How about an import, then? Some Venezuelan Beaver Cheese, perchance?
Know whose salary is capped? The CEOs of companies so screwed up they are now on welfare. All they had to do was not screw the pooch so badly that the need billions of our money to keep the financial system from melting down, and then they could have as much as they want.
I’m guessing that you’re one of the people supporting the deregulation tax cutting policies that got us into this mess. The least you can do is shut up while people in the reality based community try to fix it.
This.
Yes, it’s a pay cap at $500,000. If the government didn’t bail them out, though, they’d be looking at a pay cap of $0.
Although oversimplified… yes, that’s what would happen. And I’d rather see it that way. Many corporate bonuses are paid in stock and stock options. Let the stock go to pennies. It would absolutley devastate those very same executives you (Voyager, you) so generously want to keep paying.
See? I’m not trying to “Won’t somebody think of the millionaires?!!?” I think they fucked up too, and I think they should bear the consequences.
I just don’t see how government-mandated salary caps on the private sector is in anyway a good idea.
And… I suspect many people (Voyager, that’d be you again) have no real idea how senior executives are compensated. Their actual salaries are relatively low. They get relatively LARGE bonuses. You want to cap them at $500,000 for their salary? Yeah, fine lot of good that will do. Their bonus would go up to compensate for the loss of salary.
But the “government” didn’t bail them out. You did, and I did, and every other taxpayer in this thread.
And how do we all feel about the severance packages various Obama cabinet members are accepting from their former places of employ? SEC Chair Mary Schapiro reportedly received over nine million bucks from the various boards on which she was serving. Should she return that?
Voyager, your profile says you’re a “computer scientist” and “computer design guru” (does that mean you’re like Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana, except for computers?). I’m confident you aren’t an economist, nor that you have any more (and I’ll even throw you a bone here - any less) of an understanding of our current situation than I do.
And your comment on the “reality based community”? Your profile also lists you as a “sf fan”. Unless that stands for San Francisco, I bet that means science fiction. Fiction. “FIC - shun”.
Thus I conclude – I’ll heed your comments about the economy about as much as I’ll heed your advice on “reality”. (But do you have any pics of your latest couture line? 'cause I bet they’re fabulous!)
Going home for the night ladies and gentlemen (no, Voyager, I didn’t mean you). See you tomorrow.
Being a fan of some genre of fiction doesn’t mean that someone thinks that’s the way the world works. Unlike Republicans.
What does one have to do with the other? Getting bailout money because your industry fails = Salary Cap. This is because American executives are known to reward themselves with giant bonuses regardless of merit. And since they would be paying themselves with government money it makes sense that the government can make the rules.
Why again is that situation at all analogous with a person leaving boards of functioning companies that aren’t taking bailout money and then entering government service?
Don’t assume things. Both Velveeta and Cheez Whiz also are “cheeses” (and I’m using a very broad definition here) made in America.
Do you get wi-fi under your bridge?
Your fear is irrelevant. Examples across the first world show that single payer healthcare is more efficient and costs less than the American model.
You keep using the word ‘private’. So I gotta ask. If they are getting a government handout, how private can they be? If they are using our money, don’t we have stake in them? Aren’t we stockholders? If they want big investment to save their butts, are we not able to dictate some terms?
If I came to you and asked for money to bail me out, wouldn’t you want some terms?
I agree with you that they shouldn’t get anything and fold. But since that’s not what they (meaning the bankers) want to do…
I assure you I know very well about these compensation schemes. I work in Silicon Valley, where we have lots. I’d need to check, but I expect bonuses are covered under the $500K. Stock, more of an issue, is set so that the execs only get it after they finish paying the government back.
Execs should get paid. If they had any balls they would have done what a lot of Silicon Valley execs did after the bubble - cut their salaries to $1 and bet the stock they were getting was going to be worth something some day. If the finance execs had done that, I suspect they wouldn’t be hated so much. I figure $500K is like leaving a penny for a tip - more of an insult than leaving nothing.
I’m against wage and price controls - I was around when Nixon tried it. But I make an exception for people who screwed up so badly they nearly brought down the economy, and want to get bonuses for it.
A cartoon in the Times on Sunday. Osama bin Laden is sitting in a cave, with a deputy.
Osama: I attacked Wall Street and wrecked havoc with the American financial system
Deputy: I hear they give bonuses for that now.
Actually, I have published three peer-reviewed papers on economics as related to engineering, two of them with my daughter who has an economics degree from the University of Chicago, a place you might have heard of. One of the papers won an award. I must admit they are micro, not macro, papers though.
I fail to see what sf has to do with anything. Please explain. I assure you I do not own a propeller beanie. Are you aware, by the way, that MIT has one of the world’s biggest sf collections? Not the university, but a student run organization.
And, do please give us your analysis of how we got into this mess. Be sure to include how the banks handled risk management. As usual, it is much easier understanding how we got into it than how we can get out of it, so my request should not be very onerous.
Same here. I am willing to see what he actually does first, and YES public scrutiny would be a good thing. We’ve had too much secret this and secret that.
It’s pitiful that it is necessary to set a limit to how much the CEOs can earn, but for crying out loud, we are giving them the money! I certain want reasonable limits set. Last time the money seemed to evaporate.
Just try to think of it as what it is: a welfare program. You want some limits and oversight now?
This simply is not true. The bailout money has been either loaned to companies or used to purchase preferred stock oin companies. It is OK to make the same argument you are making with a proper characterization of the facts, so there’s no need to exaggerate the situation.
Either way it is bailing the thieving and/or incompetent fuckers out. No one seriously believes we’ll ever see that money again in any worthwhile quantities.
64 million slices of american cheese…
I’m still in the camp that hasn’t been convinced. Costs less? I agree. More efficient? I don’t agree.
As there isn’t a quantifiable, universally accepted definition of “better healthcare” I hope you won’t mind if we disagree on this.
Interesting question. I would want to see that the conditions leading up to your needing a bailout wouldn’t be repeated, because then you’d just need another bailout. But… I wouldn’t necessarily dictate what fixes you should put in place. Remember – I’m specifically talking about gov’t-mandated salary caps. I think there are other “fixes” available, I don’t think salary caps are a good idea, and I think that’s a bad road to start traveling down.
We do agree on this.