Poor CEOs cannot live on $500,000 a year - Page 4

Wigmund · 02-10-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mirai Gen

Oh, man, it just hit me.

Does it strike anyone else as hilariously ironic that these guys are saying that they can't take a salary cap because they don't want to put their kids in public schools?

Because then they'd have a reason to support funding for said public schools.
And their children would most likely be to going to the same public schools as the kids of the migrant landscapers and housekeepers they employ.

Kepor · 02-10-2009, 06:44 PM

So, the pay cap's going to apply only to those companies that take government money. As it should; they use government funds, they'll have to play by the rules. But there isn't really any reason to call for pay caps on everyone. There isn't anything morally wrong with making a lot of money, and while a widening gap between poor and rich is trouble for a country, it shouldn't be on those top few to turn that around. Nor would a pay cap necessarily change that.

Osterbaum · 02-10-2009, 06:55 PM

Quote:

So, the pay cap's going to apply only to those companies that take government money. As it should; they use government funds, they'll have to play by the rules. But there isn't really any reason to call for pay caps on everyone. There isn't anything morally wrong with making a lot of money, and while a widening gap between poor and rich is trouble for a country, it shouldn't be on those top few to turn that around. Nor would a pay cap necessarily change that.

What would change that if not a pay cap? True, it's not wrong to be rich. But if 1% of people own 99% of the money (These aren't the real figures, it's just an example), then something is very wrong.

Kepor · 02-10-2009, 07:09 PM

Because it's not necessarily that they possess that much money, but that so much is flowing to them that is the problem. Rephrased: the problem isn't whether or not they do earn that much, but that they can.

Secondly because it's just individuals that control that money, but corporations as well. Large corporations are only about 40% of all businesses (old figure, new one is probably even smaller) but earn about 98% of all business income. That much control over that much capital affords them tremendous power.

Bob The Mercenary · 02-10-2009, 08:10 PM

The thing that scares me is that if the government starts controlling how much a person can potentially make, and taken even deeper, starts telling companies how to spend their money (i.e. don't buy jets, don't buy office furnishings), doesn't that open the doorway for them to basically control all facets of a corporation? This is just punishing the rich when the entirety of the rich doesn't need to be punished. Just those who undermine our trust and use taxpayer money unwisely. It's up to them how they run their business though.

Mirai Gen · 02-10-2009, 08:12 PM

Quote:

This is just punishing the rich when the entirety of the rich doesn't need to be punished.

I think that after our entire country's history of one extreme I'm willing to give the other extreme a try.

Krylo · 02-10-2009, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bob the Mercenary

This is just punishing the rich when the entirety of the rich doesn't need to be punished. Just those who undermine our trust and use taxpayer money unwisely.

Quote:

the amount President Obama wants to set as the top pay for banking executives whose firms accept government bailout money

So you're saying you one hundred percent agree with this then?

Because the tone is one of disagreeing, and yet you're saying we should do... exactly what we're doing?

Though, honestly, I'd be all for a pay cap of like... 10-20x the amount the lowest paid worker makes. It'd prevent a lot of problems like this from happening in the future.

Fifthfiend · 02-10-2009, 08:22 PM

I'd settle for undoing the last like 50 years of ever-lower tax rates for the top income brackets because when your public policy becomes 'hey dudes who are already exorbitantly rich please continue hoarding greater and greater wealth forever' it seems like what happens is people start doing any insane thing they can think of to accumulate that wealth no matter how destructive it is to the rest of the nation.

But yeah the idea of a cap on the pay of people who are so terrible at their jobs that they have managed to run our entire economy into the ground doesn't really make me shed little-girl tears or nothin'.

I mean I personally have manged to not be directly responsible for the mass implosion of our entire economic system due to my years if not decades of grossly unethical conduct, all for the low low rate of twenty dollars an hour. If these guys are so upset at the prospect of getting paid five hunrded grand a year for their incompetence, maybe they should quit and someone can hire me and I'll be happy to be utterly incompetent at that pathetically low salary.

Bob The Mercenary · 02-10-2009, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krylo

So you're saying you one hundred percent agree with this then?

Because the tone is one of disagreeing, and yet you're saying we should do... exactly what we're doing?

Sorry, just did a skim job of this thread before posting. In those words, yes, I agree with this 100%.

I feel dumb.

Jagos · 02-10-2009, 08:49 PM

I just don't see how this can necessarily be good...

A cap on anyone prohibits them from trying to achieve whatever they want for X reason. And the Democratic belief in making the pie more equitable might cause more long term problems. After the crisis is over, will the caps continue to rule in the lands of business? Who would invest in new business if everyone has similar income with no incentive to produce more?

Besides, the millionaires are already losing money.

Also, thought I might use this for some older research that I was supposed to do:

SMB, I got a few things on the generation gaps, not necessarily the change of millionaires from the 1 out of 5 name thing from long, long ago. The link I have says there have been a few new households on the right side of the article.

As well, I'm seeing that Gen X are a lot more giving with their money. Though how much they get back in taxes is entirely another story. linkage

02-10-2009, 08:10 PM	#35
Bob The Mercenary Bob Dole Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Bob Dole Posts: 5,606	The thing that scares me is that if the government starts controlling how much a person can potentially make, and taken even deeper, starts telling companies how to spend their money (i.e. don't buy jets, don't buy office furnishings), doesn't that open the doorway for them to basically control all facets of a corporation? This is just punishing the rich when the entirety of the rich doesn't need to be punished. Just those who undermine our trust and use taxpayer money unwisely. It's up to them how they run their business though. __________________ Bob Dole

02-10-2009, 08:22 PM	#38
Fifthfiend for all seasons Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 19,409	I'd settle for undoing the last like 50 years of ever-lower tax rates for the top income brackets because when your public policy becomes 'hey dudes who are already exorbitantly rich please continue hoarding greater and greater wealth forever' it seems like what happens is people start doing any insane thing they can think of to accumulate that wealth no matter how destructive it is to the rest of the nation. But yeah the idea of a cap on the pay of people who are so terrible at their jobs that they have managed to run our entire economy into the ground doesn't really make me shed little-girl tears or nothin'. I mean I personally have manged to not be directly responsible for the mass implosion of our entire economic system due to my years if not decades of grossly unethical conduct, all for the low low rate of twenty dollars an hour. If these guys are so upset at the prospect of getting paid five hunrded grand a year for their incompetence, maybe they should quit and someone can hire me and I'll be happy to be utterly incompetent at that pathetically low salary. __________________ check out my buttspresso

02-10-2009, 08:49 PM	#40
Jagos FRONT KICK OF DOOM! Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Howdy pardner... Posts: 6,399	I just don't see how this can necessarily be good... A cap on anyone prohibits them from trying to achieve whatever they want for X reason. And the Democratic belief in making the pie more equitable might cause more long term problems. After the crisis is over, will the caps continue to rule in the lands of business? Who would invest in new business if everyone has similar income with no incentive to produce more? Besides, the millionaires are already losing money. Also, thought I might use this for some older research that I was supposed to do: SMB, I got a few things on the generation gaps, not necessarily the change of millionaires from the 1 out of 5 name thing from long, long ago. The link I have says there have been a few new households on the right side of the article. As well, I'm seeing that Gen X are a lot more giving with their money. Though how much they get back in taxes is entirely another story. linkage __________________ Copyright musings World ramblings Scifi stories

02-10-2009, 06:44 PM	#32
Kepor pretty cool guy Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 814	So, the pay cap's going to apply only to those companies that take government money. As it should; they use government funds, they'll have to play by the rules. But there isn't really any reason to call for pay caps on everyone. There isn't anything morally wrong with making a lot of money, and while a widening gap between poor and rich is trouble for a country, it shouldn't be on those top few to turn that around. Nor would a pay cap necessarily change that.

02-10-2009, 07:09 PM	#34
Kepor pretty cool guy Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 814	Because it's not necessarily that they possess that much money, but that so much is flowing to them that is the problem. Rephrased: the problem isn't whether or not they do earn that much, but that they can. Secondly because it's just individuals that control that money, but corporations as well. Large corporations are only about 40% of all businesses (old figure, new one is probably even smaller) but earn about 98% of all business income. That much control over that much capital affords them tremendous power.