Wall Street pay packages … well, you know what they did

According to an analysis from Bloomberg, CEO compensation for the nation’s 50 biggest financial companies “collectively rose by an average of 20.4 percent in 2011 — a year when most big banks and brokerages saw their revenues, profits and stock prices plummet. The 2011 pay rise followed a 26 percent increase in 2010 for CEOs who held the same job in both years …

“Overall, 33 of the 50 biggest financial companies had negative share returns in their 2011 fiscal years, as they were buffeted, particularly in the second half of the year, by a series of crises that froze the deal markets.”

So let me see if I’ve got this financial CEO gig figured out:

In a bad year in which you produce negative returns for your shareholders and most Americans are just happy to have a job, you increase your multi-million-dollar pay package by an average of 20 percent. Over a two-year period, your already extravagant compensation jumps a total of 50 percent on average.

And of course, all this follows a really really bad year, a historically bad year in which all the high-risk bets that you place go wrong and threaten to bring down the global economy. The collapse is so complete that the federal government is forced to come in and bail out your industry with hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars.

But do you feel the slightest bit chagrined or humble? Hell no. In fact, if the feds then try to insist on tighter regulations, telling you that they don’t want to have to bail out your sorry butts next time, you pout and whine about how you feel unappreciated and put-upon, and you then dump a few spare million into the campaigns of politicians who are willing to kiss your ring and tell you how wonderful you are.

Did I get that right?

– Jay Bookman

757 comments Add your comment

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 5th, 2012
2:05 pm

meritocracy, eh? LOL.

“I’m driving this company off a cliff so pay me more, dang it! I’m tired of driving…”

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 5th, 2012
2:07 pm

Go to your boss and ask him if you could get a better raise for doing a bad job than for doing a good job.

Tell him “I did a bad job because I wasn’t being paid enough…I couldn’t concentrate….ya know?”

Cutty

June 5th, 2012
2:08 pm

2nd!!

It’s a free market and they should get paid however shareholders believe they should. Even if we have to bail them out again. No more regulations.

Thought I’d get that out the way.

Aquagirl

June 5th, 2012
2:08 pm

Did I get that right?

You left out the part about if we object to their fat paychecks the terrorists win.

stands for decibels

June 5th, 2012
2:09 pm

Did I get that right?

Well I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m screwed.

JOE COOL~DoWnToWn THUG

June 5th, 2012
2:10 pm

“We dont need no stinkin regulations”

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:10 pm

“According to an analysis from Bloomberg, CEO compensation for the nation’s 50 biggest financial companies “collectively rose by an average of 20.4 percent in 2011 — a year when most big banks and brokerages saw their revenues, profits and stock prices plummet. The 2011 pay rise followed a 26 percent increase in 2010 for CEOs who held the same job in both years …”

Thank heavens they got paid at least that much. Think of how much worse the revenues, profits and stock prices would have plummeted if they didn’t find the smartest people to run things and pay them enough so they’d stick around?

(that was sarcasm, folks)

And they need another raise. Bigger. All the shareholders agree, because if they didn’t they’d all vote to change the boards of directors and change the pay packages.

(still more sarcasm)

Oh Jay?

Yeah, you got that right.

Finn McCool (The System Isn't Broken; It's Fixed ~ from an Occupy sign)

June 5th, 2012
2:11 pm

Step aside Odin and Thor,
We have found the true Masters of teh Universe.

the cat

June 5th, 2012
2:12 pm

And here we are making the choice between medicine and food.

Peadawg

June 5th, 2012
2:13 pm

“Did I get that right?” – Pretty much.

“It’s a free market and they should get paid however shareholders believe they should.” – True. But don’t come asking for a bailout next to almost go bankrupt.

godless heathen

June 5th, 2012
2:14 pm

Joe Cool,

Should CEO pay be determined by regulation?

Mick

June 5th, 2012
2:15 pm

Jay, please stop picking on our patriotic job creators you socialist, communist, pinko, liberal – got that???

Cobb Mom

June 5th, 2012
2:15 pm

The only thing that rose 20% in my household last year was my monthly health insurance premium and the deductible that goes along with it.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:15 pm

Sorry, Finn, that would be He-Man and his cohorts. But we get your drift.

(My pubescent self had quite the thing for Evil-Lyn (Meg Foster)).

real john

June 5th, 2012
2:16 pm

Jay,

Do you feel the same way about Obama’s Hollywood buddies (some of which make upwards of $20-$25 million per movie) regardless if the movie does well or not?

At least the CEO’s are responsible for thousands of employees, changing market conditions, many outside factors, changing government regulations.

George Clooney and his pals simply work for about 3 months and get paid millions….I guess since they are supporting Obama its okay..

JohnnyReb

June 5th, 2012
2:17 pm

None of those guys raised their own pay. The Board of Directors raised the pay. Compensating to retain people who run in their very small circle is bound to be a challenge. Us peons will never agree although a few may understand. Short of complete government take-over, or a stipulation within a government loan, there is nothing you can do about it but complain.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:18 pm

godless heathen

Why not? Present system is broke.

They’ve fought shareholders exercising true ownership control and rigged the system to benefit themselves, so they’ve opened themselves up to corrective action, especially when their actions have harmed millions of Americans.

Real Scootter

June 5th, 2012
2:19 pm

WEALTH ENVY!!!!

First! :grin:

Jm

June 5th, 2012
2:19 pm

Jay’s fired up.

A. Banks repaid TARP
B. Shareholders should be PO’d if they want. And sell their shares. Which probably explains (in very small part) why the sector is way down.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:20 pm

real john

Do Hollywood directors, producer, writers and investors go to Congress and demand hundreds of billions of dollars to cover their losses?

Does a bad film reception cause millions of people to lose homes and jobs?

It’s a silly analogy.

real john

June 5th, 2012
2:21 pm

I would also add some of Obama’s athlete buddies such as Lebron James made $15 million in salary and has a $90, yes $90 million dollar contract with Nike. Of course, he has many other endorsement deals as well.

He plays BASKETBALL for a living and is making probably close to $40 million a year. Again, since he is buddies with Obama I guess you don’t deem that as too much to earn.

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
2:21 pm

Over a two-year period, your already extravagant compensation jumps a total of 50 percent on average.

To put it in perspective, that 50% increase in 2 years is what 75% of working Americans have made.

In the past 33 years. Yep, 1979.

The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy.

They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes.

Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. ~Misattributed to Abraham Lincoln

But whoever wrote it was both prescient and brilliant!

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:22 pm

Jm

“Shareholders should be PO’d if they want. And sell their shares. Which probably explains (in very small part) why the sector is way down.”

sound to me a lot like “If people see drug dealers and prostitutes and crime moving into their neighborhoods, they should just move.”

Those are actions that do not in any way correct the problem.

godless heathen

June 5th, 2012
2:23 pm

Why not? Present system is broke.

They’ve fought shareholders exercising true ownership control and rigged the system to benefit themselves, so they’ve opened themselves up to corrective action, especially when their actions have harmed millions of Americans.

What system would you replace it with? The Chinese model. They don’t have this problem and they have low unemployment. Factory jobs are plentiful, I hear.

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
2:24 pm

But don’t come asking for a bailout next to almost go bankrupt.

Hey, an Elizabeth Warren fan!

I do not understand how it is that financial institutions could think that they could take taxpayer money and then turn around and act like it’s business as usual. I don’t understand how they can’t see that the world has changed in a fundamental way, that it is not business as usual when you take taxpayer dollars.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:25 pm

real john

So professional sports teams have the same impact on the economy as do Wall Street and banks?

The theme is all about levels of compensation?

Ab-so-lutely amazing -

Peter

June 5th, 2012
2:26 pm

real john ….. Wow how do you get from Hollywood to Corporate America to Politics except maybe you are talking about a Horror show.

Really if a movie bombs then the studio’s take a hit….. and if they are traded publicly then the stock does as well.

But what in the heck does it have to do with corporate America, and what folks do to back a candidate ?

southpaw

June 5th, 2012
2:27 pm

One point you missed, Jay. Or maybe you left it out on purpose; nobody can cover EVERYTHING.

Who should decide how much the CEO is paid?

Good point, heathen.

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

June 5th, 2012
2:27 pm

If it is so easy…..go get a job as a CEO.

getalife

June 5th, 2012
2:27 pm

We lost the class war.

Bow down.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:28 pm

godless

I don’t know for sure. But it’s good to see you’re open to instituting reforms and don’t keep repeating the same mantras we here from so many about the free market and shareholders have all control and… oh yeah… what about Hollywood and athletes?

I’m sure there’s a number of options. I’m thinking it might be better to break apart the current board of director scheme and gain more input from owners. Or professional associations could draft some guidelines and use that as a starting point.

Steve

June 5th, 2012
2:28 pm

I have to throw up a little bit in my mouth every time some right winger talks about wealth envy. Was it Nazi Envy when Hitler was terrorizing Europe?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

June 5th, 2012
2:28 pm

You got it right Jay….and as for shareholder’s voting, seems that even if the shareholder’s vote NO on executive comp, its only “noted” and no action need be taken. But…but….but….. I am sure Romney will stop this grand theft from real shareholders. :roll:

stands for decibels

June 5th, 2012
2:29 pm

I thought I knew what “CDS” stood for in these economics discussions, but…

It’s a silly analogy.

is really Clooney Derangement Syndrome?

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
2:29 pm

Shareholders should be granted the right to democratically nominate and elect the corporate board of directors by opening up proxy access to minority shareholders and introducing cumulative voting and competitive elections.

Shareholder authorization should be required for top executive compensation packages at each annual shareholder meeting.

Stock options, which now account for about half of the executive compensation, should be counted on financial statements as an expense (which they are).

Tax deductions for compensation 25 times above the compensation received by the lowest paid worker in a corporation should be eliminated, as recommended by the famous business guru Peter Drucker.

http://tinyurl.com/5ovk5t

JOE COOL~DoWnToWn THUG

June 5th, 2012
2:29 pm

godless heathen

June 5th, 2012
2:14 pm

Boy, you really read a whole lot into that statement.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:30 pm

southpaw

:Who should decide how much the CEO is paid?”

Are you satisfied with the present system, where the answer is “His friends, who have no accountability if things go bad”?

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

June 5th, 2012
2:31 pm

We have a Hitler mention, Bingo card almost complete in record time.

ragnar danneskjold

June 5th, 2012
2:31 pm

Leftists cannot think without spewing envy.

Jefferson

June 5th, 2012
2:32 pm

Shareholders in the form of 401 funds etc have no say. Public companies should be regulated for pay and dividends. Boards are bs if you thing they represent shareholders.

BlahBlahBlah

June 5th, 2012
2:32 pm

If you’re going to cheer the bailouts by saying garbage like “hey look, the government made money on TARP” (which I’ve seen Bookman and the lefty braintrust do repeatedly) then you have no room to complain about CEO pay. You’re either for the bailouts or you’re against them. If they paid back the money, so be it. They can pay the CEO whatever the board approves.

southpaw

June 5th, 2012
2:33 pm

Paul @2:30
If you want to say the system can be improved, you’ll get no argument from me. But skip the deflection and misdirection. Just answer my question. Who should decide?

Grasshopper

June 5th, 2012
2:34 pm

“Who should decide how much the CEO is paid?”

Don’t hold your breath waiting for an intelligent response from this group Southpaw.

Jefferson

June 5th, 2012
2:34 pm

Anyone making 4 times my pay is overpaid. Fact, cannot be changed.

King of Everything

June 5th, 2012
2:34 pm

CEO’s stack the board with yes men. It’s a symbiotic relationship, yes men vote for CEO compensation increase and it trickles down to the yes men. Unfortunately that’s where the beloved “trickle down” stops.

getalife

June 5th, 2012
2:35 pm

Spewing envy is a good name for a rock band.

Adam

June 5th, 2012
2:36 pm

Did I get that right?

Yes, yes you did.

southpaw

June 5th, 2012
2:36 pm

Grasshopper @2:34

Too bad my computer system won’t let me use the smiley emoticon. That was funny!

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

June 5th, 2012
2:36 pm

Here is a link to a list of Communes, I am sure life will be fair to you there.

http://directory.ic.org/records/communes.php

JohnnyReb

June 5th, 2012
2:37 pm

Here’s one to help complete the Bingo card.

Obama awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Dolores Huerta, a labor activist and honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Another nail in his presidential reelection coffin.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:37 pm

JamVet 2:29

Thanks for that. I was just about to research what he had to say. He’s a man whose ideas were decades ahead of their time.

Jefferson

June 5th, 2012
2:38 pm

Hate says more about the hater than anything.

Jay

June 5th, 2012
2:38 pm

Who should decide?

How about the people who actually own the company?

Brosephus™ - Got Collective Bargaining power?

June 5th, 2012
2:38 pm

How long will this farce continue before Americans wake up to the fact that the average worker here is being royally screwed with no vaseline?

Adam

June 5th, 2012
2:39 pm

godless: I’ll answer that. To the extent that pay is taken away from employees, or employees are fired/laid off, because profits go down, and then the CEO pay is jumped upward from the resulting surplus, I think that something should be done about that. It’s not the CEO’s pay that should be illegal, but I think that particular practice ought to be looked at with at least the level of scrutiny as when a company attempts to move its entire business to another state when its union workers go on strike.

weetamoe

June 5th, 2012
2:40 pm

Shareholders vote. To the comparison of crime, drugs, prostitutes in one’s neighborhood, well one could call the police, buy a gun, or start a neighborhood watch program…. uh oh oh…never mind …um from another point of view: who has the moral authority to determine what another person is paid? Business is secular. Unfair? Business is not an elementary school playground. Some condemned Wall Street bailouts. The TEA party did. But they are hateful dummies who practice some sort of vulgar homosexual act. Anderson Cooper and Rachel Maddow said so. The only solution that seems practical is no more bailouts, ever again.

A dad

June 5th, 2012
2:40 pm

Just curious abot what Bookie and his followers would say if all those horrible big companies made lots of profits last year. Applying the “logic” set forth in this blog, then the CEO’s would undoubtedly be entitled to big increases, right?
No? Hmmm, can’t say I’m surprised.

DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman

June 5th, 2012
2:40 pm

The only thing that rose 20% in my household last year was my monthly health insurance premium and the deductible that goes along with it.

Don’t forget your property taxes! That real estate boom a few years ago, blew up in every taxpayer’s face.

godless heathen

June 5th, 2012
2:40 pm

Well what chu gonna do?

CFR ___.___. _____ Each US corporation shall have a Board of Directors composed of _____ and this BOD will ______, and the BOD will _______, and the BOD will make sure that CEO pay is “fair” as determined by the bloggers of Jay Bookman’s blog on the ajc web site.

Or just let them continue to screw up and don’t bail them out next time.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:42 pm

southpaw

“But skip the deflection and misdirection. Just answer my question. Who should decide?”

First to definitions: asking people who post provocative, sound-bite posts to explain is not deflection or misdirection.

Neither is asking a person a follow-up implied by their post.

You don’t have to post such statements to build yourself up.

To your question: ideally, the owners. All of them. If the power structure fights to block that, then I don’t see much left besides direction by an independent, outside entity.

getalife

June 5th, 2012
2:42 pm

Life is not fair because the people are okay with it.

Of course, when you write the rules you can easily game the system.

Citizen of the World

June 5th, 2012
2:43 pm

No, Jay, you did not get that right. You said “kiss your ring.”

Aquagirl

June 5th, 2012
2:43 pm

Spewing envy is a good name for a rock band.

Unlike Ragnar Danneskjöld, which is only a good name for a rock band when the lead singer is a crappy writer living on Social Security and Medicare.

southpaw

June 5th, 2012
2:43 pm

Jay @2:38
Sounds like a good idea. What’s stopping them from doing that right now, except their own unwillingness to use the voting rights that their stock confers to them (known in some circles as apathy)?

JohnnyReb

June 5th, 2012
2:43 pm

Shareholders elect the Board of Directors. However, you have to be really well-healed with lots of shares to make a difference. Owning a single share will let you mouth at the annual meeting, but not having a lot of shares turns those kind of complainers into objects of ridicule.

Fred ™ I'm repressed

June 5th, 2012
2:43 pm

Oh the stupid !!!!!!!!!!!! It BURNS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow is all I can say when I read the so-called “conservatives” shoot themselves in the ass while they slobber all over themselves to repeat the lies of how they are so happy the richest Americans are sticking it to them.

I could only make it one post past 2:20. By then I had read all the stupid from them I could absorb lol. Time to see if the Armed Renegade CTF server for Black Ops has a slot open. Plenty of stupidity there, but they are kids so you expect it from them………

Ivan

June 5th, 2012
2:44 pm

It’s too bad more Democrats voted for the bailout than Republican.

“But do you feel the slightest bit chagrined or humble? Hell no”

Brosephus™ - Got Collective Bargaining power?

June 5th, 2012
2:44 pm

Or just let them continue to screw up and don’t bail them out next time.

That’s where they have the country by the balls. So much of our existence is tied into financial markets to the point where if they collapse, they can bring the country down with them. That’s the price we are paying for not being involved with elections and the happenings in DC. We’re beyond the point of no return, so I don’t think there’s much that could be done otherwise in that regard.

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
2:44 pm

Leftists cannot think without spewing envy.

So far, the most juvenile post of the thread.

Especially given, that Real Scootter already laid waste to that particular sophistry a scant 12 minutes earlier…

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:45 pm

weetamoe

To be consistent with your ’sell your shares’ statement, we’d have to say the criminals bought off the police and stopped residents from organizing.

Fact remains, just selling your shares does not in any way correct deficiencies.

curious

June 5th, 2012
2:45 pm

Stuff like this is what contributed to the French revolution, the overthrow of the Czar, and Hitler’s hatred for the Jews.

All of you can defend these pay packages all you want, but someday the peasant masses are going to rise up.

Steve

June 5th, 2012
2:46 pm

What will the next catch phrase from the “Right” be? Wealth envy is the one that kills me.

I don’t like war so I must have “war envy.”

Adam

June 5th, 2012
2:46 pm

godless: Or just let them continue to screw up and don’t bail them out next time.

While I agree with this general concept, I think that any industry so tied to the success of the country as to be “too big to fail” needs to be more heavily regulated than other industries, if not turned into an outright government agency.

Peadawg

June 5th, 2012
2:48 pm

“Or just let them continue to screw up and don’t bail them out next time.”

^^^This^^^

Thulsa Doom

June 5th, 2012
2:48 pm

I noticed that the top 3 money makers were the 2 co-ceos of KKR and the CEO of Blackstone, the only 2 private equity firms on the list. The 2 KKR guys made in the 100-150 million dollar pay and the Blackstone guy was no. 48 on the list with 4.96 million but in reality he actually took home 148.5 million-probably in deferred compensation. Nonetheless the enormous pay of these 3 execs dwarfed that of all the bank CEOs who from the looks of the report averaged between 8 and 16 million which seems like just the average pay of a pro stick and ball player who works 6 months out of the year and has nowhere near the burden of responsibilites of these CEOs.

Did it ever occur to a single liberal as to why the 3 exorbitantly paid CEOs of the only 2 “private” firms on the lists are paid so handsomely as opposed to the CEOs of the publicly traded companies?

The reason is simple. Private owners realize the inherent value of a great CEO and are willing to pay for it with their own money. The average person in the public does not. And you can find those people on the Bookman blog.

Adam

June 5th, 2012
2:48 pm

Steve: Telling phrase isn’t it? It’s almost like someone is pretending some part of their body that is regularly understood to be representative of their ego gets larger the more money they have, and if you think it’s too much you’re just jealous.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:49 pm

a dad 2:40

Asking a question of a group and then answering it with what you think puts them in a negative light possible doesn’t exactly give the impression of an honest seeker.

SPC

June 5th, 2012
2:50 pm

One of the few times I agree. The large financial institutions were, and still are, too big to fail. Commercial and investment banking should be separated and the investment banks should stand on their own. If they fail, the executives, stockholders, and investors should only get the liquidation value. Taxpayers should have nothing to do with it. Then we wouldn’t need Dodd-Frank at all.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
2:51 pm

First Bosch, then jewcowboy, now DDR!

A Trifecta!

Hi, DDR!!!!!

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
2:52 pm

curious,

Man, I’m hope around to see it!

But given that 20% of the populace apparently loves getting f&cked, it seems unlikely…

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

June 5th, 2012
2:52 pm

“Or just let them continue to screw up and don’t bail them out next time.”

As long as they use FDIC, “them” is us.

Brosephus™ - Got Collective Bargaining power?

June 5th, 2012
2:53 pm

Did it ever occur to a single liberal as to why the 3 exorbitantly paid CEOs of the only 2 “private” firms on the lists are paid so handsomely as opposed to the CEOs of the publicly traded companies?

The reason is simple. Private owners realize the inherent value of a great CEO and are willing to pay for it with their own money. The average person in the public does not. And you can find those people on the Bookman blog.

If it were only that simple. You could claim that without a hub, a wheel won’t work on a bicycle. That one hub is so very important, just as that one person in a company. However, if you remove the spokes or workers from that hub and the outer rim or customer base, that wheel still does not work on the bike. So, which is more important, the hub or the spokes?

Contrary to popular opinion, a company can still function without a CEO even if only for a limited period. However, if you remove all the workers, the CEO is worthless.

Don't Forget

June 5th, 2012
2:56 pm

We need an Ayn Rand disciple to explain how this greed is good but union greed is bad. Maybe greed is only good if your REALLY greedy and wear a nice suit.

You libs

June 5th, 2012
2:58 pm

Whenever I see a really, really fat person park in the handicapped parking place by the door and then waddle into an all-you-can-eat barbecue joint, I have this vague, unsettled feeling. Could this be the beginning of adipose envy? Can I be helped?

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
2:59 pm

Don’t Forget the corollary (LOL at the brilliant segue!),

Stand on your own two feet.

Unless you are a billion dollar corporate “person” (my friend) or a billion dollar human being.

Then welfare is just fine…

Williebkind

June 5th, 2012
3:00 pm

When we replace all the progressive liberals in public office, I would then tax the hell out of companies who pay CEO’s huge salaries unless everyone in that company makes a 6 digit payday. I have never known anyone worth that kind of SALARY these CEO’s get. If you own a business then there is no limit but the moment you hire a CEO then it applies to all the employees. If boardmembers keep telling everyone CEO’s must have these salaries for the company to retain them–replace the board members.

southpaw

June 5th, 2012
3:01 pm

Paul @2:42
Thanks for the more straight-up answer this time. But isn’t that what the owners have the chance to do now–if they don’t take the easy way out and appoint a management-picked proxy?

My question didn’t imply satisfaction with the status quo. The only thing I might have implied is that if you want to point out a problem, it’s a good idea to start figuring out a solution.

I’m not interested in building myself up, and I absolutely don’t want to tear anybody else down. As for “sound-bite”–I’m not creative enough to think of them, and the last time I heard a question like my own that was during (and related to) the Iran hostage crisis. It’s a lot easier to think of questions instead of sound bites.

Time to go from my first job to my second–taking care of the family. Have fun,everybody.

Adam

June 5th, 2012
3:01 pm

When we replace all the progressive liberals in public office, I would then tax the hell out of companies who pay CEO’s huge salaries unless everyone in that company makes a 6 digit payday.

Somehow I doubt your goals and suggestion for reaching them match up….

DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman

June 5th, 2012
3:01 pm

I would also add some of Obama’s athlete buddies such as Lebron James made $15 million in salary and has a $90, yes $90 million dollar contract with Nike. Of course, he has many other endorsement deals as well.

Well, are the tax payers bailing out LeBron? :roll:

Williebkind

June 5th, 2012
3:02 pm

“We need an Ayn Rand disciple to explain how this greed is good but union greed is bad.”

Greed is greed and unions have turned from the worker to the politician. No more unions.

Common Sense isn't very Common

June 5th, 2012
3:03 pm

Bro

The CEO can exist without any workers (permanent that is).

they only need the BOD to vote for their pay increases LOL

Look at how many companies exist where the majority of the workers are contract employees.

A large number of construction companies use 1099 employees.

A large number of banks use contractors in place of employees.

A large number of companies use part time workers (no benefits).

While the BOD is overpaid for the most part (for part time work) and vote on the CEO’s salaries.

Kind of an incestuous relationship don’t you think? Kind of like congressional pay raises :-)

JamVet

June 5th, 2012
3:04 pm

…unions have turned from the worker to the politician.

Some specifics would be useful, here…

Adam

June 5th, 2012
3:04 pm

If your basis for not liking unions is greed, therefore you want to get rid of them… I have to wonder why you ONLY want to get rid of unions when plenty of other organizations have a similar amount of greed, or worse.

Paul

June 5th, 2012
3:05 pm

Thulsa Doom

I don’t have a problem with what a PRIVATE firm (no public ownership) pays its top guys. That changes if they receive financial assistance from the feds.

Your post brings up a couple other points. That guy running Blackstone? The founder? Schwartzmann? CNN Money said his compensation was $233 million. And guess how much was salary?

$350,000

Any wonder why the rich get richer when they don’t face a 35% marginal tax rate?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/29/news/companies/blackstone_schwarzman/index.htm

Steve - USA (I support "None Of The Above")

June 5th, 2012
3:05 pm

Don’t forget those compensation figures are before SuperPac contributions so they really don’t take home that kind of money. ;)

Real Scootter

June 5th, 2012
3:05 pm

If I didn’t know better I think Bro just called me a spoke! :shock:

I'm a liberal and believe everything I read and nothing the other side comes up with...cause we're smart and they are not

June 5th, 2012
3:06 pm

Let me see if I get this right. The AJC still puts out crappy bias opinions……….yet the paper gets printed everyday………..I think I’m starting to get it.

Normal Free...Pro Human Rights Thug...And liking it!

June 5th, 2012
3:06 pm

Thulsa Doom

June 5th, 2012
3:07 pm

CEO pay is also rather miniscule in the great scheme of things. I believe when we discussed this several months back we were talking about the pay of United Healthcare’s CEO -he was paid $102 million United has 70 million members. That means that every $1.45 a year out of every member covered by United went into this CEOs pocket- basically 8 cents per month out of someone’s premium.

CEO pay is negligible in the great scheme of things. Unfortunately the truth just doesn’t fit the narrative of the envious and the hateful.

DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman

June 5th, 2012
3:07 pm

Hi Paul!! Happy Tuesday!