http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090731/ap_on_bi_ge/us_bailout_bonuses
The Democrats are out of control. Where do they get the authority to limit pay for executives at companies that did not get any TARP money? I hope this is challenged in court because the Dems will get a rude awakening.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
No, no, no Mark. It is like Rich(i.e.) says, he who pays the piper...what? You mean not it is not just who pays the piper (immoral itself) but who is too big?
So again, just wondering, what can't they control?
Hey Terry, you of populist fever, evil CEO's and all that, anything your guy and his government can't control?
Anything?
Me thinks you value your (and therefore my) freedom too little.
Lastly, told you so!!! Not? Just wait, soon everything will be too big to fail.
"He who pays the piper" is an immoral concept, silly man? How so my "principled conservative"?
Mark - Unlike the Doc, you make a distinction between TARP concerns and non-TARP. It is a sticky question and you & I probably share some ground here. Absent unique circumstances, the government should not be dictating salary ceilings.
That said - I have no problem with a protocol for performance bonuses at federally insured institutions. It needs to be prudentially based rather than a technicality to be exploited. I am as worried about the camel's nose under the tent as you are.
As you recall, I was in favor of the AIG bonuses. I also think the energy trader at Citi is entitled to his $100mm bonus if his contract was inked pre-TARP. Alas, a deal is a deal.
It does bother me that executive pay has skyrocketed in the US in this Second Gilded Age, while remaining rational in Europe and Japan. Perhaps, public companies should be required to produce an annual chart showing the top 100 execs pay relative to the company's lowest pay level as well as the outfit's average wage or salary. Sunlight is the best disinfectant and this may raise those at the bottom at little and rationalize those at the top.
So Rich why is it always the liberals answer that there be another type of reporting requirement or regulation. Maybe we should require all people who make more than $350,000 to publish their names and social security numbers.
I always thought the market was the ultimate decision maker. These companies can't pay the bonuses if they can't afford them. It comes down to simple economics. But of course liberals have trouble with these simple concepts since they seem to believe that you can spend yourself out of an economic mess and not have any repercussions later.
GWB hands Obama a $1.3T deficit (after inheriting a $200B surplus). Then, the Republicans commence whining about the deficit.
Is that out of whack or what? Do Republicans even have standing to discuss fiscal policies? I think they should be restricted to lecturing the scientific community on the fallacies of evolution and climate change...
Post a Comment