How about this? CEO pay that rises with company/stock growth is taxed at the regular rate. CEO pay that rises when the company/stock growth declines is taxed at 90%.
TomJoad
· 1 year ago
Well...I have a problem with it EVEN when they do a good job. There ought to be a rule, regarding the average, least paid, and multiple that a CEO cannot make more than.
This has gotten obscene. A CEO actually does less work, is less critical to a company, and I question why they should make more money at all? They sit at the top, and make decisions, based either on input ot on built-in prejudices. The actual PEOPLE in the company are what give any company its worth. How many CEOs have you met, seen, or heard where you thought "man...that guy is off on his own planet"?
Making decisions, where you get tons of money whether your decisions are bad or good...how about having that be the LEAST paid position in the company? I mean, in the old days, you had an owner that built a company from the ground up, and knew it inside out, and okay...he was THE boss. Nowdays a lot is done by comittee, and a new CEO only knows "theoretically" if at all, how to run a company. What exactly makes him so expensive? He really adds null value, he may restructure (oh...hard, hard, back breaking work that) or give commands, but the people that actually do the work....put it this way, I've worked in enough corporations, for years in the same ones, and CEOs came, held their meetings, restructured, looked important, and then left. My and others work with the customers, often IN SPITE of some nonsense from a CEO, gave our company its worth. Those parade of bozos coming in and out, either left us alone, or made it tougher on us to deliver product. Often they make terrible decisions. riding on our backs.
jr
· 1 year ago
We need to go back to the Eisenhower tax rates which would be 91 percent on incomes of 3.2 million and above
ekwhite
· 1 year ago
Jr. , that makes sense. We need to think confiscatory tax rates above a certain income and/or total elimination of deductions for incomes over 3.2 million.
LeslieB
· 1 year ago
CEOs make over 360 times the pay of the average US worker. It's obscene because average wages aren't keeping up with inflation, and many have seen their wages frozen for years.
These outrageous CEO wages come at the expense of the company, its shareholders and its employees. CEO performance isn't necessarily tied to those excessive multi-millions either.
Andrew
· 1 year ago
As far as CEO compensation goes, both their respectives boards as well as share holders should be the ones deciding how much a CEO is to be paid. No doubt the total figure should be determined by the companies operational performance as well as profit margin. I think it's a stretch to think that government should force a company to do otherwise, but perhaps there is some room for further discussion with reagrd to employee compensation either determined within the company or in fact rasing the minimum wage for workers based on true and accurate inflation data, not the nonsensical numbers that are currently provided from a cooked set of government books via the Federal Reserve. While many may not follow the workings of the IMF as well as the world bank this weekend in D.C., a major water shed event has taken place. For those who have followed the Wanta matter for the last 18 months, the major banks in the US are finally going to be reined in. This will start a chain reaction throughout banking world wide. You can get the fact here: www.worldreports.org. Keep an eye out this week for announcements regarding Citibank. It's do or die in the near term.
ekwhite
· 1 year ago
Giving shareholders a say in executive compensation is a start, but it isn't enough. Large funds will have the deciding vote in executive compensation. Expect the "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" effect to expand to fund managers. I agree with Chris that we need to reform the tax code to eliminate the special perks placed there over the years. Deductions should be simplified or eliminated to a few that benefit everyone, not just a special few. Chris should expand on this topic.
Busboy
· 1 year ago
Some of the CEO's run their corporations for the benefit of the executives. Some run them for the benefit of the stockholders. The stockholders already have a say in how much the CEO gets paid. If they don't like it?;.... then they can sell their stock. There is/was an IRS regulation on the books which will only let a corporation write off CEO salaries up to $1 million. People who invest for themselves can easily spot corporations which are run by and for the executives. The problem areas are some mutual funds where the stocks are picked by managers based on the "good ol' boy" criteria.
Busboy
· 1 year ago
Why should there be a rule? Who the hell are you? Some pipsqueak who, in his infinite wisdom, wants to tell a multibillion dollar corporation how much to pay it's CEO? If you think you're one of life's losers? Then figure out how to make your own pasture greener instead of shitting in someone else's yard.
All Comments
This has gotten obscene. A CEO actually does less work, is less critical to a company, and I question why they should make more money at all? They sit at the top, and make decisions, based either on input ot on built-in prejudices. The actual PEOPLE in the company are what give any company its worth. How many CEOs have you met, seen, or heard where you thought "man...that guy is off on his own planet"?
Making decisions, where you get tons of money whether your decisions are bad or good...how about having that be the LEAST paid position in the company? I mean, in the old days, you had an owner that built a company from the ground up, and knew it inside out, and okay...he was THE boss. Nowdays a lot is done by comittee, and a new CEO only knows "theoretically" if at all, how to run a company. What exactly makes him so expensive? He really adds null value, he may restructure (oh...hard, hard, back breaking work that) or give commands, but the people that actually do the work....put it this way, I've worked in enough corporations, for years in the same ones, and CEOs came, held their meetings, restructured, looked important, and then left. My and others work with the customers, often IN SPITE of some nonsense from a CEO, gave our company its worth. Those parade of bozos coming in and out, either left us alone, or made it tougher on us to deliver product. Often they make terrible decisions.
riding on our backs.
These outrageous CEO wages come at the expense of the company, its shareholders and its employees. CEO performance isn't necessarily tied to those excessive multi-millions either.
While many may not follow the workings of the IMF as well as the world bank this weekend in D.C., a major water shed event has taken place. For those who have followed the Wanta matter for the last 18 months, the major banks in the US are finally going to be reined in. This will start a chain reaction throughout banking world wide. You can get the fact here:
www.worldreports.org. Keep an eye out this week for announcements regarding Citibank. It's do or die in the near term.