It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Pay Czar to Rework Contracts Deemed High

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 08:42 AM
link   

U.S. Pay Czar to Rework Contracts Deemed High


online.wsj.com

WASHINGTON -- The U.S. pay czar, now preparing to vet the compensation at businesses receiving major federal aid, will push to renegotiate contracts that he views as excessive or seek other ways to reduce overall outlays, said people familiar with the matter.

The role of the government in setting pay is reaching a pivotal moment. Seven banks and industrial companies that received significant bailouts must submit proposals for their compensation packages by Aug. 13.: Citigroup Inc., Bank of A
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 08:42 AM
link   
A pay czar?
wowzers!


Treasury Department official Kenneth Feinberg, who has authority to oversee pay for the 100 highest-paid employees at those companies.

None of the firms have yet submitted their proposed pay packages. GMAC has proposed to Mr. Feinberg that it be able to pay its top people a mix of 20% cash and 80% stock


Something doesn't seem right here.

WSJ is definately trying to pull a positive spin on this but i'm just not believing it.

This is very close to economic fascism.

Furthermore what will be this pay czar's role 4 years from now? Doesn't that give you the shivers.
brrrrrr

online.wsj.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   
He should start with Hollywood and all pro athletes.

2nd line.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 



I just want to see the looks on all the Obama supporters faces when they get a note saying that Uncle Sam has deemed that you are getting paid too much.

So as part of a "Fairness and spread the wealth program", one third of your paycheck is going to someone that doesn't work.

Another third of you paycheck has also been taken for the government healthcare plan.

Another third will be kept because you really don't need all that money. It's not like you're going to spend it, anyway.

And yet, another third (yes, I'm keeping count) will go to the charity of THEIR choice, ie ACORN, or an ACORN branch, or an ACORN executive, or an ACORN office coffee fund, or an ACORN beer fund. . . . .

So this is the hope and change ya'll wanted?





posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi
He should start with Hollywood and all pro athletes.



I think he should start by reviewing all the no bid contracts let out to the "war profiteers" by the Bush administration like Halliburton, Blackwater etc.

remember this?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 09:34 AM
link   
It is for our own good, we must assimilate.


[edit on 27-7-2009 by Doom and Gloom]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 09:39 AM
link   
reply to post by mikerussellus
 



I just want to see the looks on all the Obama supporters faces when they get a note saying that Uncle Sam has deemed that you are getting paid too much.


Oh come on you know Obama supporters only vote for a living!


I'm joking people, lighten up.

_________________________-


I knew this was going to happen. It will start with the bailed out firms then it will move into all aspects of business.

I understand the Obama wants to build a communist nation, but its going to be really hard for him to do that when he destroys all businesses.

What do you think the reaction will be when these CEO's dissolve the business just out of spite and 100's of thousands go on to the unemployment line.

Not going to be pretty. Can you say, "Who is John Galt?"



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Every time I hear the word Czar I get the shivers !!



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
If businesses are so poorly run they need the .gov to bail them out, then the management at those companies should not be expecting big fat bonus checks, duh


It amazes me how good the right is at suckering people into looking out for the interests of people who have nothing but contempt for them.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by xmotex
 


If the business are so poorly run that they need the gov to bail them out then they need to fail, period.

Those big wigs don't care about me and I don't care about them. That is why the business should fail.

It amazes me how people on left claim they want freedom, but support fascism.
I can make nonfactual statements too.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
guys, come on

left, right who cares!

don't allow words like liberal, conservative, left or right to delimit thought and perspective!

these terms are merely distractions.

What is right is right and what is wrong is wrong.

Simple, does this serve the people's interest or not.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


No, it doesn't serve the peoples interest. The government is the ones that enabled this businesses the ability to still award these people their extravagant bonuses.

Without the gov doing what they did these businesses would have shuddered and died. Trying to justify that somebody's pay should be capped because of something the people didn't want to begin with is the distraction tactic.

They are trying to distract you from the fact that the gov are the enablers and completely at fault.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   


It amazes me how people on left claim they want freedom, but support fascism.


I dislike the right, but I'm not such a huge fan of the left either, really


This is not "fascism" except by the most ridiculous stretch of the imagination.

This is .gov being stuck with the bill for irresponsible business practices.

Apparently, the market is not as magical as we'd like to believe



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
This is not "fascism" except by the most ridiculous stretch of the imagination.


There's a difference between economic fascism and militant fascism.

You are thinking of militant fascism, that's not the only form of it.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
IMO, it goes against Obama/s policy of taxing the rich. If they limit the pay, they owe less taxes.

How does Obama expect to pay for his healthcare if they are setting limits on how much a person can earn?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join