Umm, for thinking the shareholders should not suffer losing money while the
GM Chief is paid an insane amount of money?
How did you get "socialist democrat" from thinking the shareholders should
be treated right?
Folks, above, I would like you observe what it is like to be brainwashed by
one of the various political sides. Anytime a company gets questioned about
ethics, there is always an extreme conservative who thinks it is socialist
to suggest a company have such.
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 01:48:17 +0000, Don't Taze Me, Bro! wrote:
It's a fact of life, Junior. Sometimes shareholders lose money. That's
the way the stock market and the free enterprise system works. As for the
CEO making an "insane" amount of money... well, it's certainly more than
other GM employees make, but that's (also) how things work. Those in
charge get paid more. Simple fact of life. Perhaps if you had more
education, you could make some money, yourself!
Because your post is a textbook example of Lib-think, which is thinly
disguised socialism, where you believe everyone should make the same
income, and share everything amongst each other equally. That isn't how
it works here in the USA, thank god. Go visit the (former) East Bloc if
you'd like to see how well that system works.
Wrong. It's socialist to complain that the boss makes more than you do.
Get a clue, and stay in school, boy. Someday maybe you'll be a CEO....
well, that's not too likely, but perhaps you can get out of the fast food
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".
Now filtering out all posts originating from Google Groups.
I have a stressful job, too. And a Master's. I make .01 percent of that
and if I were in charge of a division that lost that kind of money, I'd
be out on my ass in a heartbeat. Stressful job, yeah right.
Here is a fact for you. Rick Wagoner, CEO of GM got total
compensation last year of over $14 million. That is more than the
compensation of the CEO and the 36 board members of Honda Motor
Company combined. Honda had record sales last month. How is GM
doing? Oh, that's right, the death spiral thing - never mind.
Anyway, US executives are paid obscene amounts of money not just in
comparison to "other employees," but compared to their foreign
counterparts. Hard to see the value here. The truth is that American
companies are - more and more - being run for the benefit of the
executives rather than the stockholders or, god forbid, the mainstream
If you read my post I did not say it was any business of the governments,
and in fact I don't think it should be. However, the fact remains, that exec
salaries are out of line with the competition. I know that sounds like a
liberal rant, but in this case it is just the facts. The board should clean
house and the stockholders should vote with their wallets.
the BOD of many companies is like a elite club;they often serve on several
companies BODs,and I think they select who can be elected to the BODs.(the
choices) So,the shareholders don't really get a lot of say in the
matter,and the execs get to give each other huge salaries and
bonuses,without regard to actual exec performance as shown by stock price
It's seems like a vicious circle.
But the fact remains that many people(socialists) DO think the gov't should
step in and cap exec salaries.
A law against it? Hell no. I think the tax tables need to be
adjusted. And when he tries to pass on this tremendous wealth to
whatever progeny might share his genetic makeup, that transfer should
be heavily taxed. If the company then wants to make a major
contribution (albeit indirect) to the US Treasury, they can knock
And unions are not run for the benefit of the company.
Tell that to the GM shareholders. I bet not 0.1% of them make as much
Ah,so everybody DOESNT get treated equally under the law.
If you work smarter,earn more,you get taxed at higher rates as punishment.
DOUBLE taxation? The guy's income was taxed once,and he should be able to
pass on his private property(assets) to his progeny without being taxed
on the same income again.
You must be a Socialist-Communist;everything is property of the State.
Or simply jealous of those who do better than you,and want government to
strip them of their earnings and life's accumulations.
But it is STILL *THEIR* decision,not the US Government.
Not in a non-Communist society.
He is taxed the same as everyone else. If I make $13 million this
year, I will pay the same tax he does.
If you mean the tax is progressive, you are right. It always has
Nope. It isn't the money being taxed, it is the transaction. If I
earn a dollar, I pay tax on it. If I pay the dollar to the plumber,
he gets taxed on it. If he buys groceries with it, the store pays
taxes on the profits. Daddy Richbucks gets taxed when he earns a
dollar. Then he passes it on to, perhaps, his no-good kid who never
worked a day in his life. Now if I had to pay tax and the plumber had
to pay tax and the grocer had to pay tax and even Daddy Richbucks had
to pay tax, why should the no-good kid have to pay tax?
You must be an anarchist if you believe the state has no just
authority to collect taxes.
If you are talking about estate taxes, I would point out that the
person who had the earnings and life savings is dead. The only just
thing would be to fill their yacht with the cash and the body, set it
on fire, and push it out to sea.
As for being jealous, no I am not jealous. I am angry at the super
rich who use their power to rape this country.
Like I said, I wouldn't dream of stopping them from pushing his salary
well into the 80% bracket.
I usually stay away from Usenet politics, but here I must weigh in.
If you have a problem with the current state of corporate governance, I
have two terms for you to look up and study:
the Williams Act of 1968, and
the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993.
There are other bad laws also to blame, but these two are the chief modern
The problem here is not the machinations of ordinary individuals in their
ordinary course of life, but those of ordinary individuals able to exercise
state power over those who lack it.
Often the cure for a political disease is far worse than the disease that
prompted the cure.
So? If the decisions of the board are bad for the company, the
company goes out of business. Tough shit. Someone else will take
their place, and likely be better run. The shareholders have noone
but themselves to blame. And the workers will just have to find new
jobs. It happens to most of us at some point...
And which lord are you talking about? Personally, I don't answer to
one, so I have none to defame... Not that I care about your personal
religious choices, but don't assume that everyone you are talking to
Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
joe at hits - buffalo dot com
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.