 |
05-30-2010, 11:25 AM
|
#1
|
|
s.e. pa.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: flag, az/hatfield, pa.
Posts: 5,122
|
the other Diversification
erveryone must join the fun...share... 
Morgan Stanley Chairguy John Mack got a raise Friday after the Wall Street firm's board more than doubled his base salary to $2 million a year.
Hey, after doing such a good yob, why not?
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 03:36 PM
|
#2
|
|
Clueless Newbie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 312
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by skate
erveryone must join the fun...share...
Morgan Stanley Chairguy John Mack got a raise Friday after the Wall Street firm's board more than doubled his base salary to $2 million a year.
Hey, after doing such a good yob, why not? |
Tell 'em, Comrade! Nobody, regardles of luck, skill, training, or perseverance, should have anything more than anyone else.
You shouldn't have a pony unless we ALL get ponies. You shouldn't have a mansion und a yacht unless we ALL get a mansion und a yacht! Everyone is great at everything, and no one is better at anything than anyone else, so we ALL must have EXACTLY the same benefits and outcomes!
Egalitarianism and all that! Down with success! Up with failure!
(Translation for the sarcasm impared: If you are not a stockholder in Morgan Stanley, you have NO RIGHT to tell a private entity, even a publically traded one, what to do with their money unless it is a public safety hazard. If you don't like it, one is always free to boycott M-S or any other company)
__________________
"Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth. Socialism is the equal distribution of poverty." - Winston Churchill
I am not John Galt, I am Jon Arbuckle!
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 04:38 PM
|
#3
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,884
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WeirdWilly
Tell 'em, Comrade! Nobody, regardles of luck, skill, training, or perseverance, should have anything more than anyone else.
You shouldn't have a pony unless we ALL get ponies. You shouldn't have a mansion und a yacht unless we ALL get a mansion und a yacht! Everyone is great at everything, and no one is better at anything than anyone else, so we ALL must have EXACTLY the same benefits and outcomes!
Egalitarianism and all that! Down with success! Up with failure!
(Translation for the sarcasm impared: If you are not a stockholder in Morgan Stanley, you have NO RIGHT to tell a private entity, even a publically traded one, what to do with their money unless it is a public safety hazard. If you don't like it, one is always free to boycott M-S or any other company)
|
But that's the part the sarcasm-impaired don't get: "THEIR money". 
Boxcar
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 05:01 PM
|
#4
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: bullhead city, az
Posts: 1,157
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by boxcar
But that's the part the sarcasm-impaired don't get: "THEIR money".
Boxcar |
all corporate money "belongs" to the shareholders...they should make the decisions..
__________________
"Marines - Providing Enemies of America an Opportunity To Die For their
Country Since 1775"
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 05:11 PM
|
#5
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 46,884
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by prospector
all corporate money "belongs" to the shareholders...they should make the decisions..
|
No! The dividends belong to the shareholders, not the salaries of the corporate officers. If the shareholders believe otherwise, let them buy the corporation and run it themselves!
Boxcar
__________________
Consistent profits can only be made on the basis of analysis that is far from obvious to the majority. - anonymous guru
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 06:24 PM
|
#6
|
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,889
|
I thought they already bought it.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 06:33 PM
|
#7
|
|
Lacrimae rerum
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at my house
Posts: 7,308
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by boxcar
No! The dividends belong to the shareholders, not the salaries of the corporate officers. If the shareholders believe otherwise, let them buy the corporation and run it themselves!
Boxcar
|
the shareholders did buy the company. The shareholders elect a Board, and the Board hires CEOs and sets the salaries on the shareholders behalf.
Probably the best advice is don't be a shareholder unless you like the governance of the corp.
Quote:
|
(Translation for the sarcasm impared: If you are not a stockholder in Morgan Stanley, you have NO RIGHT to tell a private entity, even a publically traded one, what to do with their money unless it is a public safety hazard. )
|
Anyone, shareholder or not, has every right to make fun of, ridicule, lambast, and anything else they can think of, any private entity's capital allocation, including CEO pay. It's called free speech. You can tell anyone anything about anything. That private corp just doesn't have to listen. And because they don't have to listen, because what skate or you or I thinks about this matter means nothing to them -- they don't really require any self appointed, non-paid "shouter downers", either. But I'm sure they enjoy any volunteer work that gets thrown their way.
Last edited by chickenhead; 05-30-2010 at 06:35 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 06:38 PM
|
#8
|
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: bullhead city, az
Posts: 1,157
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by boxcar
No! The dividends belong to the shareholders, not the salaries of the corporate officers. If the shareholders believe otherwise, let them buy the corporation and run it themselves!
Boxcar
|
the shareholders do own the company...the board they elect determines the salaries..proxy votes are dangerous pieces of paper..
__________________
"Marines - Providing Enemies of America an Opportunity To Die For their
Country Since 1775"
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 06:47 PM
|
#9
|
|
Lacrimae rerum
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at my house
Posts: 7,308
|
btw, I'd argue that Bartz's $48 million package at Yahoo last year was a hell of a bigger waste of money than an extra mil for Mack. Some of these CEO's are just shockingly overpaid for what the shareholders get in return. Very few corps out there can stand to waste $50 mil on one person per year. That is many dozens of superstar engineers salaries, they would contribute a hell of a lot more to building value.
Last edited by chickenhead; 05-30-2010 at 06:52 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 07:15 PM
|
#10
|
|
Clueless Newbie
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: S.E. Michigan
Posts: 312
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chickenhead
Anyone, shareholder or not, has every right to make fun of, ridicule, lambast, and anything else they can think of, any private entity's capital allocation, including CEO pay. It's called free speech. You can tell anyone anything about anything. That private corp just doesn't have to listen. And because they don't have to listen, because what skate or you or I thinks about this matter means nothing to them -- they don't really require any self appointed, non-paid "shouter downers", either. But I'm sure they enjoy any volunteer work that gets thrown their way.
|
I was a little clumsy, but that is my point. People should be able to say what they want. But when the government starts dictating what companies pay, there is a problem.
__________________
"Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth. Socialism is the equal distribution of poverty." - Winston Churchill
I am not John Galt, I am Jon Arbuckle!
|
|
|
|
|
05-30-2010, 07:35 PM
|
#11
|
|
Lacrimae rerum
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at my house
Posts: 7,308
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by WeirdWilly
I was a little clumsy, but that is my point. People should be able to say what they want. But when the government starts dictating what companies pay, there is a problem.
|
I know that, but that wasn't skates suggestion, he didn't suggest any remedy.
And I agree, with the following caveat or context.
If you as head of a private corp take anyone on as a "rescue" share or bondholder because you've f*cked up so badly as to both render your corp insolvent and had every other investor of size turn their back on you and leave you for dead, don't expect your new investor to not interfere with some of your capital allocation, especially CEO pay. True whether that investor be public or private.
Hopefully all CEOs have taken notice of that entirely to-be-expected fact.
Last edited by chickenhead; 05-30-2010 at 07:36 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
05-31-2010, 01:53 PM
|
#12
|
|
s.e. pa.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: flag, az/hatfield, pa.
Posts: 5,122
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by chickenhead
I know that, but that wasn't skates suggestion, he didn't suggest any remedy.
And I agree, with the following caveat or context.
If you as head of a private corp take anyone on as a "rescue" share or bondholder because you've f*cked up so badly as to both render your corp insolvent and had every other investor of size turn their back on you and leave you for dead, don't expect your new investor to not interfere with some of your capital allocation, especially CEO pay. True whether that investor be public or private.
Hopefully all CEOs have taken notice of that entirely to-be-expected fact.
|
I sure can see both sides and they are pretty even, seems to me.
So, i've really got no grip. free speech...etc. i understand, but enough is enough ditto.
What i see is an ever increase in pay scale, im going to say that Grasso (past head of NYstk EX) got way too much money.
What happens is a guy like Grasso gets $140 Million to retire (does nothing, retires) but upset the apple cart, freedom aside, you got to consider the economic structure.
To view the complete , economic, opposite side after the BO health care passed, we can see that the structure of money flow has tipped which comes close to turnover, which relates to rebellion.
The health care bill will now cover people making less than $1200/mo, which is a welfare payment over $1000/yr for those on Medicare.
My point would be, this is obvious, a much more Gov control Welfare Program, due to an uneven PAY SCALE within the economy.
It does not correct the problem, but rather covers the problem.
We Now have, nothing new i understand, our economy going in an increasing Welfare State direction, while at the same time (this is my point) Chinas Economy is doing just the OPPOSITE.
To address the problem, we need a higher pay scale for the working person.
To get this higher scale, we need less people able to do the work, which means fewer immigrants. legal or illegal does not matter.
We are talking about an economic structure, NOT sweetheart deals.
be a little real....please
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
