fire
The big boys have been making the big bucks since the beginning of our country. I do not know what your definition of excessive entails. If you are referring to IDCC, I believe that some may be receiving compensation that leans to the high side. However, I do not believe that any one of them is outrageous.
It amazes me how we are being led by the so-called GURUS to conclude that the market is down because of salaries and options. I would like for any of these critics to show me and the rest of the investing public just one corporate resolution that they have authored and submitted to companies in which they hold shares for a vote at the ASM.
My question is where are these GURUS while we have wholesale lay offs and salary reductions for the working man? I will tell you where they are. They are patting the MBA's performing the cutting and chopping on the back. Where are these guys with the foresight to stop this erosion of the American markets and consumerism? Is this all they have to talk about, high salaries?
We have an economic system that is based on 5% unemployment. we operated at substantially less than 5% for several years. The logical conclusion would be inflation problems. Yet, we did not have such a problem and the reason is the workers are making a bare necessity living. They have had a problem with spendable income for some time. Meanwhile, the real inflation has been local taxes, utilities and mandatory insurance premiums, all of which are not counted in the figures.
We have seen the house payments triple because of the taxes and insurance, the P&I remains the same. Looking back and raising objections to upper salary structures is not justified unless the GURUS were as vocal when the shareholders allowed this to happen. The fact is they were not there to rally the shareholders to defeat the resolutions and proposals from the management of the companies. They were urging the MBA's to lay off and restructure. They were the supporters who knocked out age discrimination if it was based on an economic decision by the company. These folks supported the big companies as they rewrote the book on employee/company loyalty. They applauded the efforts of the companies who forced the older workers out because it helped the bottom line. The fact that it changed the norms and mores of Business did not matter. Everyone knew that the average person's peak earning years was between 50 to 60 years of age. Well, we see the targets of the restructuring programs and it was these people who got cut in favor of a younger worker.
I like to see people make money because it is good for our country and the economy. I will be the first to speak against the big boys receiving loans from their companies. However, the making of money is not the problem in America. Walmart typifies the new America. Low pay for employees and cheap prices as a result of squeezing the suppliers' margin causing the manufacturers to either leave the country or cut the labor costs across the board. Once again, the American consumer is beaten down and the old line family businesses are forced to close the doors. Is this good for America? I think not, but obviously many think otherwise.
So long as we have an athlete who returns from a five year prison sentence to make 73 million dollars in his first year back, shareholders are not alarmed when a CEO makes 10 million. At least the CEO's are running a company rather than biting a piece off his opponent's ear.
Sorry for the rant, but I see many more problems with the new American business climate than high salaries for the folks who run the companies.
MO
loop
