Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page:  « First  ‹ Previous  1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
martman1
retired business owner
11:37 AM on 04/18/2013
Too bad each shareholder doesn't get one vote as opposed to each share getting one vote. That would solve this particular problem in a hurry. Obviously that would never happen because the employees would each buy a share and vote for higher wages..........hopefully tempered with an eye on long term profitability.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alan Rudo
Forgive enemies; nothing annoys them more
12:34 PM on 04/18/2013
Some companies do have that type of stock vote, one vote per shareholder. Just not that many, and personally, I think those who have significant investment in the company should have a larger say, especially if they had taken risk in it's formation.
martman1
retired business owner
02:56 PM on 04/18/2013
I pretty much agree with you. I was thinking more along the lines of the large shareholders that have purchased stock at the IPO or later.
photo
SeriesSeven
Progressivism is a disease.
12:44 PM on 04/18/2013
Voting methods are determined by the articles of incorporation and are different for each company. If you want to start a company that has the proxy voting scheme that you've outlined...go ahead. Stop sticking your fat nose in other people's business when it doesn't affect you.
martman1
retired business owner
02:52 PM on 04/18/2013
I thought it was interesting to think about..........why the bad mood?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TAZinTally
11:10 AM on 04/18/2013
Who decides these paychecks? I think the stockholders are not helping themselves. The companies would be even more profitable if that money went back in the pot to pay dividends.
11:49 AM on 04/18/2013
Corporate Governance boards.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stewart Goss
Collectivism leads to mass poverty
11:09 AM on 04/18/2013
Redistribution can only occur after an initial distribution, the author of this article is cleverly trying to redefine the terminology, interesting propaganda technique.

CEO compensation is largely driven by stock performance. Furthermore liberals never do the actual math to figure out how much pay would accrue to the employees if the CEO's took a large cut. I did, with one company, it was $3 a pay period.
11:52 AM on 04/18/2013
Read the article. CEO compensation has nothing to do with stock performance. It has been well documented over and over that CEOs of under performing companies still get big raises.

Sell it somewhere else because that dog won't hunt.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justin Bowen
04:25 PM on 04/18/2013
You know why I love the internet? It's because information is a few keystrokes away.

Want to know who the most highly-paid CEOs are and the breakdown of their compensation package? Go here:

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2012/12/ceo-compensation-12_rank.html

Want to know the performance of the stocks of those companies? Go here:
http://www.morningstar.com/

The fact is, most highly-paid CEO's pay DOES come from stocks. Thus, the size of their compensation in any given year DOES depend on how well the stock performs. Low-performing stock = low stock gains. It's simple math. We can argue all day about financial and political manipulation of stock prices, but in the end, when a CEO's pay is dependent upon stock performance - which is the preferred method of compensation of executives due to tax laws that favor performance-based pay over straight salary - it IS the price of the stock that determines the size of the compensation package.

It's very simple multiplication. One million shares of X company's stock at $50/share equals $50 million. One million shares of X company's stock at $100/share equals $100 million. Stock price goes up, CEO gets paid more. So, CEO ensures that stock price goes up. Bing bang boom.
photo
Arawn
For a year and a day.
12:20 PM on 04/18/2013
except that it has nothing to do with stock performance, read the article. CEOs from failing companies got millions of dollars even as the company tanks or gets bailed out with tax money.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stewart Goss
Collectivism leads to mass poverty
02:56 PM on 04/18/2013
A lot of CEO's get stock options, so yes, it does have a lot to do with it.
photo
4eva
.-.. --- ...- . --..-- / -. --- - / .... .- - .
02:57 PM on 04/18/2013
They should not be getting bailouts.
Shareholders should share the risk
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:06 AM on 04/18/2013
Ummm... the only way a CEO's pay comes out of my pocket is if I buy his company's product or service. Or if the taxes I pay are used to bailout his failing company.

To the extent the author supports ending taxpayer funded bailouts, I agree.

To the extent he supports interfering in the individual's right to contract for her own labor, take a hike.
11:54 AM on 04/18/2013
LMOL failed at reading comprehension.....
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
01:38 PM on 04/18/2013
Well, keep trying. It's bound to improve at some point....
photo
Arawn
For a year and a day.
12:22 PM on 04/18/2013
any state with right to work laws interferes with an individuals right to contract by banning companies from having exclusive contracts with unions. so unless you support removing all of those laws you have no leg to stand on.
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
01:40 PM on 04/18/2013
Agree- so do states that allow closed shop laws & the Federal gov't via the Wagner Act, the Minimum Wage law, the PPACA, OSHA, and a host of other regulatory bodies....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:58 AM on 04/18/2013
Every time a mutual fund tries to sell me something, I ask what they are doing about excessive executive pay. Silence is the answer and I of course don't buy.
photo
SeriesSeven
Progressivism is a disease.
12:46 PM on 04/18/2013
Good, you're making your own decision as to your preferences in the marketplace. Now step aside and let everyone else do the same. Stop whining about the decisions that everyone else is making.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:04 PM on 04/18/2013
Destructive practices need to be stopped.  Some persuasion is needed so people make informed decisions.  I guess you would prefer ignorance.  
10:49 AM on 04/18/2013
How about the intentionally bankrupting companies so they can steal the company?
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:07 AM on 04/18/2013
How does that work?
11:54 AM on 04/18/2013
LMOL really? Time for a nap...
12:13 PM on 04/18/2013
Take a look at Bain Capital..... They mastered the process....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justin Bowen
10:36 AM on 04/18/2013
First of all, even IF the vast majority of the compensation packages provided to CEOs seized and distributed to the rest of the employees, those employees would see their paychecks rise by less than 10%. This idea that the average employee's monthly pay would rise dramatically is utterly ridiculous.

Second, it was CONGRESS who precipitated the dramatic rise in executive compensation. In the years leading up to 1993, lobbyists - and subsequently CONGRESS - whined and moaned about the yearly SALARY of CEOs and other executives. Companies were writing off their salaries of executives as business expenses.

So what did Congress do? It changed the tax laws (via the section 162(m) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 to limit the write-off of executive pay to $1 million each and instead provided favorable tax treatment of other forms of compensation - e.g. stock options - to encourage companies to compensate executives in a way that, at the time, was more politically palatable.

It was not the free market or anything even CLOSE to the free market that caused this "problem". It was liberal lobbyists and the congressmen and congresswomen whom they bought. And now, you all want Congress to once again change the tax laws to "encourage" companies to change how they compensate executives because you believe that you can control outcomes. At what point are you going to realize that you don't?
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:08 AM on 04/18/2013
Please don't cloud emotional demagoguing with a recitation of the facts....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stewart Goss
Collectivism leads to mass poverty
11:10 AM on 04/18/2013
Not even 10%. Do the calculation on a company like Walmart, tens of millions in cuts to CEO pay are a drop in the bucket when you have millions of employees.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Justin Bowen
04:29 PM on 04/18/2013
I actually did the math with UnitedHealth Group for 2011, which tends to rub whiny leftists the wrong way for some odd reason. If all of Stephen Hemsley's $98 million in stocks was evenly divvied up between the other 133,000 employees, each employee would see an increase in his or her salary of 0.9% (that's 9/10 of 1% for the illiterate out there) - and that's BEFORE the government gets its hands on that money.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mozartssister
10:31 AM on 04/18/2013
A little enlightenment, in the meantime, about what's going on at the opposite end of the spectrum. Good stats especially on page 2:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505123_162-57579485/in-retail-life-on-the-job-often-leads-to-a-dead-end/

58% of new jobs created in the last four years are low-wage, low-end jobs that are, as Sherter says, "a pathway straight to poverty." Working conditions--unpaid demands on time/availability--make it increasingly harder for people to arrange for child care, go to school, to "better" themselves . . .
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:10 AM on 04/18/2013
Hmmm....too bad the POTUS and the Left keep demonizing capitalism and the investing class. Perhaps they'd not be so reticent to invest in American business and entrepreneurial ventures these days....
12:30 PM on 04/18/2013
I'm sorry but the Investing Class has been profiteering since the Reagan era and IMO no longer deserve the 'special' treatment that they have so enjoyed at the expense to the working class, the environment, innovation, energy independence, national transportation infrastructure, the GNP and our collective future. This is no longer a 'right' verses 'left' issue!!!... it is economic Tyranny vs economic Freedom.... We are a consumer based society... without a strong 'consumer class aka working class' we will simply run out of ways to make those 'required' strong quarterly profits that the share holders so rightiously demand....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wayne Caswell
Consumer Advocate & Founder of Modern Health Talk
10:19 AM on 04/18/2013
CEOs have a legal responsibility to serve shareholders, but as far as I know, there are still just two basic ways to increase profit -- with higher revenue or lower expenses. Unfortunately, too many of today's CEOs have learned from each other, that it's much easier to cut the largest expense line item, HR, than to develop new markets and products and actually compete for more business.
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:11 AM on 04/18/2013
If they cut costs, doesn't that automatically make them more competitive, especially regarding investment returns?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wayne Caswell
Consumer Advocate & Founder of Modern Health Talk
12:18 PM on 04/18/2013
Cutting costs can increase profit in the short term but has limits and often limits growth in the long term. Increasing revenue by developing new markets, products & services is much harder but has no limits and is much more strategic long term. So, I'd never pay a CEO the big bucks to go the simple route, especially if it undermines the organization's long term profitability.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vipersdad
02:57 PM on 04/18/2013
no it does not.

having products people want to buy makes them more competitive.

history is repleat with examples of companies who cost-cut themselves in to oblivion.

innovation is frequently devalued.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Roy Ellefson
11:38 AM on 04/18/2013
I don't believe their fiduciary responsibilities are legislated to be solely for their shareholders...that's a myth. Some (few) enlightened CEOs recognize that their responsibility is not only to their shareholders but also to their employees, the communities in which they do business, essentially the stakeholders in the corporation. The sooner we move away from the myth of total legal responsibility to shareholders the better.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wayne Caswell
Consumer Advocate & Founder of Modern Health Talk
12:24 PM on 04/18/2013
I recommend that you watch "The Corporation" (on YouTube in 23 chapters at www.youtube.com/user/machbar). It's Canada's most successful documentary EVER, winning 26 international awards and 10 audience choice awards. The film is based on the book, "The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power," by Joel Bakan.
10:17 AM on 04/18/2013
Sigh, but I bet anything you ALL support free trade, NAFTA, work visas like H1B, student visas, liberal immigration (the maximum wage law), endless corporate welfare, and limitation on liability for corporations ( a well understood moral hazard). So don't blame the rich or DC. YOU all support this when you support things like trade with communist slave labor China, work visas, and amnesty for illegals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stewart Goss
Collectivism leads to mass poverty
11:13 AM on 04/18/2013
So the employees of Chinese firms are their legal property?

A slave is someone bound by force to serve, interesting how you manipulate the definition of the word.
12:22 PM on 04/18/2013
Stewart_Goss, so you are now a defender of communist China?! Hilarious!
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:23 AM on 04/18/2013
Why is free trade wrong? Why is lowering barriers to free trade (like NAFTA) wrong?

Why is setting up barriers to the free movement of peaceful human beings right?

Agree that corporate "welfare" is indeed wrong - what's your answer to stop it?

How do you expect investment to grow without a limit on liability to funds invested? Criminal acts are not protected by the corporate veil, so why penalize honest investors?

I've been importing from China for over 20 years; "slave-labor", prison labor and child labor are not the norm.
12:16 PM on 04/18/2013
John_Galt2, free trade is wrong for many reasons. When we have trade with communist dictatorships we are endorsing slavery. Also we used to tax imports to fund government but now we tax workers...for working.

There are many other obvious reasons. And if you really believe in free trade then end all taxes on workers first. Don't tax me to pay for R
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sagrimore
They can never take my panache
10:12 AM on 04/18/2013
"There is no single policy that would reverse this enormous upward redistribution of income."

Here is one way:

Eliminate corporate immunity for corporate executives and officers who make more than $5 million per year in compensation. Allow them to be sued personally by people who are harmed by their corporations and by shareholders who want to recover fines and judgements paid out by the corporation for wrongdoing on their watches.

Conservatives LOVE to talk about "personal responsibility". Well, an executive who makes $13,700 per day ($16,500 per day if they take Sundays off) SHOULD be held responsible for the actions of everyone under them.
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:24 AM on 04/18/2013
Would you recommend the same treatment for non-CEOs?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sagrimore
They can never take my panache
07:12 AM on 04/19/2013
I wrote that "corporate executives and officers" should be able to be held responsible for their decisions. I intended that CEOs, CFOs, chairmen of boards, directors, company presidents, managers and vice presidents should be included if they have the power to make independent decisions on corporate policy.
photo
SeriesSeven
Progressivism is a disease.
12:55 PM on 04/18/2013
Good, then also allow the public to sue union members responsible for manufacturing defects. Do you also think that's appropriate? Or are you just a envious hypocrite?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vipersdad
05:04 PM on 04/18/2013
If Union members make decisions around manufacturing practices or materials that lead to unsafe or poor quality products and cause harm either financially or physically, then yes - fair is fair.

in many cases, union members are part of the decision-chain and should be accountable.

in other cases, union workers are only cogs in a wheel and do not make decisions that affect product quality.

but to your point - yes - there should be personal accountability across the board.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sagrimore
They can never take my panache
07:43 AM on 04/19/2013
You managed to miss both the point of the article and of my comment.

The article discussed out-of-control executive compensation that comes, in large part, from executives essentially setting their own compensation and receiving their compensation whether they do a good job or not.

What I offered in my comment was a way to provide disincentives to excessive compensation which also holds corporate policymakers accountable when their decisions go wrong. I was thinking of particular instances like BP executives who, allegedly, ignored engineers' warnings and proceeded with drilling on the Deepwater Horizon platform, or executives at Wall Street financial corporations that will have to pay large fines for violating laws or regulations.

You and the "news" providers you listen to inside the conservative media bubble may not realize this, but union members, almost by definition don't set corporate policy. They don't approve product design or manufacturing methods. They don't set productivity targets. And they don't set procedures for quality control.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Wayne Caswell
Consumer Advocate & Founder of Modern Health Talk
10:04 AM on 04/18/2013
Watch the documentary, The Corporation, on YouTube in 23 chapters at http://m.youtube.com/user/machbar
PROGRESSISGOOD
Without Economic Justice, There Is No Justice!
10:02 AM on 04/18/2013
Why doesn't the free market take care of this obscenity. There are over 200 million American adults who would love to have one of the fortune 500 CEO positions. That should drive the pay down dramatically.

If you believe these CEO's have some special knowledge or skill that makes them unnique; then, you have never worked in Corporate America.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stewart Goss
Collectivism leads to mass poverty
11:15 AM on 04/18/2013
They have extremely specialized knowledge and skills.

Put a clerk in their job and he/she wouldn't even have the vocabulary to understand a boardroom conversation.

Always easy when you're on the outside.
11:58 AM on 04/18/2013
Oh please, the clerks in my last firm WROTE the memos from the bosses - I don't mean retyped, wrote.
When you are discussing an owner/operator, I get it. But what I've found is those CEOs generally understand the concept of a good workforce and have pay and/or benefits that compensate that. I get a really nice big bonus for somehow who truly turns a company around, not just ekes out another 2% due to a RIF.
But most of today's US CEOs are simply people with great connections due to going to Harvard or Yale MBA because their dads did. And many of them are not worth the paper their degree was printed on.
12:20 PM on 04/18/2013
Stewart_Goss, corporations are a product of government. These are NOT private businesses.

I'm an engineer and no executive could do what I do yet they feel fine lobbying congress for more work visas. Work visas are command economic policies! So your campions favor state capitalism.
photo
John Galt2
My life is my own...
11:25 AM on 04/18/2013
"If you believe these CEO's have some special knowledge or skill that makes them unnique; then, you have never worked in Corporate America."

So you are saying that Steven Jobs was just another money-sucker, who provided no special value to Apple worthy of a big paycheck?

On what grounds?
12:27 PM on 04/18/2013
You are missing the point! Corporations are NOT private businesses. Corporations lobby and whine and cry to the government for work visas, student visas, amnesty for illegals, welfare, and all sorts of special deals. And just look at limited liability. Limitations on liability shield corporations from responsibility. How is that moral or just?
PROGRESSISGOOD
Without Economic Justice, There Is No Justice!
12:59 PM on 04/18/2013
On the grounds that everyone who works at Apple despised him.
10:01 AM on 04/18/2013
Outsource CEOs' jobs to China for a fraction of the cost.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
windy33
10:01 AM on 04/18/2013
in the end god will remedy this problem. those that have the most kick those that have the least. not gods will at all. they will suffer in due time, when they meet their maker
10:58 AM on 04/18/2013
I'm sure that the folks out there who have been unemployed for months (or years) through no fault of their own will find this oh so very comforting. Of course it would be better if God chipped in a little for that mortgage that's about to go into default.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stewart Goss
Collectivism leads to mass poverty
11:16 AM on 04/18/2013
Time for the mystics to chime in.