Former ACORN execs?
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 10/21/2009 1:26:50 PM PDT by Nachum
Responding to the growing furor over the paychecks of executives at companies that received billions of dollars in the government’s financial rescue, the Obama administration will order the companies that received the most aid to deeply slash the compensation to their highest paid executives, an official involved in the decision said on Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnbc.com ...
The list, ping
-PJ
Except of course there will be no reduction in pay or benefits for UAW workers at GM. They’re now a politically protected group of patronage workers. GM will continue to be a bottomless sinkhole into which the administration will pour billions more dollars of taxpayer money, mainly to protect the UAW from foreign competition.
Hmmmmm....maybe big CORPORATIONs will TURN (back to free enterprise)........well...I can dream....
They don't have to enforce it. The Obama speaks and the world bends over. Except the Olympic Committee. And Fox News.
It’s not the pay, it’s the bonus packages that are offensive.
Notice who will not be giving anything back. JP Morgan and Government Sachs the ones who made the most off the bailouts and the ones who coincidentally paid off obama.
Yeppers. Barofsky came out today and said we weren’t going to get TARP money back.
“JP Morgan”
Employees not among the ‘privileged’ have had no pay increases for 3 years, no year-end bonuses last year, and a 5% rise in the cost of benefits in each of the 3 years mentioned above. IIRC, JPM is making $$.
“Responding to the growing furor over the paychecks of executives at companies that received billions of dollars in the government’s financial rescue...”
I realize this is nothing more than a cliché, something reporters say without thinking about it. But what “growing furor”? If there was a furor, it died down a long time ago.
Long time since Obama proposed limiting pay or when ACORN was parking buses outside executives’ houses, or we were arguing here on FR about the contract clause, ex post facto laws, and bills of attainder. Not to say people don’t still care about it, but the furor is stable, I’d assume, or shriking. This announcement will kick up the dust, but it’ll die down again.
“Hmmmmm....maybe big CORPORATIONs will TURN (back to free enterprise)........well...I can dream”
Wake up and join the nightmare.
“It’s not the pay, it’s the bonus packages that are offensive.”
Bonus packages are pay. Just like your healthcare coverage, if you have it through your employer, is pay. Or like a company care is pay. Benefits are pay.
care = car
Worse many now have no jobs!
“At the financial products division of the insurance giant, A.I.G., the locus of problems that plagued the large insurer and forced its rescue with more than $180 billion in taxpayer assistance, no top executive will receive more than $200,000 in total compensation”
What quality of executives are they gonna be able to get for $200K?
Former ACORN execs?
Hey, I only have a few hundred dollars left, and can't get another job. I'll take the gig. $200k sounds pretty good when you're down and out!
I don't want to live in a country where the imperial federal gubmit can slash my salary because someone - anyone - finds it offensive.
“What quality of executives are they gonna be able to get for $200K?”
Hopefully a better batch than the greedy, arrogant, bunch that we got for $20M. You know, the people that drove this economy to its knees and enabled Obama to become President - simply by CONTINUING to make loans to people that THEY KNEW didn’t have a prayer in H3LL of paying back, based on their incomes.
I have no problem with this pay cap, other than maybe $200k is a bit low for an 80-hour high-stress job, but these guys asked for it, and they got it. Perhaps next this will teach the executive class something, because these bailouts did not but teach them they could get away with ANYTHING.
They didn't make the loans based on greed. They didn't make losing bets to make money, they made them because the federal government forced them to.
You're right, IMO, that bailouts teach the wrong lesson. And I do believe that the current system tends to encourage risk taking by executives (after all, if you lose all you're out is a job -- what I call a Resume Generating Event). But price controls just don't work.
“They didn’t make the loans based on greed. They didn’t make losing bets to make money, they made them because the federal government forced them to.”
Then they should have resigned and publicly stated what was going on...I think you underestimate their mindset.
“They didn’t make the loans based on greed. They didn’t make losing bets to make money, they made them because the federal government forced them to.”
Wasn;t the issue at AIG credit default swaps (or was it cdo’s?)? This has nothing to do with the feds making them do anything, and everything to do with an unregulated derivative market and AIG’s exposure to it.
You’re right, we did start getting off track there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.