Mega-Million Dollar CEO Payouts

reply to post by Maxmars


I'm the first person to say that the banking system is a worthless sector that adds nothing to society.

However I will not criticize the CEOs themselves, who are nothing but extremely highly paid employees.

It is the sector and industry that is worthless, not the CEOs.

If you must rail against something, then rail against the industry.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


So in essence, don't hate the player, hate the game? I agree with that 100%, but you have to admit... Some of these players make it real easy to hate them.

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
Jelousy is an evil mistress.

You folks hate these CEOs simple because you dont command the same respect or pay that they can.

It isnt the fault of the CEOs that they are paid this much, its institutional failure.

It has nothing to do with jealousy, or hatred, it's about them being unethical (IMO).


I would much rather have the respect that i have right now. Respect that i have EARNED from my coworkers, bosses, friends, family,etc because i am a damn good worker and how i live my life. You can't command respect it is earned, and they don't command respect, if they command anything it's fear simply because they are so wealthy and powerful.


It is partly their fault, they don't have to accept that kind of pay. During one of my business classes we read about a CEO that was given a substantial raise and what she did was to tell them to take that raise and distribute it equally amongst the employees, now that's a CEO that has my respect.

I am not jealous of, nor do i hate them, i just think that it's wrong that they make this much money while the workers on the lower levels don't even make enough to support their families, and most don't have decent or any health insurance. I think it's a disgrace that these people make that kind of money while many firefighters, police officers, and teachers have to take a second job to make ends meet.

Leo wanta 43 trillion dollars, Haliburton billions of dollars in oil contracts, goldman sacks on the review board of the money being spent. Getting congress to bail out the all the money you all stold priceless there are some things money cant buy and for everything else there's sell outs on wallstreet.

Maybe we should come up with a new mastercard with pictures of ceo's on it they can make there own commericals like they do now.

Falcon

Here's a question for the envious folk in this thread. Why don't you start your own business and become successful like these guys?

Or even easier become educated enough and valuable enough to run these companies for them.

And then when you become rich and successful we can all hate you because you make more money than us poo poo folk.

Give me a break

reply to post by Cool Hand Luke


Please understand, I am not ripping on an educated person chasing the "American dream". I'm ripping on the guy that cooks the books, employs questionable accounting practices, tubes a company, and then walks with $20,000,000+ in the process.

CHL do you play in the market? Do you have an IRA? If you answered yes to either of those, you are most likely a victim of one of these dirt bags.

Originally posted by Cool Hand Luke
Here's a question for the envious folk in this thread. Why don't you start your own business and become successful like these guys?

Most of these crooks didn't start "their own business". And if you have ever tried to start your own, on average, you won't be a rich man. Having started two of my own over the years, (just sold the last one in June) the first three years are starvation, the only people making money is the government, and they get theirs before you get yours!

[edit on 10/7/2008 by TheRooster]

I find it funny that on those lists of CEO pay. Henry Paulson raked in the single largest yearly earnings with:

2006 Henry Paulson $129,087,000 $34,900,000 $163,987,000

I mean common he was obviously not that good of a CEO from 2004-2006 or they wouldn't be tits up right now. I mean really $129 087 000 salary for 2006. That's excessive and greedy and undeserved.

This is the man that's going to steer you clear of your economic woes! Great choice, no conflict of interest there.

Lehman Bros head took home $300m

The head of failed US investment bank Lehman Brothers has told Congress that he took home about $300m in pay and bonuses over the past eight years.

Richard Fuld, whose firm went bankrupt last month, made the statement during testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The panel is holding its first hearing into the cause of the financial crisis.

It is being held amid renewed market turmoil, with shares plummeting further in Europe and the US.

Committee chairman Henry Waxman opened the hearing by saying the credit freeze threatened the entire economy.

"To restore our economy to health, two steps are necessary," he said. "First, we must identify what went wrong. Then we must enact real reform of our financial markets."

news.bbc.co.uk...

GIVE IT BACK!!!!!!

You have not earnt it.. I do not see you out in all weathers working physically hard. I cannot fathom how many, like yourself, are allowed to 'earn' this terribly ridiculous amount of money...

I fail to see how your intelligence is any different from that of a car mechanic who, not only uses his brain to fault find and rectify problems, but also must use physical labour, and in some cases extreme strength, to solve the vehicles problems.

All people like yourself appear to do to us general public is that your sat in a comfy chair ina plush office on top of some building telling millions of others what to do with their time, money and lives...

It has got to stop.

People want a reform of this system..too damn right they do and it's gotta start with people like Fuld. Kick them out. Re-design this attrocity that is the enslavement of us all. Stop the abuse of power that has blighted these nations for far too long.

Actually the Lehman CEO took home 480 million since 2000 and he ran his company into the ground. He doesn't deserve a fraction of what he was compensated. He used the system to steal wealth - plain and simple. He's a crook in a 10k suit.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by verylowfrequency]

I disagree with all of you. You all seem to hate successful business people. Their salaries are not "unearned", at least no more so than a moron footballer paid $100 million to kick around a piece of inflated leather for 5 years.

Its the game that is broken at the moment. Game theory directly tells us that where there is an avenue for money making, there ambitious people shall embark.

What is wrong with the game at the moment?

1. Fractional Reserve Banking is legal. This is the root of all problems.

2. Bundled derivates mask the risk of subprime

3. Fiat currency

4. Banks' ability to take money and lend it to others at a profit, while gambling depositors money.

5. Merchant banking as a process is where money is made to spin faster (increased liquidity and interbank lending), while the outside layer is sliced off. This inevitably leads to a frenzied situation which can unwind and bring down the entire industrial system.


So show me where these CEOs are directly to blame? You think that their salaries are excessive and unearned? The solution is not to cap their salaries (otherwise they will just take them offshore). Additionally, you must know that these CEOs are really the best of the best... GPA 4.0 from harvard, wharton etc. If there is a game for them to play, they will play it. Take away the game, and they will move to more worthwhile endevours such as business.

In short, I would suggest that all of you consider and read about the evils of fractional reserve banking and fiat currency as opposed to the "unearned" salaries and supposed greed of the CEOs.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


Maybe you missed this story today 44. Lehman sought millions for execs whille seeking aid.

WASHINGTON - The now-bankrupt investment bank Lehman Brothers arranged millions in bonuses for fired executives as it pleaded for a federal lifeline, lawmakers learned Monday, as Congress began investigating what went so wrong on Wall Street to prompt a $700 billion government bailout.

Video Link of 500 million dollar man in hearing

Your company is now bankrupt our economy is in crises, but you get to keep 480 million.

You did well when you company did well and you did well when you company didn't do well. Now you walked away with 500 million and the owners of you company, the stockholders have nothing

That's really the problem these people are gutting companies and running and expect everyone else to pick up the pieces.

[edit on 7-10-2008 by verylowfrequency]

reply to post by 44soulslayer


You seem to be forgetting that these are the same CEO's who helped cause the mess in the first place.

These are the same CEO's who called for deregulation in order to expand their already bloated coffers and manipulate the market by creating paper wealth based on nothing more than a self created, self feeding bubble which has now burst.

These are the same CEO's who were guilty of some extremely creative accounting to hide the mess that they have made and are now (in some cases) under investigation by the FBI.

I don't give a damn how much YOU worship these people, THEY are responsible for this mess, and now that the bottom has fallen out of their paper empires you STILL want to reward them?

EESA does nothing to address the black hole of approx $180 trillion of bank held derivatives - if the banks go down, WE all go down with them, the difference is that they won't get their mansions repossessed, they won't be trying to feed a family on peanuts, they won't be out of a job, despite their incompetence.

In any other walk of life, these people would be sacked for gross misconduct - but you not only want them to keep their jobs, you want them to continue to earn a nice fat bonus for screwing up the worlds banks.

The reason?
GREED.

Right wing money grubbers will always use the same excuses - but at the end of the day these people have been undone by their own greed, and now we are not only expected to bail them out, but to keep paying them a BONUS for messing things up so badly that soon the whole planet will be in a state of financial meltdown.

If ever there was proof that UNFETTERED capitalism doesn't work, this is it.

And yet you still defend the clowns who caused all this.

reply to post by budski


It is a company decision as to how much an employee should be paid. Governmental intervention is not an option.

Yes it was the CEOs fault for this mess we find ourselves in. The solution should be simple : they get fired.

It does seem a bit strange that Fuld et al were given these golden parachutes. It does seem a bit like a captain escaping from a drowning ship.

But what can be done about this in a practical manner?

And for the record I dont worship these CEOs... frankly that was a cheap shot. I respect their core abilities and intelligence, yet I recognise that they were offered an immoral carrot from the industry. They had or possibly have the potential to be great leaders in business and other fields. I just regret that they went into the banking profession, which is inherently useless.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


My apologies, but that's how it came across - sorry for any offense for my mistake

Let's not forget that these same institutions poured millions into the campaign of bush,and when he was elected, used this as a lever for deregulation.

Bush happily complied, and the result is what we see today - they built huge "empires" based on worthless paper transactions, andkilled the golden goose many times over.

The fact is, that with people this greedy, there HAS to be regulation.

Governments got rid of regulations and they cashed in to the detriment of everyone except themselves.

And now Paulson wants to put the same people in charge of the $700 billion - all that'll happen is that they will use it as another way to bloat their bank accounts.

reply to post by budski


I view regulation in an entirely different light.

While some suggest capping executive pay, dictating what loans can be made etc; I consider such an approach to be over interfering.

What I would like to see is a banking code or constitution, where the banking industry is only allowed to perform the base functions of a bank. That is they should be allowed to take depositors money, lend it out to others carefully and give interest to their depositors while turning a profit themselves.

I would outlaw directly any of this paper trading wizardry of derivative bundling, exotics etc.

Banks should only exist to safeguard money while lending money out to those who need credit. In short, they should ONLY be the reputable middleman for liquidity exchange amongst individuals.

As such I dont believe in regulating certain banking functions, I believe in outlawing them wholesale. After all, I cant see any added value to society from those functions.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


And therein lies the problem - both bush and mccain are great believers in deregulation and giving a free hand to banks to do as they will.

The myth of drip down economics was perhaps one of the greatest fallacies of our time (or maybe any other) and this is one of the things that has caused this mess.

The probelm is that banks are no longer seen as lending/saving institutions, they are now seen as money making entities, and this is where capitalism has gone mad.

Not EVERYTHING should be about how much money an organisation can make some things are to important to society to be allowed to run wild.

There is something still to be said for venture capital, because that helps create business and real, tangible wealth - but high street banks should not be in the business of high risk ventures. As you rightly say, they should have limited functions.

The drip down economics should become a form of drip UP economics, with wealth being created at the lower levels and spreading up through the economy, something which would also make the market a fairer place and would stop the insane pursuit of massive wealth by unscrupulous people/institutions etc - a form of socialist capitalism if you will.

Just to be clear, I am NOT advocating communist ideals, but I am saying that capitalism can be more of a level playing field than it has been for many years with the formation and regulation of responsible entities who practice responsible capitalism - and in this I also advocate corporate responsibility in all area's.

reply to post by budski


Im not sure if the current system can be called capitalism. It is much closer to Keynesian moderate interventionism. However the sad thing is that they are intervening the the wrong areas.

Capitalism would never allow the creation of wealth from thin air. There must be some value added. There is a difference between intangible asset creation (for example building a brand name), and straight outright fabricating money.

Adam Smith would have cried if he saw this current situation. This is not capitalism, and therein lies the problem. For capitalism to work, we need sound money. Otherwise it descends into a farce (ie where it is at the moment).

In short, I agree with you. But its my opinion that the present situation is nowhere near capitalism.

reply to post by 44soulslayer


That's another problem altogether - people have been conditioned in the west to view our system as capitalism, when as you rightly point out, it more closely resembles Keynesianism, especially in the area of state intervention.

It's also a problem that the west has largely lost its manufacturing base (in comparison to a few years back) and is now largely service driven, with the effect that the wealth created is less tangible, and makes money flow in the wrong direction.

In order to have a truly sound economic base, the west must move back towards a mixture of goods and services - but while we live in a throw away society, this isn't going to happen.

reply to post by budski


I believe the future is not so much in physical creation and wealth addition. While manufacturing is important, ultimately it does not provide anything much material posessions.

What I would like to envisage for the future is a de-centralised form of intertwined business and research. I would like to see research groups in their respective areas of science, technology, farming, arts etc etc innovate and create; and then create wealth for themselves and others by commercialising their innovations/ creations/ products.

I dont know if this will ever come to pass, but I sure hope it will