I'm generally against the government having a big say in how companies pay their executives as well. If they do really stupid things, hopefully they will fail. The problem is that the CEO's that are getting paid $40-60 million a year are heading companies that have gotten that big through acquisitions and mergers that have resulted in the company being "too big to fail". And at that point, their problem becomes our problem (as we have recently seen). Its not just finance companies either. Paulson is buying commercial paper from GM and Catepillar now, unsecured debt, because those companies are so big and we need them to be solvent and taking part in the economy.
So what's the option? Do we take a harder stance against corporate mergers and acquisitions so that companies don't get so large that we can't allow them to fail? Do we impose more oversight and restrictions on companies that do get that big to hopefully reduce the odds that they do something stupid and have to get bailed out? What is the balance between allowing corporate freedom and protecting the national interest? Judah On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Cameron Childress <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Loathe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> However he faced angry questioning from the committee's members. Henry >> Waxman, a Democrat, asked: "Your company is now bankrupt, our economy is >> in crisis, but you get to keep $480 million (£276 million). I have a >> very basic question for you, is this fair?" >> >> Mr Fuld said that he had in fact taken about $300 million (£173 million) >> in pay and bonuses over the past eight years. > > I am definitely against the government interfering with how much > executives get compensated. That's really up to the company. > However, this is insane... > > I really wonder what type of measurement could be made on corporate > responsibility to it's shareholders aside from share price? I mean it > looks here as if there is a serious need that's not being met. > Someone needs to come up with a metric to measure ridiculous behavior > by a company so that shareholders can look at that measurement. I'd > say that potential employees looking to work for a company would be > interested in that too. > > I mean - I have worked in the past for a giant company that made > really dumb decisions of great magnitude, and once I realized that was > the case I quit and found a new place to work. I'm all about letting > companies make those bad decisions, but it sure would be nice to have > a way to measure that in a nice concise, easy to understand number.. > > -Cameron > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:272844 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
