View Poll Results: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

Voters
95. You may not vote on this poll
  • Disagree. Quality CEOs are in short supply. They must be paid more or companies can't survive.

    52 54.74%
  • Agree. Times are tough. CEOs should take pay cuts to help their companies be more profitable.

    43 45.26%
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 76

Thread: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

  1. #21
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyDan View Post
    Weeell, I think the link in the OP a load of socialist, class warfare crap, pal.
    How is it crap? Is it because its socialist? Is everything socialists say or report just "crap"? Or is it because its tough facts that you just dont accept it as fact and play it off as just "crap"? What part about it is "crap"? Why is it "crap"? Can you answer these questions "pal"?


  2. #22
    Guru
    LuckyDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Carrollton, TX
    Last Seen
    05-13-13 @ 11:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,758

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    How is it crap? Is it because its socialist? Is everything socialists say or report just "crap"? Or is it because its tough facts that you just dont accept it as fact and play it off as just "crap"? What part about it is "crap"? Why is it "crap"? Can you answer these questions "pal"?
    See post #7.

    The first line in the article is wrong.

    While US unemployment remains at near-Depression levels and health care, pensions and education are being slashed by all levels of the government, the pay of corporate CEOs is soaring.
    We are not "at or near-Depression level unemployment."

    It's deceptive, too, in that it looks only at companies that made billions - such firms are likely to have been successful.
    The Times report was based on a survey conducted by the executive compensation firm Equilar. The company looked at CEO pay at companies with revenue of $10.78 billion or more.
    I've already posted one example of a CEO whose compensation decreased drastically.

    Then it gets to the heart of the matter, it's thesis: If government is broke, business has no right to be successful.

    These numerical indices of unrestrained self-enrichment by the corporate-financial elite provide the appropriate context for considering the unprecedented wave of budget-cutting taking place across the country. Record budget deficits—the result of depleted tax revenues stemming from the economic crash precipitated by corporate fraud, plus the multi-trillion-dollar bailout of the banks—are being used to justify the gutting of health care, pensions and education as well as pay cuts and attacks on workers’ bargaining rights and the right to strike.
    The whole piece is replete with anti-capitalist buzz words.

    the corporate elite . . .unrestrained self-enrichment . . . corporate fraud . . . the gutting of health care . . . attacks on workers’ bargaining rights and the right to strike. . . a modern-day example of the Big Lie . . . the ruling class . . . historically unprecedented transfer of wealth . . . assault on the working class . . .
    Where is "Workers of the world, unite!" If I read nothing but bilge like this all day, I'd be pissed, too.
    Last edited by LuckyDan; 07-05-11 at 03:49 PM.

  3. #23
    Unnecessary Middleman Bardo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    10-27-11 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    605

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyDan View Post
    We are not "at or near-Depression level unemployment."
    I'd say we're not at depression level unemployment but we're close. These days they measure unemployment by how many people are collecting unemployment benefits. Back in the depression they measured unemployment by counting everyone who was unemployed. Real unemployment is much higher than the 9% or whatever the official number is. Whenever unemployment benefits expire or get slashed the official rate goes down but it doesn't change the real unemployment rate.
    "It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this." Bertrand Russell

  4. #24
    Guru
    LuckyDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Carrollton, TX
    Last Seen
    05-13-13 @ 11:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,758

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by Bardo View Post
    I'd say we're not at depression level unemployment but we're close. These days they measure unemployment by how many people are collecting unemployment benefits. Back in the depression they measured unemployment by counting everyone who was unemployed. Real unemployment is much higher than the 9% or whatever the official number is. Whenever unemployment benefits expire or get slashed the official rate goes down but it doesn't change the real unemployment rate.
    I don't dispute that, but then what is the real rate?

    In 1933, the worst year, the population was 92,950,00, with a labor force of 51,840,000 and 12,830,000 unemployed, for a percentage of 24.75 unemployed

    Unemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

    The May report from BLS has this:

    The number of unemployed persons (13.9 million) and the unemployment rate (9.1
    percent) were essentially unchanged in May. The labor force, at 153.7 million, was
    little changed over the month. (See table A-1.)
    Employment Situation Summary

  5. #25
    Unnecessary Middleman Bardo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    10-27-11 @ 06:07 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    605

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyDan View Post
    I don't dispute that, but then what is the real rate?

    In 1933, the worst year, the population was 92,950,00, with a labor force of 51,840,000 and 12,830,000 unemployed, for a percentage of 24.75 unemployed

    Unemployment Statistics during the Great Depression

    The May report from BLS has this:



    Employment Situation Summary
    It's hard to say, I've seen figures ranging from 16% to 22%. It really depends on how you classify "unemployed" and wether or not this counts the underemployed who are working part time jobs. I assume these people would be counted in the labor force statistics but aren't fully employed.

    Either way, it's not going to be 1933 levels. But even if the real rate is/was 15-16% it would still be on par with the onset of the depression or the years leading up to the war.
    "It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this." Bertrand Russell

  6. #26
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyDan View Post
    See post #7.

    The first line in the article is wrong.
    Well we were at the closest sense the Great Depression...

    And,

    So you disagree with the study done by Equilar that finds there is a 23% gain from 2009?



    We are not "at or near-Depression level unemployment."
    We have been at the closest sense the Great Depression.

    It's deceptive, too, in that it looks only at companies that made billions - such firms are likely to have been successful.
    It looked at all the major corporations and companies, so what? Why does that matter? Its not "deceptive" if it openly tells you that its looking at the major companies and corporations...

    I've already posted one example of a CEO whose compensation decreased drastically.
    One! One!? One!? We should feel so bad for him and give him a huge tax break!

    Then it gets to the heart of the matter, it's thesis: If government is broke, business has no right to be successful.
    Never saw anywhere that it stated or began to state that "business has no right to be successful". Wondering how you got that out of the article or the snipit you posted.




    The whole piece is replete with anti-capitalist buzz words.
    Well it is a socialist article...



    Where is "Workers of the world, unite!" If I read nothing but bilge like this all day, I'd be pissed, too.
    Well maybe you should stop being so content...


  7. #27
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    They should but they wont...the pigs at the trough want moar n moAR and theyve been taking it

  8. #28
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Since CEO pay is almost entirely based on options and incentives, I don't have a problem with it.
    No, for some CEO's this is true for others there are other mechanisms for getting money from the company, e.g. deferred compensation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Pay is determined on the success of the company, specifically book value..
    Mostly true, especially true with pay that can be seen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Now I would have a problem if a company was drowning in red ink and its CEO was getting more and more money, like the banking giants were doing during the FNMA and FHLMC (that's Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for those of you without a degree in finance) days.
    You only mentioned 2, but the list is very long, e.g. Bank of America. Did you have a motive in selecting those two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    However, if a company was going "lean and mean" to propel themselves up, then the CEOs should get a reward for shrewd business practices. The truth is that we were running on a faulty business model for many decades, as GM has taught us in spades..
    Yes, but a division CEO I knew was rewarded regardless of performance. The he would sit with us at times and brag about the new toys, e.g. motorcycle, he just bought.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Besides, with the difficulty involved in being a CEO, they earn the right to demand a lot.
    The same CEO put in fewer hours than most others did. One of his best skills was feigning surprise when things went wrong.

    I posted before: Almost nobody knows how much CEOís are paid. They get money from the company via mechanisms that donít have to even be revealed to the whole board, or to stock holders, or to the government. Some of these techniques have been made illegal, but not enough. One favorite of mine, which is now has to be revealed to the board, is differed pay. Money earned this year but paid to the CEO after he leaves the company. So, what pay are you asking about, the pay we know about or the pay we donít know about? Do you want to be made happy by what youíre told or by what is real? (I had a short conversation with a high level accountant at a large US corporation that confirmed other reports Iíd read.)

  9. #29
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,069

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    it depends on the CEO and on the worker. I, for example, have been promoted twice since the recession started, am doing much better than I was before. It might be good for individual CEO's who wish to send a "we're all in this together" message to reduce their own pay (work for a dollar a year or something as Steve Jobs does); and/or simply take stock in lieu of cash. But that is up to the individual company negotiating with the CEO and the worker.

  10. #30
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,749

    Re: With workers cutting back, wealthy CEOs should cut back too. Agree/disagree

    I agree, CEOs should take cuts as well, in fact everyone should. That said though, most of the money will be saved at the bottom, simply due to the large number of workers there. Even if you cut a few million dollars from the CEO salary, it's still going to be a drop in the bucket compared to cutting the wages of thousand of workers.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •