rssA Bit More on Obama’s Executive Compensation Stand
Wednesday, February 04, 2009 at 9:56 am
- 8 Comments
Following up on Mary’s post, it’s also worth noting that the $500,000 executive-pay limit for bailed out banks to be unveiled today by the White House seems to apply to total compensation — meaning salary, bonuses, stock options*, everything.
That would be a sharp break from the Bush administration’s Wall Street bailout bill, which did very little to rein in the enormous pay packages enjoyed by Wall Street executives, even after they’d run their companies into the ground. Under TARP, for example, the limits on golden parachute retirement packages applied only to the five top-paid employees of the bailed-out firm — and only if the firm accepted more than $300 million of taxpayer funding.
The Obama team’s limits also seem poised to go further than the TARP-reform bill passed by the House last month. That proposal, which the Senate never considered, would have limited executive bonuses and incentive-based pay, but not salaries — a loophole that would have allowed bailed-out firms to pay their executives anything they pleased.
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) previously pushed a proposal to cap total executive compensation at $1 million, and Wall Street should have taken it when they could. President Obama appears prepared to cut that figure in half.
As Mary points out, few outside of lower Manhattan will be shedding tears.
*Update: The $500,000 cap does not include stock options. Click here to see more loopholes in the Obama plan.
8 Comments
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 8:12 am
A good start but It's time to do more. Write your senator to pass a law to return the bonus money already paid to failed executives.
It's easy to do here: http://returnthebonus.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/…
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 11:12 am
Capping executive pay at $500,000 a year for financial firms receiving “exceptional assistance” is a little late in coming and does nothing for us now. That horse is already out of the barn. Even if it does come back, I'm sure there are enough legal loopholes and “exceptions” lurking in that guideline to make it of little consequence. Obama did nothing, again.
Obama needs to get his nose out of the air and to the grindstone where it belongs. He ran around the country , hat in hand, begging for the job of President — it's time he produces something of value in exchange for his salary.
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 12:17 pm
While I believe less is more when it comes to government intervention, on this issue I wholeheartedly agree that income and perks should be limited for those who participate in the bailout until the money has been repaid.
For example: If you loan me money to assist me in paying my mortgage because I’ve fallen on hard times (e.g. unemployment) and I turn around take a trip to Paris and buy a new porche, you’re right to be outraged and upset. Worse still, if someone else compels you to loan me the money (the government) and I turn around and take that trip and make that purchase you’re likely to be even more upset because you had no direct, immediate say in the loan.
Yes, you elect the officials who sign off on these decisions, but once they make decisions like this that you don’t agree with you’re stuck until their terms are up.
When the government decides to loan MY tax dollars to institutions which I have no direct interest in, I demand that reasonable restrictions be attached to their acceptance of my hard earned money.
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
I am trying to refinance my mortgage.
I have a 6% 30 years fix now.
I have a credit score of 700, perfect income history, 5 time more equity than debt, perfect candidate.
I can't get a loan below 5% apr.
WHY?
Because the greedy bankers don't give a shit about me or you the economy or the country.
All they care about is their profits and huge salaries,
everything else expandable.
What is Obama doing for you?
NO THING!!!
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 4:12 pm
A good start but It's time to do more. Write your senator to pass a law to return the bonus money already paid to failed executives.
It's easy to do here: http://returnthebonus.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/…
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 7:12 pm
Capping executive pay at $500,000 a year for financial firms receiving “exceptional assistance” is a little late in coming and does nothing for us now. That horse is already out of the barn. Even if it does come back, I'm sure there are enough legal loopholes and “exceptions” lurking in that guideline to make it of little consequence. Obama did nothing, again.
Obama needs to get his nose out of the air and to the grindstone where it belongs. He ran around the country , hat in hand, begging for the job of President — it's time he produces something of value in exchange for his salary.
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 8:17 pm
While I believe less is more when it comes to government intervention, on this issue I wholeheartedly agree that income and perks should be limited for those who participate in the bailout until the money has been repaid.
For example: If you loan me money to assist me in paying my mortgage because I’ve fallen on hard times (e.g. unemployment) and I turn around take a trip to Paris and buy a new porche, you’re right to be outraged and upset. Worse still, if someone else compels you to loan me the money (the government) and I turn around and take that trip and make that purchase you’re likely to be even more upset because you had no direct, immediate say in the loan.
Yes, you elect the officials who sign off on these decisions, but once they make decisions like this that you don’t agree with you’re stuck until their terms are up.
When the government decides to loan MY tax dollars to institutions which I have no direct interest in, I demand that reasonable restrictions be attached to their acceptance of my hard earned money.
Comment posted February 4, 2009 @ 9:38 pm
I am trying to refinance my mortgage.
I have a 6% 30 years fix now.
I have a credit score of 700, perfect income history, 5 time more equity than debt, perfect candidate.
I can't get a loan below 5% apr.
WHY?
Because the greedy bankers don't give a shit about me or you the economy or the country.
All they care about is their profits and huge salaries,
everything else expandable.
What is Obama doing for you?
NO THING!!!
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
