(August 20, 2015 at 12:16 pm)abaris Wrote: You're only scratching the surface here. I guess nobody would argue against a private company paying their CEOs whatever they want. But in many cases it's not the reality. There are two problems. One, the system of short term bonuses. Managers take unnecessary risks to meet the requirements for their annual bonus. Two, in case of failure, absolutely nothing happens. As has been shown in 2008 when the state bailed out the losers and risk takers. Not a single one of them was tried. Not a single one of them paid a dime in compensations.You're right, just the surface. I'm not that deep or educated in business.
So I'm all for private companies paying what they want. But please, don't come running for the taxpayer's money when things go down the drain. That's yet another example of why the current capitalistic system doesn't work and the market doesn't regulate itself. To add insult to injury, most of these zeros that brought us the debacle of 2008, enjoy the results of the golden handshakes they got after the failed miserably at their jobs. Paid by yours truly among millions of other people.
I can only speak for the company I worked at. In two instances, the director, lead manager and lead salesman manipulated data to increase the number of sales and consequently their bonuses. The following year, as a result of their actions, both blocks of business lost money. They were terminated with minimal severance (past bonus pay reduced from severance). I think the players in the 2008 crash should have suffered the same/similar fate.
As to the 2008 crash, I might be wrong but wasn't this started by politics and lowering the qualifications to get loans for homeowners? As far as the taxpayer bailout, wasn't that political also? I think the bailout has been paid back plus interest.
https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/
Being told you're delusional does not necessarily mean you're mental.
