Comments (15) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   Ken Warren said, 29 days ago

   When you can set your own salary the answer to the question “How Much Is To Much?” is “To Much Is Never Enough!”

2. 

   nomad2112 said, 29 days ago

   ^ Are you just jealous? CEO salaries have about as much to do with the average person’s life as does major league ball players salaries.

3. 

   motivemagus said, 29 days ago

   But nomad, the guys paying themselves bonuses with tax money because they failed in their job deserve to get whacked. As far as I am concerned, if you took TARP money, instead of living by the free market you claim to love, then you open yourself up to government intervention.

4. 

   comYics said, 29 days ago

   So obvious and so many jokes made about it, but what is actually being done about it?

5. 

   believecommonsense said, 29 days ago

   Perhaps Wall St. and the top echelon of the financial sector would benefit from a brain drain.

6. 

   M Henri Day said, 28 days ago

   Believecommonsense, are you intimating that financial sector executives would benefit from a hydrocephalus shunt ? I’m not certain that that is the case, but those who permit these people to siphon off so much of the economy - not only in the United States, but in the world as a whole - may very well be in need of some sort of medical procedure ; that is, as soon as a cure for stupidity is devised. Alas, we shall probably have to wait for that good five-cent cigar ; Schiller’s maxim that Gegen der Dummheit kämpfen die Götter selbst vergebens still holds true….

   Henri

7. 

   scottfreitas said, 28 days ago

   This is the one topic where I keep lining up with the Leftie posters.

   No business is too big too fail; any business which takes government money can suffer the wrath of the idiot politicians its lobbyists convinced to bail them out; let the CEOs bail en masse, no one cares, no one will miss them, and your average Joe the Plumber is more likely to make better decisions than they are, so stop trying to act like bloated salaries = wise, benevolent bosses. They DON’T.

   Why?

   Because most business colleges today suck at producing good businessmen to roughly the same degree modern teaching colleges fail to produce good teachers (now I’m probably pissing the lefties off, oh well, boo hoo).

   This is what the Left misses: much of what we call “education” today isn’t the solution, it is the PROBLEM.

8. 

   nomad2112 said, 28 days ago

   motivemagus, This administration isn’t “wacking” just the ones who “failed in there jobs” they are indiscriminately punishing anyone they see fit. That is tyranny and nothing else.

9. 

   4uk4ata said, 27 days ago

   Nomad, as far as I know the ones that would supposedly get “wacking” are the execs who a) took bailout funds, b) haven’t paid them back yet, and c) give themselves bonuses.

   No sane lender, public or private, should tolerate this from people who owe them money. Had the companies not taken public funds or paid them back in full, I could live with it. This, however, is repulsive. If they had done so well to give bonuses, why didn’t they pay their debts first?

10. 

    motivemagus said, 27 days ago

    nomad, quite the opposite, as I understand it. They are picking on companies that took major government money, and not that many, considering how many took TARP funding (I know quite a few). If anything, they’re not going far enough. They’re trying to do a few symbolic ones, and, frankly, it isn’t working.
    scott, I tend to agree with you on business schools, but mostly because their training is incomplete. Too much on analysis, not enough on leading people. Some days I wish I had an MBA, some days I thank God I don’t…

11. 

    nomad2112 said, 27 days ago

    Thanks motivemagus, I did a little more home work on this topic and it looks like you are correct.

    This and several other ‘toons and some of the MSN are misleading in their statements.

12. 

    motivemagus said, 27 days ago

    Thank you, nomad. And I agree – some of these cartoonists aren’t doing their homework!

13. 

    churchillwasright said, 27 days ago

    G.E. took tarp funds, but as far as I know, no one is looking at their execs salaries. Why is this? (rhetorical question)

14. 

    4uk4ata said, 26 days ago

    How much is the head honcho of GE making, church?

15. 

    churchillwasright said, 26 days ago

    According to Forbes, Immelt made 12.6mil in 2005, but

    “According to Reuters [2/18/2009], “Jeff Immelt has waived his right to a bonus and performance-based pay that would have netted him more than $12 million in cash.” The GE board approved that action. Immelt’s salary will stay where it is at $3.3 million.

    “The move is a smart one, at least from the standpoint of public relations and shareholder sentiment. GE’s shares have dropped from a 52-week high of $38.52 to under $11, near a period low. Investors are concerned that the company will lose its “Aaa” rating or have to cut its dividend. Immelt has said he will fight to keep both intact.”

    On the other hand “GE is now down roughly 80% since September 2001 when Immelt took over.” [3/09]

    Note all the publications called this his 2008 Bonus.This had nothing to do with TARP. They fired the CEO of Home Depot when his company lost 20%. He’s lucky he’s still employed. I can’t find anything about his 2009 Bonus.

    Also, I’m not a financial guru, so I don’t know how they structure salaries like this, ie stocks and such.

    So, to sum up, I have no idea. But I do know he’s a part of the Obama administration, ownes NBC, GE Capital, Energy, Medical, Oil and Gas, Lighting, etc. (see the list here, took tarp funds, and his name is never mentioned by the Pay Tsar, who I assume is looking at 2009 Bonuses, not 2008.