Posted on 10/23/2009 7:46:45 AM PDT by Biggirl
Neil Cavuto and Bill O'Reilly in a cat fight over executive pay. Conficto gato or cat fight in Spanish.
Too much. Neil Cavuto from FBN (which if you do not have ….DEMAND IT … tried desperately to explain to Bill O’Reilly, why controlling the pay of even those companies taking bailout money, is just a bad idea. It’s a slippery slope. O’Reilly, at his populist best, scoffs. But there is a turning point about midway through. The money line … Bill, there is no free market. Watch all the way through and he will convince you too.
(Excerpt) Read more at radioviceonline.com ...
BOR wants to land an interview with BObama so bad he won’t open his eyes/ears to see or listen to others on subject.
BOR wants everyone to agree to his point of view.
JMO, still have that in USA.
Hey Karly-poo, should we limit the pay of the bloviators at MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NPR, NBC, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, and George Soros?
I think his point was that non-TARP execs would be punished because their salaries could be depressed because the market for those jobs is being influenced by government fiat. He sees this as a way of the govt depressing incomes of those who were not part of the TARP situation in the first place. It is a way for govt to decrease the compensation of high earners, those people so despised by liberals and class-envy enthusiasts. He is correct.
I dont disagree with points 1 and 2. I do think that you might be a little off on point 3. Once the government gets their nose under the tent, they will get greedy and they will be jealous.
This action will get the “workers of the world” all riled up—in fact, this will get all workers looking at the pay of their managers and executives. Most average worker-bees have no idea what the top folk make. I know from experience that Senior VPs in the run of the mill financial institution make eight to ten times that of their front line employee. Bonuses of 60-80% were not uncommon. I was actually a little unsettled when I found out the pay scales.
The government wont HAVE to do anything, there will be a movement towards more organization and unions will see a revival.
THAT is the agenda here.
Cavuto makes a *lot* of people look both ignorant and mean.
I like Neil.
O’Reilly is just a boob when he gets on these populist rants. His thing about the oil-companies and gas prices in 2008 was ridiculous.
Nope. Just O'Reilly. He's Fox's Chief Bloviator. (The original post was sarcasm, even though I wouldn't mind seeing O'Reilly hoist on his on petard).
Nam Vet
First, I was responding to Cavuto's point that the restriction of TARP recipient comp would spread throughout the economy WITHOUT addition regulation and restrictions.
I agree with you in that their initial move to restrict pay is a harbinger of their desire to legally restrict ALL business.
As I said, such restrictions would eventually have to be placed not just on partnership performance but even on the actually growth of companies...and it is hard, but not impossible, to see how they would tell companies to limit their sales to a certain level.
If they implement that level of control, they will have killed the golden goose.
There are two issues here: The government setting salaries for those companies that have accepted and have not repaid TARP funds and setting compensation for those who have either not accepted or repaid. Banks routinely place restrictions on compensation and payment of dividends by the borrower until the loan is repaid. This is just prudent lending. As long as the government is the lender, it too should do so. If the government has been repaid or never lent, it should keep its nose out of the matter. This latter right recently proposed by the FED scares the me.
Isn’t the issue of crazy executive salaries stemming from the salaries being set in many cases by a board of directors that consists of...... executives? Maybe of other companies though?
IMHO, one major problem with the corporate world is that the executives are operating on a ‘get-in’ make $$ ‘get-out’ mentality that is not punished by bad results, and is usually very shortsighted. Its an ethics/morality kind of thing that the government cannot regulate.
The larger a corporate entity is, the more insulation the execs have fron Joe stockholder and Josephine consumer. Until a better, cheaper option comes to the market.
What about some of the firms and small banks forced to take TARP so they could lend it to the banks? What happens when their pay gets limited, and they had no choice?
My secretary were paid extremely well compared to others in NYC. In fact, in most years I paid her a bonus equal to her salary. The support staff, mostly young MBA's, were also paid handsomely out of the fees I generated, but their comp was decided by the Department Head with input from me
But as you can see, as a senior investment banker, my pay (except for a small salary) was almost all bonus. It was big but the pressure was intense.
Wall St firms compete with each other (i.e. the investment bankers at my firm competed with those at other for the same deals) and the more they are payed, the smarter they get (odd isn't it).
Also, the more the bankers are paid, the more creative they get. That is a good thing but also a bad thing. It is this arrangement that requires the firms to have good commitment committees to review and decide to put the firms capital behind such deals.
As a final note, if I hadn't made a lot of money for the firm, not only would I have received a minor (or no) bonus, but I would have had my staff removed (and possibly fired) and I might have even been fired. If I had been fired for poor performance, word would spread around Wall St and my career would have been over.
Yes he did, I think he was leading up to the Patriot section being given to Michelle Obamao.
“Let me guess...you didn’t watch the clip before posting...”
You guessed wrong.
Ford will prevail over GM regardless of where Obama sets GM salaries. TARP will hang over the heads of those that accepted it. They are the ones who sold out. Let ‘em rot.
“What about some of the firms and small banks forced to take TARP so they could lend it to the banks? What happens when their pay gets limited, and they had no choice?”
They had a choice. A very difficult one. But they had one.
If the government is holding the risk, the have the reins as any owner should.
But government shouldn’t be the owner...the owner should be whatever private entity would have purchase them at actual market value.
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.