Debate Now Republican candidates discussion, Conservative/libertarian/tea party only

[Sun Devil 92]

Ceo pay. I have not figured out a way to punish companies for outrageous reimbursement without stepping on people's rights, so I think this is a case that will have to be waged by jawboning. Public pressure will,have to be brought to bear and you know what, it doesn't cost anything. It is not anti-conservative to point out the obscenity that is ceo pay. Some may call this demagoguery but this is exhibit A for income inequality which republicans have to talk about. Don't get me wrong about this, I think individuals should be rewarded for their efforts or their inventions or their talents or success they bring to their companies, but executives should have the humility to recognize they didn't do it alone and their employees deserve a mentor not a king.

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

 

[Ernie S.]

But there is no 'theft' involved in those mega salaries and I personally think it is ethically problematic to try to pressure a company that is not doing anything unethical. And it is purely voluntary whether or not we do business with a private business as opposed to whether we support the permanent political class in Washington who have the power to enrich themselves at our expense. IMO that is where you need to focus your anger and resentment.

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

I will say with a good deal of confidence that nobody on this thread or this site has a clue what I do and do not understand. Before you specify such assumption I would invite you to read over my Extortion thread. It was either to wordy to too tedious or too hard to understand to attract a lot of attention, but it spells it all out for anybody with an interest in the subject to see how Congress and big business interact.

But the guy with a golden parachute got it because it was written into his contract when he was made CEO of a company. It is no different that the severance pay I have been guaranteed when I went to work for somebody.

But let me ask you. Whose money it is that an executive gets paid. Yours? Mine? What is it to you what he or she gets paid?

If I am a stockholder...it is my money.

Now what was the question ?

Then attend the annual meeting and cast your vote. Be sure, however, you have a lot of shares of voting stock. There will be a few million other share holders with a better understanding of the business voting against you.

Yes, you always get a few million share holders at any meeting. They fit them all in an auditorium.

Next, you have the issues associated with having a great deal of stock loaded up in mutual funds. You might not even know what you own. Hence, only the more interested parties will vote (and they will often own a great deal of stock).

So...it's not so simple Ernie.

And while we are at it, let's talk about the CEO's who buddy up to the government and do things like help write regulations so they know what is in there and can make sure it is is harder for others to enter the market.

I am simply saying that it would be good to have this out on the table. If the average American investor is to stupid to pay attention or does not have the time...these kinds of abuses will go on.

I never said it was simple, but is is your right to vote. As far as CEO's writing regulations: Did it ever occur to you that they got to be CEO's because they knew the business? Who better to consult when proposing regulations?

Or perhaps you think it entirely appropriate that a great deal of obamacare was written by a man while serving 5 months in prison (and 11 months in house arrest) for tax evasion and bank fraud.

 

[Ernie S.]

Ceo pay. I have not figured out a way to punish companies for outrageous reimbursement without stepping on people's rights, so I think this is a case that will have to be waged by jawboning. Public pressure will,have to be brought to bear and you know what, it doesn't cost anything. It is not anti-conservative to point out the obscenity that is ceo pay. Some may call this demagoguery but this is exhibit A for income inequality which republicans have to talk about. Don't get me wrong about this, I think individuals should be rewarded for their efforts or their inventions or their talents or success they bring to their companies, but executives should have the humility to recognize they didn't do it alone and their employees deserve a mentor not a king.

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

You are daft!

 

[Papageorgio]

If it is a privately held corporation. But in a publicly traded company, sotckholders have no way of stopping this kind of theft.

But there is no 'theft' involved in those mega salaries and I personally think it is ethically problematic to try to pressure a company that is not doing anything unethical. And it is purely voluntary whether or not we do business with a private business as opposed to whether we support the permanent political class in Washington who have the power to enrich themselves at our expense. IMO that is where you need to focus your anger and resentment.

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

I will say with a good deal of confidence that nobody on this thread or this site has a clue what I do and do not understand. Before you specify such assumption I would invite you to read over my Extortion thread. It was either to wordy to too tedious or too hard to understand to attract a lot of attention, but it spells it all out for anybody with an interest in the subject to see how Congress and big business interact.

But the guy with a golden parachute got it because it was written into his contract when he was made CEO of a company. It is no different that the severance pay I have been guaranteed when I went to work for somebody.

But let me ask you. Whose money it is that an executive gets paid. Yours? Mine? What is it to you what he or she gets paid?

If I am a stockholder...it is my money.

Now what was the question ?

Nobody forced you to buy the stock though. Nobody guaranteed you any return when you did. It's an educated gamble at best, and if you don't like what the CEO gets paid then why buy the stock? The wise investor researches the product she buys.

I look at who the CEO of the companies I invest in. I look at company values and who they spend their charity with and what causes they support. If I buy individual stocks I can get picky. If you are a worried about who CEOs or if they get a large payout. Do your homework. I have found that some CEOs are worth their salary.

 

[Ernie S.]

But there is no 'theft' involved in those mega salaries and I personally think it is ethically problematic to try to pressure a company that is not doing anything unethical. And it is purely voluntary whether or not we do business with a private business as opposed to whether we support the permanent political class in Washington who have the power to enrich themselves at our expense. IMO that is where you need to focus your anger and resentment.

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

Do you know what a contract is? Many people sign them when they assume a position.

The logical extension of that is that shareholders should not allow such stupid and corrupt contracts to be signed.

They do it for the same reason an NFL team will sign a $20,000,000 contract with a Quarterback. The company wanted to attract a person they felt would best run their business. Just like a QB may bust up his knees or shred his shoulder, a CEO may guess wrong and cost a company money in the long run. Both the Packers and General Electric are STILL bound by contract.

Uh...do companies have a salary cap ?

I'd love to see something like that play out.

You might want to look a little further into how these companies pick their CEO's. Often time it is an incestuous little affair that involves knowing people on the board.

Salary caps are artificial limits a league puts on teams to try to keep them competitive. In the real world companies will spend whatever they feel necessary to crush competition. There is now "Commissioner", nor should there be.

 

[Ernie S.]

If it is a privately held corporation. But in a publicly traded company, sotckholders have no way of stopping this kind of theft.

But there is no 'theft' involved in those mega salaries and I personally think it is ethically problematic to try to pressure a company that is not doing anything unethical. And it is purely voluntary whether or not we do business with a private business as opposed to whether we support the permanent political class in Washington who have the power to enrich themselves at our expense. IMO that is where you need to focus your anger and resentment.

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

I will say with a good deal of confidence that nobody on this thread or this site has a clue what I do and do not understand. Before you specify such assumption I would invite you to read over my Extortion thread. It was either to wordy to too tedious or too hard to understand to attract a lot of attention, but it spells it all out for anybody with an interest in the subject to see how Congress and big business interact.

But the guy with a golden parachute got it because it was written into his contract when he was made CEO of a company. It is no different that the severance pay I have been guaranteed when I went to work for somebody.

But let me ask you. Whose money it is that an executive gets paid. Yours? Mine? What is it to you what he or she gets paid?

Next time, you can link me to the thread you said you generated.

You are right...nobody knows what you do and don't understand. We do see what you post, however, and it clearly shows a disconnect.

She may very well be disconnected from your reality, sir, and I congratulate her for that.

 

[Votto]

Scott Walker got the poo beat out of him and he still came up smelling like roses.

He stood his ground and won, something virtually unheard of in conservative politics.

Cruz is just a punching bag for the left. He has become the new punching bag since "W" is out of the picture, not that "W" was ever a conservative. Although Cruz never comes up smelling like roses on anything, he still stands his ground and handles the abuse with poise like a good soldier, almost so much I think he kinda likes it. Even though the dude is smart, he has no chance in a general election. The press has done a good enough job on demonizing him for too long now. I think he is smart enough to know this, which is why it is puzzling what his angle actually is in running.

My gut is that if either Walker or Cruz gets elected, they will either be stiff armed and alienated from the federal government on all sides, or they will cave and become one of them in order to survive politically.

It's really the system and not the Presidential candidate that is the issue for me, which is why I support the Article V movement.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

I will say with a good deal of confidence that nobody on this thread or this site has a clue what I do and do not understand. Before you specify such assumption I would invite you to read over my Extortion thread. It was either to wordy to too tedious or too hard to understand to attract a lot of attention, but it spells it all out for anybody with an interest in the subject to see how Congress and big business interact.

But the guy with a golden parachute got it because it was written into his contract when he was made CEO of a company. It is no different that the severance pay I have been guaranteed when I went to work for somebody.

But let me ask you. Whose money it is that an executive gets paid. Yours? Mine? What is it to you what he or she gets paid?

If I am a stockholder...it is my money.

Now what was the question ?

Then attend the annual meeting and cast your vote. Be sure, however, you have a lot of shares of voting stock. There will be a few million other share holders with a better understanding of the business voting against you.

Yes, you always get a few million share holders at any meeting. They fit them all in an auditorium.

Next, you have the issues associated with having a great deal of stock loaded up in mutual funds. You might not even know what you own. Hence, only the more interested parties will vote (and they will often own a great deal of stock).

So...it's not so simple Ernie.

And while we are at it, let's talk about the CEO's who buddy up to the government and do things like help write regulations so they know what is in there and can make sure it is is harder for others to enter the market.

I am simply saying that it would be good to have this out on the table. If the average American investor is to stupid to pay attention or does not have the time...these kinds of abuses will go on.

I never said it was simple, but is is your right to vote. As far as CEO's writing regulations: Did it ever occur to you that they got to be CEO's because they knew the business? Who better to consult when proposing regulations?

Or perhaps you think it entirely appropriate that a great deal of obamacare was written by a man while serving 5 months in prison (and 11 months in house arrest) for tax evasion and bank fraud.

This confuses me.

CEO's and their business suggest regulations (that probably are not needed) in order to create high barriers to entry. It keeps the competition out and margins high.

What I think is that we ought to be looking at the regulations that keep industries propped up and protected to see if they can be cancelled.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Ceo pay. I have not figured out a way to punish companies for outrageous reimbursement without stepping on people's rights, so I think this is a case that will have to be waged by jawboning. Public pressure will,have to be brought to bear and you know what, it doesn't cost anything. It is not anti-conservative to point out the obscenity that is ceo pay. Some may call this demagoguery but this is exhibit A for income inequality which republicans have to talk about. Don't get me wrong about this, I think individuals should be rewarded for their efforts or their inventions or their talents or success they bring to their companies, but executives should have the humility to recognize they didn't do it alone and their employees deserve a mentor not a king.

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

You are daft!

Are you arguing this isn't the case ?

Seriously ?

 

[Ernie S.]

Ceo pay. I have not figured out a way to punish companies for outrageous reimbursement without stepping on people's rights, so I think this is a case that will have to be waged by jawboning. Public pressure will,have to be brought to bear and you know what, it doesn't cost anything. It is not anti-conservative to point out the obscenity that is ceo pay. Some may call this demagoguery but this is exhibit A for income inequality which republicans have to talk about. Don't get me wrong about this, I think individuals should be rewarded for their efforts or their inventions or their talents or success they bring to their companies, but executives should have the humility to recognize they didn't do it alone and their employees deserve a mentor not a king.

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

By the way! Did you read the first post in this thread?


"Rules for this thread....

you must support conservative, libertarian or Tea Party beliefs and candidates....."

 

[Sun Devil 92]

But there is no 'theft' involved in those mega salaries and I personally think it is ethically problematic to try to pressure a company that is not doing anything unethical. And it is purely voluntary whether or not we do business with a private business as opposed to whether we support the permanent political class in Washington who have the power to enrich themselves at our expense. IMO that is where you need to focus your anger and resentment.

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

I will say with a good deal of confidence that nobody on this thread or this site has a clue what I do and do not understand. Before you specify such assumption I would invite you to read over my Extortion thread. It was either to wordy to too tedious or too hard to understand to attract a lot of attention, but it spells it all out for anybody with an interest in the subject to see how Congress and big business interact.

But the guy with a golden parachute got it because it was written into his contract when he was made CEO of a company. It is no different that the severance pay I have been guaranteed when I went to work for somebody.

But let me ask you. Whose money it is that an executive gets paid. Yours? Mine? What is it to you what he or she gets paid?

If I am a stockholder...it is my money.

Now what was the question ?

Nobody forced you to buy the stock though. Nobody guaranteed you any return when you did. It's an educated gamble at best, and if you don't like what the CEO gets paid then why buy the stock? The wise investor researches the product she buys.

I look at who the CEO of the companies I invest in. I look at company values and who they spend their charity with and what causes they support. If I buy individual stocks I can get picky. If you are a worried about who CEOs or if they get a large payout. Do your homework. I have found that some CEOs are worth their salary.

Thanks for the advice.

It seems the trigger happy right wingers (not necessarily conservatives) think that just because someone wants a candidate who might look at potential abuse...it is call for a restriction on all CEO's.

I have never said that.

What is more difficult is for shareholders to have a vote that counts so that the abusers can be held accountable.

I'd like to have a candidate who looks into that.

Small businesses can't form up if they are mired in regulation. CEO's of large companies want to create huge market disconnets and high barriers to entry.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Ceo pay. I have not figured out a way to punish companies for outrageous reimbursement without stepping on people's rights, so I think this is a case that will have to be waged by jawboning. Public pressure will,have to be brought to bear and you know what, it doesn't cost anything. It is not anti-conservative to point out the obscenity that is ceo pay. Some may call this demagoguery but this is exhibit A for income inequality which republicans have to talk about. Don't get me wrong about this, I think individuals should be rewarded for their efforts or their inventions or their talents or success they bring to their companies, but executives should have the humility to recognize they didn't do it alone and their employees deserve a mentor not a king.

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

By the way! Did you read the first post in this thread?


"Rules for this thread....

you must support conservative, libertarian or Tea Party beliefs and candidates....."

I do support many conservative beliefs. That isn't what is being espoused. You and your cohort are engaging in nothing more than right wing corporatism.

 

[Ernie S.]

I will say with a good deal of confidence that nobody on this thread or this site has a clue what I do and do not understand. Before you specify such assumption I would invite you to read over my Extortion thread. It was either to wordy to too tedious or too hard to understand to attract a lot of attention, but it spells it all out for anybody with an interest in the subject to see how Congress and big business interact.

But the guy with a golden parachute got it because it was written into his contract when he was made CEO of a company. It is no different that the severance pay I have been guaranteed when I went to work for somebody.

But let me ask you. Whose money it is that an executive gets paid. Yours? Mine? What is it to you what he or she gets paid?

If I am a stockholder...it is my money.

Now what was the question ?

Then attend the annual meeting and cast your vote. Be sure, however, you have a lot of shares of voting stock. There will be a few million other share holders with a better understanding of the business voting against you.

Yes, you always get a few million share holders at any meeting. They fit them all in an auditorium.

Next, you have the issues associated with having a great deal of stock loaded up in mutual funds. You might not even know what you own. Hence, only the more interested parties will vote (and they will often own a great deal of stock).

So...it's not so simple Ernie.

And while we are at it, let's talk about the CEO's who buddy up to the government and do things like help write regulations so they know what is in there and can make sure it is is harder for others to enter the market.

I am simply saying that it would be good to have this out on the table. If the average American investor is to stupid to pay attention or does not have the time...these kinds of abuses will go on.

I never said it was simple, but is is your right to vote. As far as CEO's writing regulations: Did it ever occur to you that they got to be CEO's because they knew the business? Who better to consult when proposing regulations?

Or perhaps you think it entirely appropriate that a great deal of obamacare was written by a man while serving 5 months in prison (and 11 months in house arrest) for tax evasion and bank fraud.

This confuses me.

CEO's and their business suggest regulations (that probably are not needed) in order to create high barriers to entry. It keeps the competition out and margins high.

What I think is that we ought to be looking at the regulations that keep industries propped up and protected to see if they can be cancelled.

You're easily confused but not so easily tolerated.

 

[Ernie S.]

Ceo pay. I have not figured out a way to punish companies for outrageous reimbursement without stepping on people's rights, so I think this is a case that will have to be waged by jawboning. Public pressure will,have to be brought to bear and you know what, it doesn't cost anything. It is not anti-conservative to point out the obscenity that is ceo pay. Some may call this demagoguery but this is exhibit A for income inequality which republicans have to talk about. Don't get me wrong about this, I think individuals should be rewarded for their efforts or their inventions or their talents or success they bring to their companies, but executives should have the humility to recognize they didn't do it alone and their employees deserve a mentor not a king.

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

By the way! Did you read the first post in this thread?


"Rules for this thread....

you must support conservative, libertarian or Tea Party beliefs and candidates....."

I do support many conservative beliefs. That isn't what is being espoused. You and your cohort are engaging in nothing more than right wing corporatism.

you must support conservative, libertarian or Tea Party beliefs and candidates.

Go away!

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And here we have a huge disconnect on the part of someone who obviously does not understand how this system works.

I find it almost hysterical (and I mean that) that you would go after politicians and not the top brass at large companies.

They are almost one in the same and they are deep in bed together.

You didn't see the site on the CEO's who'se companies lost money big time and were fired with 30 million dollar golden parachutes ?

Do you know what a contract is? Many people sign them when they assume a position.

The logical extension of that is that shareholders should not allow such stupid and corrupt contracts to be signed.

They do it for the same reason an NFL team will sign a $20,000,000 contract with a Quarterback. The company wanted to attract a person they felt would best run their business. Just like a QB may bust up his knees or shred his shoulder, a CEO may guess wrong and cost a company money in the long run. Both the Packers and General Electric are STILL bound by contract.

Uh...do companies have a salary cap ?

I'd love to see something like that play out.

You might want to look a little further into how these companies pick their CEO's. Often time it is an incestuous little affair that involves knowing people on the board.

Salary caps are artificial limits a league puts on teams to try to keep them competitive. In the real world companies will spend whatever they feel necessary to crush competition. There is now "Commissioner", nor should there be.

So large corporations can help create regulations that cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to comply with thus pretty much ensuring that no small players can get into the business.

And you support that ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

It's a good point.

Large corporations and government are one in the same and those CEO's are making a lot off of our tax dollars (and we don't see anything). Additionally, they are still rewarded for failure with huge golden parachutes.

USATODAY.com - Forget brass rings 151 execs grab for gold

Perhaps the most lucrative exit package for an underperforming CEO is that of Mattel's Jill Barad. Ousted from the floundering toymaker last February, Barad got a $26.4 million payout and supplemental retirement worth $1 million. Mattel forgave a $4.2 million stock-related loan, the balance on a $3 million home loan it provided Barad and will cover her $3.3 million tax hit resulting from the forgiven loans. Mattel also covers Barad's health insurance, security services, outplacement help and financial counseling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This is one of the more egregious.

Now, while the thread isn't about this, it does point to yet another place the GOP could make some points if they actually believe what they say. It is very clear this isn't free enterprise. This is mutual backscratching and is the equivalent of larceny.

The GOP would do well to really take a hard look at the wealth concentration in this country and understand how it occurs.

They don't need to pass laws against people making lots of money.

Economics teaches that nobody should get fabulously rich is a true free market system. Others will jump into the fray and extract those margins and profits and drive costs down.

What the GOP should be doing is talking about taking away barriers to entry into new markets.

One of these would getting rid of wall street altogether. Wall street only exists because it is protected.

I am not paying close attention to the candidates just yet, but if any of them is addressing this in a serious fashion....I'd like to know.

UM, helloooooooooooooooooooo!

If a country is FREE,. then you are FREE to make as much as you have the ability to make.

Does economics teach otherwise or does socialism?

Economics teaches that you don't "make" any money. In a perfect market economy NOBODY makes a profit......

By the way! Did you read the first post in this thread?


"Rules for this thread....

you must support conservative, libertarian or Tea Party beliefs and candidates....."

I do support many conservative beliefs. That isn't what is being espoused. You and your cohort are engaging in nothing more than right wing corporatism.

you must support conservative, libertarian or Tea Party beliefs and candidates.

Go away!

Please describe how I am not.

Or are you saying that those beliefs prop up corruption ?

 

[Ernie S.]

I am saying that you are not a Conservative and should leave the thread.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Scott Walker got the poo beat out of him and he still came up smelling like roses.

He stood his ground and won, something virtually unheard of in conservative politics.

Cruz is just a punching bag for the left. He has become the new punching bag since "W" is out of the picture, not that "W" was ever a conservative. Although Cruz never comes up smelling like roses on anything, he still stands his ground and handles the abuse with poise like a good soldier, almost so much I think he kinda likes it. Even though the dude is smart, he has no chance in a general election. The press has done a good enough job on demonizing him for too long now. I think he is smart enough to know this, which is why it is puzzling what his angle actually is in running.

My gut is that if either Walker or Cruz gets elected, they will either be stiff armed and alienated from the federal government on all sides, or they will cave and become one of them in order to survive politically.

It's really the system and not the Presidential candidate that is the issue for me, which is why I support the Article V movement.

You are correct in that a sea change in any direction requires help on all sides.

Does the establishment right really want change....I really wonder ?

But if a GOP candidate is elected, it does no good if they don't have a willing congress.

None and I mean NONE of the big issues are on the table being discussed right now.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

I am saying that you are not a Conservative and should leave the thread.

You are the one who isn't conservative.

You are right wing statist.

You leave.

And once again, you provide nothing to back up your accusation.

You can't take the fact that someone is calling you out because you are so beholden to the BS line that somehow corporations exhibit free market tendencies.

I work for large corporations. They need government money and they need government protection.

Or were you for saving GM ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Ernie S.

Were you for Obama saving GM ?