CEO Pay in 2010 Jumped 11%

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
CEO pay is up by 11% this year. It is so nice to see something besides unemployment on the rise. :rolleyes: Who says the terrible economy is hurting people? On a serious note...the CEOs making the most money ($25M+ per year) also happen to be the ones complaining how bad piracy is "killing" their industry .
 
Well how else are they expected to "keep talent" if they don't offer such high wages and compensation packages....

sorry sorry, I'm thinking university presidents, and why they make half a million a year and are set for life.
 
So when is that money supposed to trickle down to everyone else? More millionaires have been made in the past 10 years but the economy has went to crap.
 
Before anyone makes the "you're just jealous... " remarks...let me just respond to that with a solid "duh!" :D

$84M a year? I could be SET for life if I swapped jobs with Viacom's CEO for one month. :eek:
 
in before the CEO worshipers arrive with their "why dont you become a CEO" comments
 
You know, I really want to hate these guys for crap like this. Years spent trying to claw my way up from the bottom, really frustrates me when I see people that just seem to have it all handed too them.

That said, I just can't because frankly I would do the same in their shoes give the chance. That is the thing I love about capitalism, you can get whatever you want if you have the drive to get it.
 
So now we know where the trillion dollar bailout went. Since not to much has changed at Wall street, the next melt down should happen in within the next seven years.
 
I work for a company in the Fortune 500. Our CEO was handed his job when the old one left a few years back. Now he's getting a huge increase this year while everyone still gets the same old cost of living (which inflation almost knocks out).

It's such bullshit because he did NOTHING to get us where we are. It's the people doing the every day job that move the company forward and we are treated like shit while he gets huge pay bumps and bonuses.

We haven't changed a damn thing... the economy improves and HE gets the credit? Fucking bullshit.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
You know, I really want to hate these guys for crap like this. Years spent trying to claw my way up from the bottom, really frustrates me when I see people that just seem to have it all handed too them.

That said, I just can't because frankly I would do the same in their shoes give the chance. That is the thing I love about capitalism, you can get whatever you want if you have the drive to get it.
Click to expand...

and you have to be a sociopath that truly self-absorbed individual with no conscience or feeling for others and for whom social rules have no meaning.
 
Uncle said:
and you have to be a sociopath that truly self-absorbed individual with no conscience or feeling for others and for whom social rules have no meaning.
Click to expand...

CEOs aren't serial killers.
 
"That's not 'change', that's more of the same."

Just worse. Across the boards.
 
Dekoth-E- said:
That said, I just can't because frankly I would do the same in their shoes give the chance. That is the thing I love about capitalism, you can get whatever you want if you have the drive to get it.
Click to expand...

Which is why this sort of thing will continue, the idea that it is possible to be in that position where as the truth is most of us never will.
 
First, laugh.
Second, puke.
Third, make my broke ass Mac N' Cheese for supper.
 
Yeah I really no legitimate reason to raise taxes on the over 1 millions back to...lets see...1970's percentage. Remember? Because Reagan and S&L? When rich people paid the same taxes we do?
 
Uncle said:
and you have to be a sociopath that truly self-absorbed individual with no conscience or feeling for others and for whom social rules have no meaning.
Click to expand...

450 said:
CEOs aren't serial killers.
Click to expand...

No they aren't but, their attitude, yours and, many other people is that as long as a business practice is legal, it's perfectly fine. Too many people let the law define their morality. This is a conscious choice that adversely affects society and the long term health of economy. It can not be continually supported but, too many simply focus on getting theirs before the bottom drops out.
 
Uncle said:
So now we know where the trillion dollar bailout went. Since not to much has changed at Wall street, the next melt down should happen in within the next seven years.
Click to expand...

With the price of gas I would give it 2 years at the most.
 
Not only is wealth and income in the US becoming more concentrated at the top, but study after study is showing that social mobility - the ability to improve the lot you were born into - is declining in the US.

There is still quite a bit of opportunity here. But burying our heads in the sand and refusing to talk about real issues that are occurring by chanting "USA #1" and "The land of opportunity!" won't help anything.

FYI, as a "capitalist" one should be hugely concerned about businesses and individuals making so much profit, as it is a sign of an inefficient market.
 
Uncle said:
So now we know where the trillion dollar bailout went. Since not to much has changed at Wall street, the next melt down should happen in within the next seven years.
Click to expand...

The bailout is small change compared to the bailout given to the banks by the Fed. Give money to the banks for 0.25% which they can then lend right back to the government for 3%? It doesn't take being a genius to make a profit in banking nowadays, just have the right network that will allow you to hook up your hose to the Fed money spigot. Just look at all the investment companies that changed to "bank holding companies" to do just that.
 
We're talking about savvy people here able to exploit a situation for the best and we're surprised that in an economic market where it's easier than ever to tell you're employee's we just can't afford even cost of living pay rises this year that even more money is finding it's way to the top?

Reminds me of the episode of the American Office where he gets a massive bonus for sacking a guy and saving the company money. Except without the ipod secret santa.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Not only is wealth and income in the US becoming more concentrated at the top, but study after study is showing that social mobility - the ability to improve the lot you were born into - is declining in the US.

FYI, as a "capitalist" one should be hugely concerned about businesses and individuals making so much profit, as it is a sign of an inefficient market.
Click to expand...

And the more the government gets involved, with more regulations and bailouts, the more this income disparity will grow. If you disagree, look at most 3rd world countries, where the government and big business are basically the same... Billionairs at the top, and almost everyone else is poor.

If a bank/company is allowed to fail, the the CEO loses his paycheck, and his stock option become worthless. That's alot more fair than bailouts.

For many large companies, it's a better investment to spend money on lobbist, then to invest in new products. A few million in campain donations to the right people can result in 100's of millions in profits if new laws are written to hurt you competitors and help your own company.
 
I wonder how many of these companies had Furloughs and pay reductions for rank and file. My experience is that at least one of the companies did. Glad my pay reduction went to the CEO getting a 35% raise.
 
nutzo said:
And the more the government gets involved, with more regulations and bailouts, the more this income disparity will grow. If you disagree, look at most 3rd world countries, where the government and big business are basically the same... Billionairs at the top, and almost everyone else is poor.

If a bank/company is allowed to fail, the the CEO loses his paycheck, and his stock option become worthless. That's alot more fair than bailouts.

For many large companies, it's a better investment to spend money on lobbist, then to invest in new products. A few million in campain donations to the right people can result in 100's of millions in profits if new laws are written to hurt you competitors and help your own company.
Click to expand...


The argument about deregulation is actually incorrect. Our economic system was highly regulated during our most profitable years as a nation. Taxes were far more progressive. Reagan regularly gets credit for a cyclical correction to our economy. Completely free markets where the cost to entry is high (read: now almost all highly technical products, services... or anything requiring infrastructure) become inefficient with a few competitors and tend to take on duopolistic characteristics like verizon/comcast in cable areas or a number of states' failing deregulation of utility providers.

The problem is more that people don't understand Adam Smith, especially Libertarians and Laissez Faire proto-Reagans. Laissez-Faire was French, hence the name and Smith didn't agree with most of it. The description of the invisible hand was a description solely of academic market forces. In practice, Smith regularly warned against the influence of business on market forces. His philosophy, and by inheritance the basis for our economic system rely entirely on business following the rule of law and social morality... which isn't working out so hot. Look at how absolutely wrong Greenspan/Reaganomics have turned out to be... it's ridiculous.

Even more scary is how little we've adapted beyond Smith's ideas and our initial conception of Capitalism since the NJ/Delaware effect of allowing corporations to exist beyond their initial charters.
 
If the free market were allowed to work, we wouldn't have these problems. Did everyone forget bankruptcy is a GOOD thing? It forces the business to cut all waste and re-evaluate the value of staff and executives and if necessary, terminate those employees.

Also, just forget all other arguments, the salary of any CEO is NONE of your concern. It is between the Shareholder(s) and the CEO, and nobody else. If you honestly feel that you are being undervalued because the CEO is getting paid too much, or for whatever reason, then go get a job somewhere else.
 
shizzdizzle said:
Also, just forget all other arguments, the salary of any CEO is NONE of your concern. It is between the Shareholder(s) and the CEO, and nobody else. If you honestly feel that you are being undervalued because the CEO is getting paid too much, or for whatever reason, then go get a job somewhere else.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely right. We don't live in a society or a country that is at all connected or dependent on one another, we all just float through in little self-isolated pods. How dare we peons comment on our betters? :rolleyes:
 
nutzo said:
And the more the government gets involved, with more regulations and bailouts, the more this income disparity will grow. If you disagree, look at most 3rd world countries, where the government and big business are basically the same... Billionairs at the top, and almost everyone else is poor.

If a bank/company is allowed to fail, the the CEO loses his paycheck, and his stock option become worthless. That's alot more fair than bailouts.

For many large companies, it's a better investment to spend money on lobbist, then to invest in new products. A few million in campain donations to the right people can result in 100's of millions in profits if new laws are written to hurt you competitors and help your own company.
Click to expand...

^---- This. While I don't think there was ever a period of golden regulation, or deregulation..

There are many overly regulated economies that are crap, and there are many loosely regulated economies that are crap.. and there are good examples on both sides. Simply put some things should be regulated, some should not. I tend to think that in a profit/loss market environment... less regulation is needed, because there as at least some market dynamic involved. I mean, you at least fear losing money.. and an environment where fraud is actually prosecuted might help as well. Instead people who commit fraud all get away with the exception of a few scapegoats.

There aren't many who would argue that the system of socializing losses is not consistent with capitalism. Granted there are numerous forms of capitalism, it is far from free market, and far from anything I would consider capitalism.
 
InternationalHat said:
The argument about deregulation is actually incorrect. Our economic system was highly regulated during our most profitable years as a nation. Taxes were far more progressive. Reagan regularly gets credit for a cyclical correction to our economy. Completely free markets where the cost to entry is high (read: now almost all highly technical products, services... or anything requiring infrastructure) become inefficient with a few competitors and tend to take on duopolistic characteristics like verizon/comcast in cable areas or a number of states' failing deregulation of utility providers.

The problem is more that people don't understand Adam Smith, especially Libertarians and Laissez Faire proto-Reagans. Laissez-Faire was French, hence the name and Smith didn't agree with most of it. The description of the invisible hand was a description solely of academic market forces. In practice, Smith regularly warned against the influence of business on market forces. His philosophy, and by inheritance the basis for our economic system rely entirely on business following the rule of law and social morality... which isn't working out so hot. Look at how absolutely wrong Greenspan/Reaganomics have turned out to be... it's ridiculous.

Even more scary is how little we've adapted beyond Smith's ideas and our initial conception of Capitalism since the NJ/Delaware effect of allowing corporations to exist beyond their initial charters.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to understand where this concept of government regulation being evil came from. I'm not asking which radio show host, but where regulation went wrong in some tangible sense for the middle and low class to be so easily sold on the government being this monster, by these pundits.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Not only is wealth and income in the US becoming more concentrated at the top, but study after study is showing that social mobility - the ability to improve the lot you were born into - is declining in the US.

There is still quite a bit of opportunity here. But burying our heads in the sand and refusing to talk about real issues that are occurring by chanting "USA #1" and "The land of opportunity!" won't help anything.

FYI, as a "capitalist" one should be hugely concerned about businesses and individuals making so much profit, as it is a sign of an inefficient market.
Click to expand...

Part of the reason for large "profits" as business being scared to invest that money into building up the business. I don't blame them given the total failure that is the Federal and some states government. If there was some more stable fiscal policy and spending habits you'd see more spending from business and more job creation.
 
piscian18 said:
I'm trying to understand where this concept of government regulation being evil came from. I'm not asking which radio show host, but where regulation went wrong in some tangible sense for the middle and low class to be so easily sold on the government being this monster, by these pundits.
Click to expand...

The problem is that government doen't play a true third party role. Instead they are just in bed with special interest that could be very well represented by the business they are trying to regulate.
 
*cou-unions-gh*

It's the only way that employees can limit this level of greed.

Who brainwashed the public in the 70s/80s that unions are horrible? The rich. Who's profitting now that there are basically no union left and those that are have little power? The rich.
 
toffty said:
*cou-unions-gh*

It's the only way that employees can limit this level of greed.

Who brainwashed the public in the 70s/80s that unions are horrible? The rich. Who's profitting now that there are basically no union left and those that are have little power? The rich.
Click to expand...
Unions and owners killed my Expos and will never be forgiven.

There is a middle ground called merit-based pay. Unions don't allow it. CEOs don't follow it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top