Markstein shows well executives for what they are, parasites. Not any better than those “welfare queens” in poor neighborhoods the republican croud always talks about, except, they fraud for millions EACH. (Is there ever a republican that went in a poor neighborhood anyway)
Corosive Frog–
No, not all executives are parasites. Not even most of them. I appraise them. Most of them are extremely smart (the average exec has a 115 IQ) and unbelievably hardworking in a white-collar sense (they don’t get days off, and virtually all their socializing is usually for business purposes as well). Many of them have very high integrity – they act on their beliefs. Their beliefs may not be the same as yours or mine, but that doesn’t make them unethical. A number of my clients are extremely anxious to include “integrity” in the list of things we assess on their own senior people and outsiders we recruit, if only for the very practical reason that a dishonest CEO brings shame and bad business down upon the whole company.
Oh, yes, and numerous studies have shown that the difference between a good CEO and a mediocre one is often the difference between a company making money and losing it. We need better selection and development of CEOs, and we need to make sure their compensation isn’t getting out of hand, but they are needed to run the businesses as well.
“We need better selection and development of CEOs, and we need to make sure their compensation isn’t getting out of hand, but they are needed to run the businesses as well.”
This was the only objection I had to your post. It is not up to “us” to decide what a CEO is paid or the responsibilties he has, it is the decision of the company that hires him. If they make a bad choice they will learn from their mistakes hardly something the government has ever done yet.
Bob, if “we” don’t like what a company is doing and don’t buy their product/service then aren’t “we” determining -indirectly- what the CEO will get paid?
motivemagus,
I too believe that there are CEOs with principals out there, BUT, why in H#LL they hide their principals all during these periods of melt down, and for the past 20 yrs or so, and especially the last 8 years?
In this case they are either against the greedy, or with them.
CBob– I agree with you. I kind of meant “we” in the sense of “we the people.” In my business, we actually help companies do just that.
However, it is also true that you get what you measure. The problem with the totally free market is it allows for spiking milk with melamine for short-term profits, or riding a housing bubble, as long as you get out in time – a bet too many people would make.
“Bob, if “we” don’t like what a company is doing and don’t buy their product/service then aren’t “we” determining -indirectly- what the CEO will get paid?”
That’s exactly what the free market does. If the company is a bad one the consumer responds and that company fails we don’t need government to stick it’s big nose in.
CBob–it may be a matter of acceptable risk, and costs and benefits across time. Personally, I would prefer not to find out about the latest version of thalidomide (for example) by having ten thousand babies born without arms and then the company goes out of business eventually after fighting it out in court for ten more years. What government can provide is some rigor in preventing problems that are bound to happen without adult supervision. Hence the success of things like the USDA (until the Republicans cut it), the Clean Air and Water Acts (ditto), the FDA, and, let’s not forget, the Interstate Highway system, which transformed the country but was built for defense purposes – a project clearly too large for the individual taxpayer or the state. I realize this is the classic liberal position that government has its uses, but i think the case is pretty strong.
dhleaky over 15 years ago
Those vapors coming from the Whitehouse are stench.
lalas over 15 years ago
Terrible drawing but I think it’s actually the Capitol not the White House.
CorosiveFrog Premium Member over 15 years ago
Markstein shows well executives for what they are, parasites. Not any better than those “welfare queens” in poor neighborhoods the republican croud always talks about, except, they fraud for millions EACH. (Is there ever a republican that went in a poor neighborhood anyway)
Alexus_The_Great over 15 years ago
Excellent!
and YES it is Capitol…
Motivemagus over 15 years ago
Corosive Frog– No, not all executives are parasites. Not even most of them. I appraise them. Most of them are extremely smart (the average exec has a 115 IQ) and unbelievably hardworking in a white-collar sense (they don’t get days off, and virtually all their socializing is usually for business purposes as well). Many of them have very high integrity – they act on their beliefs. Their beliefs may not be the same as yours or mine, but that doesn’t make them unethical. A number of my clients are extremely anxious to include “integrity” in the list of things we assess on their own senior people and outsiders we recruit, if only for the very practical reason that a dishonest CEO brings shame and bad business down upon the whole company. Oh, yes, and numerous studies have shown that the difference between a good CEO and a mediocre one is often the difference between a company making money and losing it. We need better selection and development of CEOs, and we need to make sure their compensation isn’t getting out of hand, but they are needed to run the businesses as well.
ConservativeBob over 15 years ago
“We need better selection and development of CEOs, and we need to make sure their compensation isn’t getting out of hand, but they are needed to run the businesses as well.”
This was the only objection I had to your post. It is not up to “us” to decide what a CEO is paid or the responsibilties he has, it is the decision of the company that hires him. If they make a bad choice they will learn from their mistakes hardly something the government has ever done yet.
Kylop over 15 years ago
Bob, if “we” don’t like what a company is doing and don’t buy their product/service then aren’t “we” determining -indirectly- what the CEO will get paid?
dhleaky over 15 years ago
motivemagus, I too believe that there are CEOs with principals out there, BUT, why in H#LL they hide their principals all during these periods of melt down, and for the past 20 yrs or so, and especially the last 8 years? In this case they are either against the greedy, or with them.
lalas over 15 years ago
The difficulty Bob lies in the fact that CEOs serve on boards of other companies and approve the parachutes of their friends and fellow CEOs.
There has GOT to be a way to keep them from getting a hefty bonus after destroying a company.
Motivemagus over 15 years ago
CBob– I agree with you. I kind of meant “we” in the sense of “we the people.” In my business, we actually help companies do just that.
However, it is also true that you get what you measure. The problem with the totally free market is it allows for spiking milk with melamine for short-term profits, or riding a housing bubble, as long as you get out in time – a bet too many people would make.
ConservativeBob over 15 years ago
“Bob, if “we” don’t like what a company is doing and don’t buy their product/service then aren’t “we” determining -indirectly- what the CEO will get paid?”
That’s exactly what the free market does. If the company is a bad one the consumer responds and that company fails we don’t need government to stick it’s big nose in.
Motivemagus over 15 years ago
CBob–it may be a matter of acceptable risk, and costs and benefits across time. Personally, I would prefer not to find out about the latest version of thalidomide (for example) by having ten thousand babies born without arms and then the company goes out of business eventually after fighting it out in court for ten more years. What government can provide is some rigor in preventing problems that are bound to happen without adult supervision. Hence the success of things like the USDA (until the Republicans cut it), the Clean Air and Water Acts (ditto), the FDA, and, let’s not forget, the Interstate Highway system, which transformed the country but was built for defense purposes – a project clearly too large for the individual taxpayer or the state. I realize this is the classic liberal position that government has its uses, but i think the case is pretty strong.