$500,000 Executive pay limit for bailout companies

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
9,367
Location
USA
This covers only those companies that receive bailout money. I assume this effects the big 3 CEOs.

I was kinda hoping for a $250k limit.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29003620

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama on Wednesday imposed $500,000 caps on senior executive pay for the most distressed financial institutions receiving federal bailout money, saying Americans are upset with “executives being rewarded for failure.”

Obama announced the dramatic new government intervention into corporate America at the White House, with his new Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, at his side. The president said the executive-pay limits are a first step, to be followed by the unveiling next week of a sweeping new framework for spending what remains in the $700 billion financial industry bailout program that Congress created last year.

The move comes amid a national outcry over huge bonuses going to executives heading companies seeking taxpayer dollars to remain afloat. The desire for limits was reinforced by revelations that Wall Street firms paid more than $18 billion in bonuses in 2008 even amid the economic downturn and the massive taxpayer-dollar infusion into their industry

“We all need to take responsibility,” Obama said. “And this includes executives at major financial firms who turned to the American people, hat in hand, when they were in trouble, even as they paid themselves their customary lavish bonuses. As I said last week, that’s the height of irresponsibility. That’s shameful.”

The pay cap would apply to all institutions that have negotiated agreements with the Treasury Department for “exceptional assistance.” Those would include AIG, Bank of America and Citi.

Firms that want to pay executives above the $500,000 threshold would have to use stock that could not be sold or liquidated until they pay back the government funds.

Generally healthy institutions would have more leeway. They also face the $500,000 limit if they’re getting government help, but that cap can be waived with full public disclosure and a nonbinding shareholder vote.

“This is America. We don’t disparage wealth,” Obama said. “But what gets people upset and rightfully so are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.”
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
people upset and rightfully so are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.”



We should cap the salary of Congress members then, since Congress is an utter failure. $700/week with no benefits. Live like the rabble. Perhaps if they did that for a few years they'd start making better decisions for all of us since they'd have a clear picture of reality for the masses.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
people upset and rightfully so are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.”



We should cap the salary of Congress members then, since Congress is an utter failure. $700/week with no benefits. Live like the rabble. Perhaps if they did that for a few years they'd start making better decisions for all of us since they'd have a clear picture of reality for the masses.


Do you really think these congress people are in it for the salary? They probably take a huge pay cut to get into politics to begin with.
 
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
people upset and rightfully so are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.”



We should cap the salary of Congress members then, since Congress is an utter failure. $700/week with no benefits. Live like the rabble. Perhaps if they did that for a few years they'd start making better decisions for all of us since they'd have a clear picture of reality for the masses.



X2
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
people upset and rightfully so are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.”



We should cap the salary of Congress members then, since Congress is an utter failure. $700/week with no benefits. Live like the rabble. Perhaps if they did that for a few years they'd start making better decisions for all of us since they'd have a clear picture of reality for the masses.


Do you really think these congress people are in it for the salary? They probably take a huge pay cut to get into politics to begin with.


True. OK, how about each member of Congress pays the Treasury $700 bucks a week! Still no benefits.
 
I would venture to say 60% of them are in it for the money, fringe benefits, and the wonderful lifetime retirement they get. There are probably a few good apples in that barrel. So I do not get to political and get this thing shut down, I won't name the rotten apples.
 
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
people upset and rightfully so are executives being rewarded for failure. Especially when those rewards are subsidized by U.S. taxpayers.”



We should cap the salary of Congress members then, since Congress is an utter failure. $700/week with no benefits. Live like the rabble. Perhaps if they did that for a few years they'd start making better decisions for all of us since they'd have a clear picture of reality for the masses.


Yeah, but the CEOs of these bailout companies are getting multimillion dollar bonuses, eh?
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny
I would venture to say 60% of them are in it for the money, fringe benefits, and the wonderful lifetime retirement they get. There are probably a few good apples in that barrel. So I do not get to political and get this thing shut down, I won't name the rotten apples.


The rotten ones were all born on a day of the week that ends with a "Y".
 
So, the CEO of the Girls Scouts will make more money than the CEO of CITI? Last I checked, the Girl Scouts made more money than CITI so there's nothing wrong with capping the salaries of failed CEO-s if they are subsidized by the taxpayers.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
I actually agree with his last quote.

I won't speak for Gary.


I think it's a great coup. ..but I'll reserve judgment until after the thieves figure an end runaround. They always do.

The company stock clause appears to be an exemption. I'd put a cap on how many multiples that may include ..and maybe a decade time trail for full vesting. Otherwise, you have the same jo's manipulating their company's bottom line for ONE YEAR ..getting a BIG STOCK OPTION ..and quitting.

I hope that they end up at my homeless shelter in a dunk state ..I recognize them ..and call the cops to come and get them for being too intoxicated for our standards.
 
I worked in D.C. for a large think-tank... all of them R's, D's, and Lieberman are all crooks- all. They don't take a pay cut to go there, maybe in base salary #s but once you get a job in the house or senate, your 'off the balalance sheet' income just went up 500 fold.

That's why I advocate government staying the heck out of any business because they (the repubs, dems, and independents) end up choosing winners and looser, which we as consumers should pick via buying a product. We SHOULD be able to dictate who stays open and who folds based on how good of a product they produce but no- with this bailout and future ones gov't will decide this for us and we will continue to get sub-par products (GM/Chrysler/Ford cars)... gov't will continue to expand it's influence, pretty soon holding our hand when we go to the bathroom, just like everything else our retirment, our schooling, and pretty soon our healthcare...

Capping CEO pay is just going to make some lawyers very rich looking for a loophole out of this legislation because there's always a loophole.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan


I hope that they end up at my homeless shelter in a drunk state ..I recognize them ..and call the cops to come and get them for being too intoxicated for our standards.


Don't you mean you'll call 911 after you "find" their unconscious beaten to within an inch of death bodies behind the shelter?

"It's sad officer. It looks like someone mugged them. I'm sorry I didn't get here sooner..."
 
Originally Posted By: jsharp
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan


I hope that they end up at my homeless shelter in a drunk state ..I recognize them ..and call the cops to come and get them for being too intoxicated for our standards.


Don't you mean you'll call 911 after you "find" their unconscious beaten to within an inch of death bodies behind the shelter?

"It's sad officer. It looks like someone mugged them. I'm sorry I didn't get here sooner..."


It would be tempting ..but in all reality, I think I'd invite him in to see how others can see the humanity in anyone. It may be a waste of time ..but..
21.gif


Now if a mob of torch bearing ..pitchfork carrying.. peasants assault some ivory tower ..I might grab a water filled basin and tidy up a bit with some hand washing.
 
Originally Posted By: Johnny
I would venture to say 60% of them are in it for the money, fringe benefits, and the wonderful lifetime retirement they get. There are probably a few good apples in that barrel. So I do not get to political and get this thing shut down, I won't name the rotten apples.


Try to find me any group of 535 people that doesn't have a whole lot of bad apples. Luckily, unless congress members, most bad apples can only do so much harm

For what it's worth, though, in my time spent as a videographer I have produced videos, web sites, etc. for a large handful of politicians; both established and up-and-coming, and all struck me as fundamentally decent people who happen to play in a very dirty game.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Originally Posted By: jsharp
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan


I hope that they end up at my homeless shelter in a drunk state ..I recognize them ..and call the cops to come and get them for being too intoxicated for our standards.


Don't you mean you'll call 911 after you "find" their unconscious beaten to within an inch of death bodies behind the shelter?

"It's sad officer. It looks like someone mugged them. I'm sorry I didn't get here sooner..."


It would be tempting ..but in all reality, I think I'd invite him in to see how others can see the humanity in anyone. It may be a waste of time ..but..
21.gif


Now if a mob of torch bearing ..pitchfork carrying.. peasants assault some ivory tower ..I might grab a water filled basin and tidy up a bit with some hand washing.


I understand. Back to the topic, I think this is a bad idea overall. We're rapidly moving from loaning money to running these companies.

I say give them 90 days warning that we're calling the loans we shouldn't have made in the first place.
 
Ceos pay is way too much because they have no risk in the failure of the busisness win or loose. If you put all your life savings into a buisness and it fails you lose if you succede you should benefit. Most government people make way too much in pay and benes ,they have no resposibility for the decisions they make.
 
Originally Posted By: jsharp


I say give them 90 days warning that we're calling the loans we shouldn't have made in the first place.
I would have to agree but sorry to say those guys own the politicians
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top