole. the personality type with CEOs and top level execs have their own trends as well. I'd love to see you prove this inaccurate. of course some indivduals may vote or act against the trend, but the fact remains TRENDS still exist, so it is possible (and accpetable and normal) to generalize various types and classes of people. We should be best friends, we seem to make each other laugh all day!So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #138 March 6, 2009 I'll admit, the CEO job is less life threatening, despite many having a security detail because of the uneducated @$$holes in the world. But with regard to risk of responsibility, which is what gets you the big bucks in our society, they have the most! The guy in the coal mine or on the construction site is dependant on the executives to keep the business healthy so they can continue to BE EMPLOYED. if a coal worker dies, sad as it is, he can be replaced in less than a day by almost anyone physically capable of the job- millions of qualified people. If say, bill gates or steve jobs were removed from microsoft and apple as they were expanding, who knows what could have happened to the company and the thousands they employ. Risk doesn't necessarily mean 'of death and dismemberment' my well informed adversary... webster defines it as 'the possibility of loss.' When viewed as how much one can contribute back to society, which is how an individual in a capitalist market can be quantified, CEO's have the most value and in turn, take on the most responsibility and risk. ...because they can help or harm society on a significantly greater scale... Aighty, I'm off to tahoe to stimulate the economy. Have a lovely weekend ladies.So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #139 March 7, 2009 QuoteI'll admit, the CEO job is less life threatening, despite many having a security detail because of the uneducated @$$holes in the world. But with regard to risk of responsibility, which is what gets you the big bucks in our society, they have the most! The guy in the coal mine or on the construction site is dependant on the executives to keep the business healthy so they can continue to BE EMPLOYED. if a coal worker dies, sad as it is, he can be replaced in less than a day by almost anyone physically capable of the job- millions of qualified people. If say, bill gates or steve jobs were removed from microsoft and apple as they were expanding, who knows what could have happened to the company and the thousands they employ. Risk doesn't necessarily mean 'of death and dismemberment' my well informed adversary... webster defines it as 'the possibility of loss.' . Your arguments are so lame it's amazing you aren't embarrassed to make them. What is a worse loss, your life, or your cushy penthouse? Your limbs, or your year end bonus? Your eyesight, or your country club membership?If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #140 March 7, 2009 Well, let's see where you are wrong .... QuoteSo in that sense, they are motivated by money, as we all are. That line alone is bollocks - Not EVERYONE is motivated by money, for a start. and it's just as well too ,otherwise there'd be no Nurses, Charity workers, soldiers etc.... etc.. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #141 March 7, 2009 I thought I would post this link to the Gallup poll to give some food for thought. I'm sure most of us would agree that Gallup has a reputation for being objective in their sampling. (they aren't CNN or FOX) They say this is the highest increase of job dissatisfaction for any president in the first 30 days of office. A 16% increase. Does anyone have any feedback on why that may be? http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #142 March 7, 2009 QuoteWell, let's see where you are wrong .... QuoteSo in that sense, they are motivated by money, as we all are. That line alone is bollocks - Not EVERYONE is motivated by money, for a start. and it's just as well too ,otherwise there'd be no Nurses, Charity workers, soldiers etc.... etc.. Shropshire, I can respect your view on good hearted people as I too share a common respect for people who serve, but even those who volunteer still have to pay their personal bills, and that only comes with income. Whether they have a job or they're retired, they still need an income and it's an element of survival. Everyone is motivated to survive.... air & water may be free but food and shelter have a cost. Therefore the statement of being motivated by money is correct. I think you just misunderstood that for greed. Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #143 March 7, 2009 Could be that we live in the "Now" generation.... Looking at what a lot of posters write here... because BO didn't solve someone else's problems immediately - he's a failure [shakes head] (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #144 March 7, 2009 QuoteI thought I would post this link to the Gallup poll to give some food for thought. I'm sure most of us would agree that Gallup has a reputation for being objective in their sampling. (they aren't CNN or FOX) They say this is the highest increase of job dissatisfaction for any president in the first 30 days of office. A 16% increase. Does anyone have any feedback on why that may be? http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx I clicked on your link and found Obama approval UP to 67% Gallup also reported: Slight Increase in U.S. Satisfaction March 5, 2009 Despite continuing economic turmoil, satisfaction with the way things are going in the United States averaged 17% in February of this year, up from 12% in December of last year. AND March 5, 2009 Over the past week, an average of 21% of Americans have been satisfied with the way things are going in the country. While still quite low, these ratings are an improvement from 14% in early February, and from 9% as recently as December People are better pleased and more confident with Obama than they were with Bush.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Capt.Slog 0 #145 March 7, 2009 Irrelevant - you confuse company OWNERS with company EXECS. If Toyota and Honda can manage to find execs who'll work without exorbitant compensation, why can't US companies? www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3503728#3503728 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #146 March 8, 2009 QuoteI clicked on your link and found Obama approval UP to 67% Acutally the link shows down from 69% to 62% in the first 30 days. I do thank you for the feedback but what are your thougths on why he's had such a significant increase in displeasment and decrease in approval? Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #147 March 8, 2009 Quote If Toyota and Honda can manage to find execs who'll work without exorbitant compensation, why can't US companies? Well put!! Unfortunately we have a significant portion of people who feel they were cut from the entitlement fabric. United States of Gimme Gimme Gimme. Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #148 March 8, 2009 Quote If Toyota and Honda can manage to find execs who'll work without exorbitant compensation, why can't US companies? If Toyota and Honda can manage to find line workers who'll work without exorbitant compensation, why can't US companies? Solve those two problems and maybe the big 3 wouldn't be hurting so much. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #149 March 8, 2009 QuoteQuote If Toyota and Honda can manage to find execs who'll work without exorbitant compensation, why can't US companies? If Toyota and Honda can manage to find line workers who'll work without exorbitant compensation, why can't US companies? Solve those two problems and maybe the big 3 wouldn't be hurting so much. Maybe the execs should lead by example. After all, the execs are the supposed leaders of the companies. If the workers were supposed to lead, execs wouldn't be needed at all.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerryzflies 0 #150 March 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteI clicked on your link and found Obama approval UP to 67% Acutally the link shows down from 69% to 62% in the first 30 days. I do thank you for the feedback but what are your thougths on why he's had such a significant increase in displeasment and decrease in approval? Latest NBC/WSJ poll shows Obama approval 65%, GOP approval 26%.If you can't fix it with a hammer, the problem's electrical. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
