McCaskill May Be On To Something Big

The only salvation for our economy is to nationalize the banks along with many other quite socialist responses to the utter failure of “free market capitalism.” Many will disagree with me on this and they are going to suffer from their clinging to a lost cause. At the same time, these same folks will not accept the fact that we have long passed the environmental point of no return and the U.S. Congress, which is a bargaining and debating club, is unfit and unable to come to grips with the debacle that is on the horizon. They'll still be arguing about hydrogen cars when the visiting the Atlantic Ocean is a mere trip to Ohio.

The idea of a top salary cap seems politically justifiable given the current economic climate. But this is a very naive approach to problems within capitalism. Wage and price controls, learn from history don’t repeat it.

Wage and price controls may do little for the capitalist ethos, but neither does taking government bailouts. If these corporations want to help out the cause of capitalism they can give the taxpayers back their money. When they do this let them pay thier execs whatever they want.

Would have to remind everyone here that Ben and Jerrys imposed this upon themselves from teh get go. Their CEO salaries were never allowed to go above 7x what the lowest person got paid. This never seemed to hurt their growth, their capital gain, their employee morale.

Quite the opposite. Case closed.

I read that Obama might not include a pay cap in the next round of money to the banks.

Contact your members of Congress to support Sen. McCaskill's bill.

Lord Acton's maxim on power applies to money (well, after all, money is power). These grossly overpaid executives have been mentally and morally corrupted by the vast sums of money they reap from their companies.

Excessive income also makes one stupid. Just ask anyone who has worked in a posh retail store.

I think it's a great idea to put this cap in place for the bailout recipients. As for CEOs of other companies, there are a few examples of CEOs of big corporations having the sense to limit their own salaries and be responsible to their own companies – CEO of Costco (who's been doing this for years), CEO of Starbucks (who's declared he will only get paid $10k plus stocks for this coming year). It is happening with some companies, although unfortunately, very few and far in between. The huge bonuses of these Wall St firms that received recently is just insane, and our Fed Govt need to come down hard on these greedy bastards. IF YOU BANKRUPT YOUR OWN COMPANY, YOU DO NOT DESERVE A BONUS!!!

[...] should cap the salary and bonuses of executives whose banks receieve bailout money.  But then she takes it a step too far: But why stop there?  The shrinking economy has led to mass layoffs across the [...]

While we're at it, how about caps for Hollywood stars, musicians, and ex-politicians who write books or make speeches for enormous sums of money (okay, so we may have to give Pelosi a bail-out for her dismal failure)? In fact, why don't we just demand that ALL politicians give ANY of their net worth over say $2,000,000 to the government–some of them have done more damage to our country than most senior executives do to their companies? What about the politicians who have bankrupted our country?

This, I think, is taking things rather too far.

First of all, it smacks of punishing people simply because they are rich, and not because they actually did anything wrong. Caterpillar makes construction equipment. This year, the number of new construction projects has plummeted. It makes sense, then, that Caterpillar no longer needs as many people to make construction equipment as they did before. But they do still need a CEO. Cutting his salary isn’t going to magically remove the need to lay off those workers.

But more to the point, rich people pay a lot of taxes. That Sprint executive sits comfortably in the 35% income tax bracket, which means that he paid over seven million dollars in taxes right off the top, not counting the taxes on any bonuses he made or things he bought. In a big-picture way, this seems like exactly the wrong time to be slackening the government’s income stream by arbitrarily limiting a bunch of people’s salaries to $400,000.

[...] The Washington Independent » McCaskill May Be On To Something Big [...]

Hey, I'm not advocating for wage and price controls here, but for a voluntary cap imposed by the CEOs that acknowledges the current troubling state of the economy and the need to for everyone to “sacrifice” (to the tune of $400k) to allow the company to thrive, and keep from laying off experienced workers that you'll need in the long run. Much like the Ben & Jerry's example that Matthew notes below.

Probably the ONLY way to take these thieves license to steal away from them. I don't get paid for lousy work, neither should they. For crying out loud these banks with their schemes have brought down this country.,, along with several Republican governments and a little help from Bill Clinton.

I don't know if pegging their salaries is the best idea… but it's going to take a law to keep their sticky fingers off the bailout $$. They obviously feel they are in a government entitlement program to support their outrageous life style. If they want our $$ to bail them out, they should practice a bit of humility instead of running off and spending it on themselves while their corporations fail. So,yeah, if they take our $$ they should be restricted if they can't control themselves.

What happened to “we all must sacrifice”? I'm tired of all the sacrifice being laid on the people who actually WORK well for a living and then, get the shaft for it.

And, Kyle, unless you're rich too, you're being robbed. Plus, like Leona Helmsley said “only the poor pay taxes” if you think these folks are paying what they owe, think again. Heads up, folks.

[...] McCaskill’s War on Wall Street Idiots By stephencrose SOURCE [...]

southvalley, I think that the salient part of Helmesley's story was not the quote but rather that she went to jail for tax evasion. But she's still wrong. I'm not saying that all of the rich pay all of the taxes they should – many do not, by using loopholes or by simply not paying. But the top 1% of wage earners pay about 33% of the total income tax; the top 15% pay about two-thirds; and the top 50% of wage earners pay all of the income taxes. And that's the way it should be, but it is still the way it is.

To be clear, I'm completely on board with the McCaskill's idea of limiting compensation of banks that receive taxpayer-funded bailouts. I just don't see where we get the authority to limit compensation in privately-owned companies like this.

“Why stop there?” This is so ridiculously LEFT wing idiocy, it makes my skin crawl. So your argument is to let Congress tell the country what people's jobs are worth! I don't want Congress anywhere NEAR my job! They f— everything up they touch! Think about it…let this idea just play out: Congress sets what job will pay (worth); soon everyone wants the jobs that Congress says are worth more; all college courses are geared to only training for those jobs because that is the demand; then special interest get involved in paying off candidates/congresspeople who will up the limits in their industy; then Congress votes themselves another raise so they stay 'ahead' of all salaries offered making people seek Congress for the highest pay instead of the integrity/job that needs to be done…it just gets NUTS! I know people want to villify capitalism and free markets and all they stand for but this is America after all – not Europe, or worse a socialist country that should have to rely on the government to tell them where the value of things, including jobs, lie.

[...] pay to performance for their subordinates, though most reject the idea for themselves. But now, as Daphne Eviatar reports: When Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) Friday called Wall Street executives “idiots” for using [...]

Just in case you've never read any human resources reports, dated the secretary, or answered the department phone calls, let me clue you all in:
All jobs in a company except for the big shots' positions have PAY CAPS. The company sets them.
If the company will not set pay caps at the top, let the representatives of the capped employees and the customers, aka elected representatives, set them for them. If the employee pay cap is not socialism, neither, ladies and gents, is the management pay cap set for the good of the company's bottom line–and for America's bottom line.
Now do you understand?

Just in case you've never read any human resources reports, dated the secretary, or answered the department phone calls, let me clue you all in:
All jobs in a company except for the big shots' positions have PAY CAPS. The company sets them.
If the company will not set pay caps at the top, let the representatives of the capped employees and the customers, aka elected representatives, set them for them. If the employee pay cap is not socialism, neither, ladies and gents, is the management pay cap set for the good of the company's bottom line–and for America's bottom line.
Now do you understand?

[...] had a share of lawyer Billy Flynn in the London production of the musical Chicago. Usefull Posts The Washington Independent » McCaskill May Be On To Something Big…Cool Mom – Daphne Brogdon – Thankful For the Vibey Chair » Cool Mom – Fun Videos and a Blog [...]