Income and the gov't

oscardeuce

Active Member
Should the gov't tell us how much we can make?
Should it just be CEO's
It's geting expensive to go to pro ball games, should the gov't cap the income of atheletes?
Movies are expensive too, should the gov't cap celeb's income too?
Where do we end this madness?
 

dragonzim

Active Member
I feel that the govt has NO RIGHT to control how much someone makes. However, they should have an equal tax for the rich and poor. Pick a number like 20%-30% and EVERYONE pays that in taxes regardless of how much or how little they make.
 

1knight164

Member
I don't think they should limit CEO pay or anyone's pay for that matter, but they sure as hell shouldn't reward him/her for driving the company in the dirt knowing full well he's going to get paid. That's plain robbery.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1knight164
http:///forum/post/2768919
I don't think they should limit CEO pay or anyone's pay for that matter, but they sure as hell shouldn't reward him/her for driving the company in the dirt knowing full well he's going to get paid. That's plain robbery.
Now, there's were "limited" gov't comes in make sure there are basic rules, and people are playing by them and not lying cheating or stealing!
 

rylan1

Active Member
I believe the limit on CEO pay is limited to those involved in the bailout.... has nothing to do with any other business or corporation. So that is where it begins and ends.
So let me ask you this...
Lets say this bailout goes through.... and take AIG for example.... these #'s are only for presentation and not accurate...
Say shares before bailout of AIG were in the tank and at $100 per share... Where before they were say $165 a share... now that the bailout has secured AIG... and the price goes up to $150 a share in a month. And the CEO decides to resign and gets a windfall profit of $20 million based on the company increasing stock prices by $50 a share as a bonus... whereas he is to blame for the collapse and because of a loan from the gov't is allowed to capitalize on his bad decisions. If he decides to leave his compensation should be based on that $100 share... and not on tax payer money... the gov't should be the recipiant of the rise in price for taking on the debt.
 

oscardeuce

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
http:///forum/post/2768958
I believe the limit on CEO pay is limited to those involved in the bailout.... has nothing to do with any other business or corporation. So that is where it begins and ends.

I guess you have more faith in the gov't than I do. Social Security used to be a 1% voluntary deal too.
 

prime311

Active Member
The alternative is to do no bailout and then CEO's(and everyone else) should get nothing since their companies are bankrupt.
 

darthtang aw

Active Member
One could argue the CEO is also partially responsible for the stock climbing back up since he was successful in Lobbying )or hiring the lobbyist) for the bailout and saving the company....
Just saying.
 

reefraff

Active Member
As much as I would like to see the CEO's pay limited I don't think it can be done as far as the "Bailout" goes. You could maybe limit severance packages.
 

sharkbait9

Active Member
like the old saying goes how much is to much and how much is enough.
The gov could make a high cap on the ceo for sal and bonuse as a ceo or anyone for that matter if your not happy with a couple of hundred thousand a year then shame on you.
Cap sal and bounse and the money trickles back into the company and then down to the workers who are making the money for the greedy a ss ceo to begin with.
 

spiderwoman

Active Member
Don't you dare touch my income. I'm in control of how much I make by contracting my hours out and nobody should be allowed to limit that. I'm an entrepreneur and a lot of people depend on me.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Am I reading that the Republicans are leaning towards Socialism? Let the federal government dicatate how much a person can earn? Heaven forbid an individual starts a business from ground zero, makes that business flourish, and makes millions because of it. So you're proposing ANYONE who becomes successful in whatever business endeavor they get involved in, that they have a limit on how much personal income they can earn? Or do you just want to punish the one's the government bails out? Sorry to say, but when a business gets as large as a Lehman Brothers, Chase Bank, Washinton Mutual, AGI, pick one, it's not a single person that's making each and every decision. Go look at an Org Chart of any of those institutions, and see how far down it goes. It's your typical Pyramid Principal. The guy at the top is just fortunate enough to get a piece of everyone else's pie.
How many of the failures were intentional? Are we saying that all these banks that handed out these loans are just like an Enron? Kenneth Lay and the Enron Board deserved what they got because they maliciously and intentionally deceived their stock holders for the sole purpose of nothing more than personal gain. Many of these banks were just riding the housing boom, and honestly thought they were distributing loans that would make their profits soar. The problem was they got greedy, and started handing out money to anyone that asked for it. What did they care? They had physical property as collateral that was increasing in value every day. OOPS. They didn't factor in the possibility that the real estate market would bottom out, and fall flat on its face. Then have the unemployment rate rise at the same time. OOPS. So now the Federal Government wants to get into the real estate market. What's gonna happen if the market stays a bust? Whose gonna pay those loans back?
 

reefraff

Active Member
What this right of center independent would like to see is to make sure that as a result of the government stepping in to take the bad loans off the books a company isn't turning around and using that money to give the outgoing CEO who rode the company into the ground a multi million dollar severance package.
 

bionicarm

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
http:///forum/post/2769415
What this right of center independent would like to see is to make sure that as a result of the government stepping in to take the bad loans off the books a company isn't turning around and using that money to give the outgoing CEO who rode the company into the ground a multi million dollar severance package.
I'll agree 100% with this one.
 

el guapo

Active Member
I see it as this . If we are willing to pay for there product then they deserve to make the money off it . If we are stupid enough to over pay for the product then they deserve to make a larger profit. If they are too greedy then they deserve to have their company go under and loose the million dollar meal tickets .
 

salty blues

Active Member
Originally Posted by EL GUAPO
http:///forum/post/2769732
I see it as this . If we are willing to pay for there product then they deserve to make the money off it . If we are stupid enough to over pay for the product then they deserve to make a larger profit. If they are too greedy then they deserve to have their company go under and loose the million dollar meal tickets .
EL GUAPO, might one assume from your avatar that you are not too fond of the annointed one?
 
Top