Why do American CEOs get paid so much?

Discussion in 'Budget & Taxes' started by LafayetteBis, Aug 21, 2018.

  1. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's pay according to how much the Fed kites the stock market, not performance. Performance pay would depend on the firm's performance relative to the sector average.
    Only when they are manipulating stock prices for the benefit of option holders or other insiders.
     
  2. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The CEO's job is to protect and grow the assets to the pleasure of the Board of Directors and stockholders, that's what he is paid for either in cash or stock options. The left insisted on the change let the Democrats lessen the practice by removing the tax on salaries of $1M or whatever the current level is.

    Which would be against the law and the SEC would prosecute if they are manipulating the stock and most of those you are speaking of are looking for long term gain and asset protection, they are not day traders.
     
  3. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But if the company is not outperforming the sector average, let alone the market average, what value is he adding? He is just being paid millions to warm a seat while the Fed kites the market for him.
    Obviously that was a disingenuous effort to make it look like they were dong something without actually doing anything.
    ROTLF!! The SEC is only a source of paperwork. They have zero credibility in enforcement.
    They are looking for something for nothing, and they are getting it.
     
  4. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Depends but he is likely to get replaced by the board. Depends on what risk/reward ratio the board has instructed him to take. Depends on if they are expanding, contracting and staying at current levels.

    No they then as now were jealous and envious of the highest earners and thought they could get CEO compensation brought down to be FAIR by eliminating and expensing of salaries and bonuses over $1M. And of course like when the government thinks it can better manage business and the economy it backfired on them.

    About as lame a response you could post.

    No they want long term growth and protection of their assets why do you find that so egregious. Don't you want the same for your investments? If not what is it you want?
     
  5. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No, it only depends on how much shareholder money his friends on the board want to shovel into his pockets in return for nothing.
    If that were the case, they would have done something effective. They didn't.
    How many banksters did the SEC prosecute after the GFC?
    It's how they have been enabled to get something for nothing that I find egregious.
    I suppose most people want something for nothing. They play the lottery, after all. But what people want is irrelevant to what is a just return for a commensurate contribution to production.
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2019
  6. Socratica

    Socratica Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2019
    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    382
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    What specific crimes did bankers commit that warranted prosecution?

    Investing is something for nothing? If its that easy, why doesn't everyone make investments?

    And if everyone is making these investments, why aren't there more millionaire/billionaire investors.
     
  7. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    No it depends on the business model and goals the board sets for the CEO and CFO in managing the assets of the owners.

    You assume everything government does is effective which LOTS of times it blows up in their faces with the unintended consequences.

    I don't know how many do they every year?

    They aren't getting something for nothing. But do tell me which companies I can sign up to share in the profits and growth without having to invest anything.

    Playing the lottery is not getting something for nothing unless some state is handing out free lottery tickets.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2019
  8. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fraud, for one. Richard Fuld, CEO of Lehman Bros. -- a man so completely evil, he actually looks like Voldemort -- took hundreds of millions from the bank just months before it went broke.
    https://www.google.com/search?q=ric...QKHW1-DooQ9QEwAHoECAYQBA#imgrc=Ry-4nLIo-KG0OM:
    Yes, when all you are investing in is a legal entitlement to take from the community without making any commensurate contribution in return.
    I didn't say it was easy. Bank fraud is not easy, either. I said it was not a commensurate contribution.
    That should be obvious: same reason lots of people play poker, but only a few get rich that way.
     
  9. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which are calculated to shovel money into his pockets.
    Not everything. But government has certainly managed to fill the prisons with non-violent drug offenders....
    None?
    Getting something for nothing doesn't mean you don't risk anything. Google "rent seeking behavior" and start reading. Thieves take risks all the time to get something for nothing.
    It's something for nothing if you win.
     
  10. Socratica

    Socratica Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2019
    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    382
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    Did he take money or did they give him money? The way he looks isn't relevant to any conversation.

    Explain.

    You said it was something for nothing. If you're telling me that you're getting something of value for no effort, then you're saying that it is easy.

    If it's so easy, why aren't there more star traders and investors in the world?

    Why?
     
  11. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Sorry you don't understand the relationship between the board of directors and the CEO.

    Hardly anything

    You tell me you brought it up.

    I don't need to read up on rent seeking if you got something to say then say it.

    Nope it's a return on my investment which I put at risk. I don't have to invest my money, I do so to grow it by growing a business which employs LOTS of people and pays LOTS of wages and salaries hoping I can make a return on that. I invest the money I EARN at my job.
     
    roorooroo likes this.
  12. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He took it.
    Oh, but it is. Evil has a certain look that you can learn to recognize.
    The most obvious cases are land titles, bank licenses and IP monopolies. Their owners are legally entitled to take from the community without contributing anything in return.
    I didn't say it was easy. Some people -- criminals -- work very hard to get something for nothing. When it's legalized, it's called rent-seeking behavior, which you could Google to advantage. The point is not that it is easy or takes no effort, but that it doesn't CONTRIBUTE anything.
    I didn't say it was easy, any more than running a protection racket is easy. It's just isn't a contribution.
    I didn't say it was easy, just that it isn't a contribution.
    Because lots of people are competing for the limited opportunities to get something for nothing, and only the ones who are best at it do well. See almost any heist movie.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2019
  13. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I do.
    Yeah, just the highest incarceration rate in the world....
    I don't see any, at least not of the top people who are taking the most.
    You do if you want to understand anything about the modern capitalist economy.
    A lottery ticket is not an investment because it does not yield a return. It's gambling.
    But is your "investment" adding to production, or merely diverting production from others' pockets into your own? There's the rub. You could be describing a patent troll company.
     
  14. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You certainly do not understand fiduciary responsibility. Tell me why would the board of directors overpay and slip money to a CEO by manipulating stock prices as you are asserting, what do they get out it?

    Yes we have very good police and courts to catch and prosecute and get criminals off the streets, you would prefer we are more like some third world countries where criminals control the streets? How I forget we have that in some cities like Chicago where the police can't catch the criminals fast enough and they do ruled the streets. You want that nationwide?

    Well you brought it up not me.

    If you got something to say then say I assure you I can keep up and don't need to go on library tours.

    Sure it is and with a lousy return, not all capital investments yield a return.

    It can create it, it can expand it, it can maintain it, and can purchase it, without that capital there is no production, without a return on that capital it will not be accumulated into a productive endeavor. Without that capital all the expense of bring that product or service to market cannot be funded. And it is all at risk. That includes funding payrolls for several years before profitability.
     
  15. Socratica

    Socratica Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2019
    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    382
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    How did he take it?

    No it isn't. It's an ad homeniem. You're not strengthening your arguments by mentioning his looks and you're not adding any value to the conversation, either.

    How are they talking from the community? You're not really describing anything.

    If you're saying that people are getting, "something for nothing" then you're saying that it is easy.

    Either retract or rephrase your arguments.

    In your opinion. The economic research tends to disagree.

    Now I understand your problem: You're substituting television for an education.
     
  16. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    <yawn> I understand it very well. I also understand why despite fiduciary responsibility, there is a NEGATIVE correlation between CEO pay and corporate performance. You do not.
    He does the same for them when he is on the board and they are the CEOs.
    And imprison and murder lots of innocent people, too....
    I want you to find a willingness to know that it is not happening by accident.
    What a gracious concession....
    I've been saying it. You have been concocting excuses for not knowing indisputable facts that prove me right.
    A lottery ticket, like a derivatives bet, is not a capital investment because the money does not go to aid production.
    But that's assuming the endeavor is productive. It's often -- and most profitably -- just rent seeking.
    Risk is irrelevant, as the lottery ticket proves. The only way to EARN a return is by contributing to production. All the rest might as well be investing in a protection racket.
     
  17. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    By falsifying the bank's financial statements to make it look like it was profitable when it was actually about to go bankrupt.
    Yes, it is.
    Huh? We are talking about him!
    I disagree. IMO you can often -- not always -- tell people are evil by just looking at their faces. Dick Cheney, Kelly Ann Conway, Richard Nixon, the list goes on.
    By depriving everyone else of access to economic opportunity.
    I most certainly am. I am identifying facts that you have to find some way of not knowing, because you have already realized that they prove your beliefs are false and evil.
    Not at all. The point of rent seeking behavior is that the opportunity to get something for nothing creates a competition for control of that opportunity, and it is not going to be easy to win such a competition.
    No. Until you can find a willingness to know indisputable facts, it would be pointless. You are not even willing to know the fact that a protection racket is getting something for nothing, even though running one is not easy.
    Modern mainstream neoclassical economics begs the question by DEFINING all legally obtained returns as resulting from commensurate contributions.
    <yawn> Garbage. I have often gone years at a stretch without a TV in the house. Are you or are you not willing to know the fact that it is not easy for criminals to steal large amounts of money?
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  18. Socratica

    Socratica Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2019
    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    382
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Female
    Where is the evidence of this? Financial statements of all publicity traded Corporation are audited by third parties. This is basic.

    If you don't know what an ad hominem attack is, then you're clearly not old enough for this conversation.

    See statement above.

    How?

    You haven't identified any facts.

    Making any unsubstantiated claims isn't pointing out facts.

    I guess I'll never know because I have yet to see any academic research from you.

    You're not asking anything meaningful here.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  19. Gorgeous George

    Gorgeous George Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2019
    Messages:
    1,985
    Likes Received:
    827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    LOL! :roflol:
     
  20. Gorgeous George

    Gorgeous George Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2019
    Messages:
    1,985
    Likes Received:
    827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    This thread makes me beg the question: Why are American workers paid so little?
     
  21. bringiton

    bringiton Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    11,394
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The bank's collapse. Someone who can't understand that might be either ignorant, stupid, or dishonest.
    And....? We know the third parties were also lying. Google "Arthur Andersen" and start reading, and you might become just minimally informed on this subject.
    Oh, I know what an ad hominem fallacy is. You obviously don't. Google is your friend.
    So, just the same refusal to know.
    By obtaining legal ownership of their rights to liberty through privileges such as land titles, IP monopolies, broadcast spectrum allocations, etc.
    Of course I have, and you know it. They are merely facts that you have already realized prove your beliefs are false and evil, so you have to contrive some way of not knowing them.
    It is when the claims are factual, as mine are. Duh.

    Or are you actually claiming that running a protection racket is easy, or doesn't get something for nothing? I don't have to "substantiate" a fact that everyone knows is true, including you.
    LOL!!! No. You will never know because you have DECIDED not to know. And you have seen a lot more academic research and facts from me than I have from you, champ.
    Of course I am. You just have to refuse to know the meaning, because you have already realized that it proves your beliefs are false and evil. Your claim was that if a way of obtaining money is not easy, it can't involve getting something for nothing. I proved you wrong.

    Capisci?
     
    Last edited: Jul 22, 2019
  22. Old Man Fred

    Old Man Fred Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2017
    Messages:
    840
    Likes Received:
    253
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    So you're saying that we need to abolish the minimum wage, and allow companies to offer employees 80% of their compensation in stock options?

    I have a slightly better idea. Privatize Social Security into individual accounts, so that everyone participating in the labor force owns a share of the pie, and watch all of these problems disappear.
     
  23. roorooroo

    roorooroo Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Messages:
    2,814
    Likes Received:
    3,091
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  24. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    PIGGIES IN A PEN

    That someone was themselves. Because there is an amazing correlation of how a finite set of CEOs are also on the boards of other companies.

    A study has been made of this distortion and is here: The influence of board of director networks and corporate governance on firm performance and CEO compensation
    of which this excerpt:
    And here is another bit of research into the matter: Outside Board Memberships of CEOs: Expertise or Entrenchment?

    Frankly, I doubt that advice in red above is observed by all the piggies in the pig-pens of Extravagant Upper-income Families.

    My Point: What makes for Extravagant Wealth around the world is the lack of an upper-limit to both Earned and Unearned Gains. (Most of which, families for a long, long time have known how to "hide" offshore.

    Any nation that just puts two, three or four of those families in jail for financial finagling finds quickly all the others hiding their fortunes quite willing to declare Total Incomes.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
    bringiton likes this.
  25. LafayetteBis

    LafayetteBis Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2016
    Messages:
    9,744
    Likes Received:
    2,086
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Should a CEO be allowed to serve on another company's BoD?

    Positive opinion here:
    Negative opinion here:
    It's yours to decide ... because US law says nothing as regards the matter ...
     

Share This Page