- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: GM ceo makes 29 million a year
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:14 pm to Midtiger farm
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:14 pm to Midtiger farm
quote:Correct. "Too big to fail" means every American taxpayer has a direct interest in their compensation packages and how well those companies are performing.
Lol at private companies- more like a state run enterprise- same as airlines and railroads
1
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:18 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
Correct. "Too big to fail" means every American taxpayer has a direct interest in their compensation packages and how well those companies are performing.
What's the implication?
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:25 pm to GRTiger
quote:His post was in response to someone who asked why we should care what CEO's make. The implication is that when poor performance by these particular CEO's can and does lead to large infusions of public money because they've been deemed too big to fail the public has a direct interest in the performance of these particular CEO's.
What's the implication?
This post was edited on 9/15/23 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:31 pm to rrboy
The difference in stress and responsibility from senior executive staff to actual CEO is actually pretty vast.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:34 pm to TDTOM
quote:
The hat is because fewer and fewer people want to be part of a shitty arse union.
Wrong again.
You don't have the intelligence or real world experience for this thread.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:37 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
His post was in response to someone who asked why we should care what CEO's make. The implication is that when poor performance by these particular CEO's can and does lead to large infusions of public money because they've been deemed too big to fail the public has a direct interest in the performance of these particular CEO's.
Frankly, the only difference between GMC or Ford's CEO and inside traders like Elizabeth Warren, Dan Crenshaw, and Nancy Pelosi is that the people at least have the option to vote somebody in to replace one of those dirty politicians.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:39 pm to wadewilson
quote:
You don't have the intelligence or real world experience for this thread.
. Says the union guy that has to pay someone to speak for him. Clown.Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:43 pm to rrboy
Average salary of $67,000 is pretty good. Sounds like GM pays well. Income disparity is a problem, but you picked a bad example.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 4:53 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
His post was in response to someone who asked why we should care what CEO's make. The implication is that when poor performance by these particular CEO's can and does lead to large infusions of public money because they've been deemed too big to fail the public has a direct interest in the performance of these particular CEO's.
Performance I can see, though usually significant bailouts relate more to a macroeconomic failure than one shitty CEO. But the comp for the office of the CEO of these companies isn't really up to the general public. But even if it is, we probably want to attract high quality talent and therefore shouldn't mind elevated comp, especially because it's not us paying for it under normal circumstances.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:01 pm to GRTiger
quote:Yeah, I agree, which is why there isn't an easy solution that I can see. If you force some sort of pay cap you drive away top talent compounding the problem. Maybe if you agree to a large bailout you should have to agree to a temporary freeze in salary increases but allow increased performance bonuses that are generous enough to more than make up the difference if hit? I don't know, just throwing shite against the wall.
But even if it is, we probably want to attract high quality talent and therefore shouldn't mind elevated comp, especially because it's not us paying for it under normal circumstances.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:19 pm to northshorebamaman
When a solution isn't clear, it usually means the market should solve it and government should stand aside or at best moderate.
A serious approach would be to reduce barriers to entry into markets but that would mean government having less regulatory control and that upsets some people. The more authoritarian approach I mentioned earlier in the thread would be to significantly tighten antitrust laws.
A serious approach would be to reduce barriers to entry into markets but that would mean government having less regulatory control and that upsets some people. The more authoritarian approach I mentioned earlier in the thread would be to significantly tighten antitrust laws.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:24 pm to GRTiger
Maybe there is no effective solution and the historical trend of accumulation followed by revolution followed by accumulation is inevitable?
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:45 pm to northshorebamaman
We'll see. I don't know of any nations exactly like ours in history so I can't begin to predict the motion of our ocean.
The more we (d)evolve into centralized state control, the more likely the answer is yes.
The more we (d)evolve into centralized state control, the more likely the answer is yes.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:45 pm to rrboy
67k a year for manual labor isn’t too bad, no?
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:48 pm to GRTiger
quote:
A serious approach would be to reduce barriers to entry into markets but that would mean government having less regulatory control and that upsets some people.
In some of these cases, megacorporations are the barrier, not government.
I know this thread specifically is about UAW and Detroit carmaker, which should have been busted up 15 years ago, but our government isn't doing enough to bust up giant businesses.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 5:57 pm to wadewilson
quote:
In some of these cases, megacorporations are the barrier, not government.
What's an example?
Eta
I'm probably not coming back in here tonight. I'll just say that in the vast majority of cases, you can trace a mega corp directly to a restrictive and likely unethical government regulation that allowed one industry participant to seize a significant enough market share to have unfair control over the space. Just something to ponder. I'm going to get drunk on NZ sauv blanc like a sophisticated basic bitch.
This post was edited on 9/15/23 at 6:08 pm
Posted on 9/15/23 at 6:04 pm to GRTiger
Jeff Bezos.
He's shut down businesses he didn't like that were dependant on AWS.
Your cable or internet provider, most likely.
He's shut down businesses he didn't like that were dependant on AWS.
Your cable or internet provider, most likely.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 6:14 pm to rrboy
quote:
Average uaw worker makes about 67k a year.
Well duh. A CEO and executives aren't average. rr must stand for "raging retard".
Posted on 9/15/23 at 6:15 pm to rrboy
quote:
uaw
Is why auto manufacturing has left this nation.
Posted on 9/15/23 at 6:18 pm to wadewilson
quote:
He's shut down businesses he didn't like that were dependant on AWS.
If it were 11am on Tuesday, I'd want to dig into this. Maybe next time.
quote:
Your cable or internet provider, most likely.
The absolute classic examples of government control.
Page 12 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News