Why Limt CEO Pay?

@ParaTed2k (21787)
Sheboygan, Wisconsin
September 24, 2008 3:00am CST
There is a lot of talk about limiting the pay of CEOs and other corporate officers. I disagree, why punish the leaders of corporations that are profitable and providing jobs just because a few are incompetent? If a corporation gets to the point that they turn to the taxpayers for "bail outs", first, all the corporate assets should be seized, then all the personal assets of all the board members (going back as far as the financial problems go, so no one can just "resign" as things get bad). This would solve the problem without going after corporate officers that aren't part of the problem at all. Not one dime of taxpayer money should be given in bail outs until all of the corporate and private assets of those who are part of the problem are used up first.
1 response
• United States
24 Sep 08
If only that was the way things worked though. Some of these bail outs being paid by the taxpayers you see the company bigwigs still sporting outrageously expensive houses and cars that they do not have to part with. I do not necessarily believe that it would be such a bad idea. If they lowered the pay most likely they would not be facing these situations in which the taxpayers are having to come to the rescue. Honestly, how does it serve every taxpayer in the long run? The majority of us have never earned a fraction annually in comparison to these people so why should we be the ones who end up footing the bill? I say save the trouble and give them a wage limit. Just make it clear and there should always be a little leeway for exceptions. (medical reasons etc)
@ParaTed2k (21787)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Sep 08
Are you saying limit the salaries only of the companies being bailed out? or all companies?
• United States
24 Sep 08
I believe the point is to limit those who take monies from the about-to-be-created bailout fund. In principle, I like the idea of a limit of some kind. Too many of these high "earners" have simply taken and given nothing back. They take from their companies as they run them in the ground. That means they also take from their shareholders and their customers. In the long run, they are taking cash out of our pockets. Indeed, they are stealing cash from our pockets. Their thief just happens to be legal. To borrow a campaign slogan: It's time for a change. Be reasonable. Who deserves a golden parachute for $250 million when they've just headed the destruction of a large company--and sometimes thousands of jobs?
@ParaTed2k (21787)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
24 Sep 08
Lovestravel.. that is my point, they should not only Not get paid, they should lose whatever they have before any of us get billed with the bail out.