From the article: Should the Government Cap Executive Compensation?
Many suggest that executive compensation is way too high. What about companies that avoided failure thanks to a taxpayer bailout? How can the government protect stockholders from paying executives huge amounts for bad results? What do you think?
executive compensation
- shareholders, not the government should determine compensation. loaning money to a corporation does not make the government a shareholder. Has anyone heard of ex post facto? The government cannot loan money and come back later with new or changed terms. This is in our Constitution....perhap the COnstitution should be required reading for Congress, the White House , and the Supreme Court.
- —libcap
Inconsistant with what?
- Capitalism is an artificial creation. It exists in the balance between regulations that create a market the the regulations that would destroy a market - AND the greed and stupidity of the so called capitalists who operate the system. Shareholders were supposed to police the CEO's, but the shareholders are no longer indivuals but corporations whose greedy members now get a cut from the CEO's for looking the other way. With the restraints from shareholders removed, CEO's are looting the corporations and leaving disaster in their wake. In other words the capitalists have figured out how to fix the game while avoiding responsibility. To big to fail means they can't lose. If they are not at risk, there is no capitalism. This why monopolies are illegal. They are anti-capitalistic. Too big to fail is anti-capitalistic. Let's get back to capitalism, and stop kissing up to the CEO's who demand and get bonuses after running their companies into the ground.
- —Guest Kimit Muston
