Sunday, February 08, 2009

Well when you put it THAT way...

/sarcasm
I supported the half-mil cap on CEO salaries until I read this article. Now I understand that it's clearly impossible for them to afford their multiple vacations, their summer houses in the Hamptons, charity gala gowns, private nannies and tutors and trainers and chauffeurs, and all the rest of the accoutrements that they've certainly earned, on a salary of only $500,000.
/end sarcasm

That's more money than M and I have made in our entire marriage.

----------

I'm at nearly 14 miles so far this month. Gonna do 5K tomorrow and 3K on Tuesday, then cross-train on the bike Wednesday. I am GOING to win the distance challenge this month!

5 comments:

Knot said...

Why should the govt. be in the business of telling people how much they should make? Isn't that communism?

Hey if a company is stupid enough to pay someone that much ...

Matt Silverthorn said...

If the government is giving money to these corporations that have been run into the ground by these same CEOs, they have every right to attach stipulations to said money. Claiming socialism/communism here makes no sense.

Eric said...

My concern isn't necessarily that the government will be controlling too much. In fact, this will only apply to executives of companies that are bailed out with this second stimulus. The execs that received the first bail out are "grandfathered in" so it doesn't apply to them. Plus, even for the execs that do have the government regulation, most economists agree that it will take them less than a week to figure out a work-around. So the government won't really be limiting anything.

My greater concern is the nature of the new stimulus package. I haven't personally read it in detail, but from what I understand it's a total joke. Most of it is tax breaks that will hardly make a difference (roughly $9 more per paycheck for the average American), with a bunch of riders that are all Democratic initiatives (increased funding for Planned Parenthood, etc.) ... none of which really help the economy.

Courtney said...

Actually, this stipulation doesn't even have anything to do with the "new" stimulus (that is still currently working its way through Congress) - and that's a whole other argument. The salary cap has to do with the release of the second half of the TARP funds that were approved last year, though you're correct in pointing out that no one who has already received money will be "grandfathered" in. And yes, the socialism comparison is silly. As many economists pointed out, "When you become a partner in a business, you should have the right to direct how that business is run." I don't see how this is any different; additionally, companies are free to compensate their CEOs with as much company stock as they see fit - stock that will actually be worth something if the CEOs do their jobs!

ccnusbaum said...

About the article, specifically, if they're all being held to the same 'cap' then they're all still in the same clique, right? So that whole business about trying to fit in just doesn't make sense to me. And since the writer does't specify whom the cap applies to, you would just naturally assume everyone. At least, that's how I read it.