[pjwal]

[quote=UCGal]
I do have an issue with a CEO taking millions out of a company at a time when revenues are shrinking and quarterly earnings are actually quarterly losses. Unfortunately, that is what happening at many large companies – including the one I work at. At a time when employees have been told that raises are on hold indefinitely (last 2 years have been 0%), 401k match is gone, workforce cut by 25%… but the CEO bonuses and RSUs keep increasing. It really is obscene. It’s on a scale not seen in the public sector. The money being transfered from the stock holders to the CEO and his cronies is NOT helping the overall economy. (Share price is a fraction of what it was).[/quote]

Of course it is not on the scale of the public sector nor should it be. The public sector does not generate wealth. Why is it so hard to factor that difference in? Often times, a vast majority of the CEOs income is tied to the success of the company, but you seem to be arguing that the board should not honor his employment contract if he does a bad job. That’s not how it works and a company would be poorly run and at a disadvantage if they said, “Well Bob, we’re not going to pay you if we’re not profitable this year.” That’s not how it works for any employee or we would all be seeking government jobs. He can certainly get fired and if the board continually rewards failure the company will tank. That happens and that is OK in the private sector. There are bad apples and bad companies that fail…a company must provide value to the free market or that is what happens. If the market feels that the company is exercising poor judgment , including executive compensation, then the market will not invest and the practices of the company will play out in the free market economy.

[pjwal]

[quote=UCGal]
I do have an issue with a CEO taking millions out of a company at a time when revenues are shrinking and quarterly earnings are actually quarterly losses. Unfortunately, that is what happening at many large companies – including the one I work at. At a time when employees have been told that raises are on hold indefinitely (last 2 years have been 0%), 401k match is gone, workforce cut by 25%… but the CEO bonuses and RSUs keep increasing. It really is obscene. It’s on a scale not seen in the public sector. The money being transfered from the stock holders to the CEO and his cronies is NOT helping the overall economy. (Share price is a fraction of what it was).[/quote]

Of course it is not on the scale of the public sector nor should it be. The public sector does not generate wealth. Why is it so hard to factor that difference in? Often times, a vast majority of the CEOs income is tied to the success of the company, but you seem to be arguing that the board should not honor his employment contract if he does a bad job. That’s not how it works and a company would be poorly run and at a disadvantage if they said, “Well Bob, we’re not going to pay you if we’re not profitable this year.” That’s not how it works for any employee or we would all be seeking government jobs. He can certainly get fired and if the board continually rewards failure the company will tank. That happens and that is OK in the private sector. There are bad apples and bad companies that fail…a company must provide value to the free market or that is what happens. If the market feels that the company is exercising poor judgment , including executive compensation, then the market will not invest and the practices of the company will play out in the free market economy.

[pjwal]

[quote=UCGal]
I do have an issue with a CEO taking millions out of a company at a time when revenues are shrinking and quarterly earnings are actually quarterly losses. Unfortunately, that is what happening at many large companies – including the one I work at. At a time when employees have been told that raises are on hold indefinitely (last 2 years have been 0%), 401k match is gone, workforce cut by 25%… but the CEO bonuses and RSUs keep increasing. It really is obscene. It’s on a scale not seen in the public sector. The money being transfered from the stock holders to the CEO and his cronies is NOT helping the overall economy. (Share price is a fraction of what it was).[/quote]

Of course it is not on the scale of the public sector nor should it be. The public sector does not generate wealth. Why is it so hard to factor that difference in? Often times, a vast majority of the CEOs income is tied to the success of the company, but you seem to be arguing that the board should not honor his employment contract if he does a bad job. That’s not how it works and a company would be poorly run and at a disadvantage if they said, “Well Bob, we’re not going to pay you if we’re not profitable this year.” That’s not how it works for any employee or we would all be seeking government jobs. He can certainly get fired and if the board continually rewards failure the company will tank. That happens and that is OK in the private sector. There are bad apples and bad companies that fail…a company must provide value to the free market or that is what happens. If the market feels that the company is exercising poor judgment , including executive compensation, then the market will not invest and the practices of the company will play out in the free market economy.

[pjwal]

[quote=KSMountain]Here’s the bio for the current CIO of Atlanta.

This will give you some idea of the kind of person we’re talking about:

http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/it/bio.aspx%5B/quote%5D

Completely unimpressive. I worked for years in the Healthcare tech field for one of the few tech startups that actually experienced some success. My experience taught me that they are the industry closest to the government in their ineptitude with technology. So it’s a good fit for Atlanta and a great move for Dan Smith, who is no doubt thinking about retirement.

[pjwal]

[quote=KSMountain]Here’s the bio for the current CIO of Atlanta.

This will give you some idea of the kind of person we’re talking about:

http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/it/bio.aspx%5B/quote%5D

Completely unimpressive. I worked for years in the Healthcare tech field for one of the few tech startups that actually experienced some success. My experience taught me that they are the industry closest to the government in their ineptitude with technology. So it’s a good fit for Atlanta and a great move for Dan Smith, who is no doubt thinking about retirement.

[pjwal]

[quote=KSMountain]Here’s the bio for the current CIO of Atlanta.

This will give you some idea of the kind of person we’re talking about:

http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/it/bio.aspx%5B/quote%5D

Completely unimpressive. I worked for years in the Healthcare tech field for one of the few tech startups that actually experienced some success. My experience taught me that they are the industry closest to the government in their ineptitude with technology. So it’s a good fit for Atlanta and a great move for Dan Smith, who is no doubt thinking about retirement.

[pjwal]

[quote=KSMountain]Here’s the bio for the current CIO of Atlanta.

This will give you some idea of the kind of person we’re talking about:

http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/it/bio.aspx%5B/quote%5D

Completely unimpressive. I worked for years in the Healthcare tech field for one of the few tech startups that actually experienced some success. My experience taught me that they are the industry closest to the government in their ineptitude with technology. So it’s a good fit for Atlanta and a great move for Dan Smith, who is no doubt thinking about retirement.

[pjwal]

[quote=KSMountain]Here’s the bio for the current CIO of Atlanta.

This will give you some idea of the kind of person we’re talking about:

http://www.atlantaga.gov/government/it/bio.aspx%5B/quote%5D

Completely unimpressive. I worked for years in the Healthcare tech field for one of the few tech startups that actually experienced some success. My experience taught me that they are the industry closest to the government in their ineptitude with technology. So it’s a good fit for Atlanta and a great move for Dan Smith, who is no doubt thinking about retirement.

[pjwal]

[quote=TexasLine]
There are people at the “top” of every company who receive more money than what we think is appropriate(another discussion)…Right or Wrong?

Working for any municipality one should expect that some people have taken their positions based on an anticipated financial gain….is this different from a fortune 500 Co….?[/quote]

The difference it’s a good thing for the private sector to focus on financial gain. That is their goal for themselves and their stakeholders. And they can only do this by providing a good/service that the private sector accepts. It’s a free system of transactions in which no one is forced to participate (until we are forced to buy health insurance).

We don’t want our public sector employees to be motivated by wealth as the government does not generate wealth and that does not serve the best interest of the public.

[quote=TexasLine]
Point is….and I hope you get this…not all City employees are acting like greedy, selfish little bastards. Most of us actually struggle, unlike most of you…(that’s my little dig at those of you with two incomes making over 200,000+ and actually doing quite well on a daily basis, and with your investments…am implying you should take the plank out of your eye…etc…etc…)[/quote]

We’re doing well as a result of hard work and the risks we have to take in the private sector. Inherent risks that don’t exist in the public sector. And I think that it is OK that you do not have to face those risks as, presumably, you are serving a “higher calling.” No one is upset at all public sector employees. We are upset at those that have the gall to defend their ridiculous pensions, just as you have a right to be upset at private sector individuals that cheat/steal, which we have laws against and we prosecute fairly well in comparison to other societies. That kind of check doesn’t exist for this kind of nonsense in the public sector (sans false info given during bond sales which no one served jail time for). Our only check is at the voting booth and I hope we stir things up enough to kick these liberals out.

I’m sure there are some great real-estate web sites focused on the Berkeley, San Francisco market they can check out.

[pjwal]

[quote=TexasLine]
There are people at the “top” of every company who receive more money than what we think is appropriate(another discussion)…Right or Wrong?

Working for any municipality one should expect that some people have taken their positions based on an anticipated financial gain….is this different from a fortune 500 Co….?[/quote]

The difference it’s a good thing for the private sector to focus on financial gain. That is their goal for themselves and their stakeholders. And they can only do this by providing a good/service that the private sector accepts. It’s a free system of transactions in which no one is forced to participate (until we are forced to buy health insurance).

We don’t want our public sector employees to be motivated by wealth as the government does not generate wealth and that does not serve the best interest of the public.

[quote=TexasLine]
Point is….and I hope you get this…not all City employees are acting like greedy, selfish little bastards. Most of us actually struggle, unlike most of you…(that’s my little dig at those of you with two incomes making over 200,000+ and actually doing quite well on a daily basis, and with your investments…am implying you should take the plank out of your eye…etc…etc…)[/quote]

We’re doing well as a result of hard work and the risks we have to take in the private sector. Inherent risks that don’t exist in the public sector. And I think that it is OK that you do not have to face those risks as, presumably, you are serving a “higher calling.” No one is upset at all public sector employees. We are upset at those that have the gall to defend their ridiculous pensions, just as you have a right to be upset at private sector individuals that cheat/steal, which we have laws against and we prosecute fairly well in comparison to other societies. That kind of check doesn’t exist for this kind of nonsense in the public sector (sans false info given during bond sales which no one served jail time for). Our only check is at the voting booth and I hope we stir things up enough to kick these liberals out.

I’m sure there are some great real-estate web sites focused on the Berkeley, San Francisco market they can check out.

[pjwal]

[quote=TexasLine]
There are people at the “top” of every company who receive more money than what we think is appropriate(another discussion)…Right or Wrong?

Working for any municipality one should expect that some people have taken their positions based on an anticipated financial gain….is this different from a fortune 500 Co….?[/quote]

The difference it’s a good thing for the private sector to focus on financial gain. That is their goal for themselves and their stakeholders. And they can only do this by providing a good/service that the private sector accepts. It’s a free system of transactions in which no one is forced to participate (until we are forced to buy health insurance).

We don’t want our public sector employees to be motivated by wealth as the government does not generate wealth and that does not serve the best interest of the public.

[quote=TexasLine]
Point is….and I hope you get this…not all City employees are acting like greedy, selfish little bastards. Most of us actually struggle, unlike most of you…(that’s my little dig at those of you with two incomes making over 200,000+ and actually doing quite well on a daily basis, and with your investments…am implying you should take the plank out of your eye…etc…etc…)[/quote]

We’re doing well as a result of hard work and the risks we have to take in the private sector. Inherent risks that don’t exist in the public sector. And I think that it is OK that you do not have to face those risks as, presumably, you are serving a “higher calling.” No one is upset at all public sector employees. We are upset at those that have the gall to defend their ridiculous pensions, just as you have a right to be upset at private sector individuals that cheat/steal, which we have laws against and we prosecute fairly well in comparison to other societies. That kind of check doesn’t exist for this kind of nonsense in the public sector (sans false info given during bond sales which no one served jail time for). Our only check is at the voting booth and I hope we stir things up enough to kick these liberals out.

I’m sure there are some great real-estate web sites focused on the Berkeley, San Francisco market they can check out.

[pjwal]

[quote=TexasLine]
There are people at the “top” of every company who receive more money than what we think is appropriate(another discussion)…Right or Wrong?

Working for any municipality one should expect that some people have taken their positions based on an anticipated financial gain….is this different from a fortune 500 Co….?[/quote]

The difference it’s a good thing for the private sector to focus on financial gain. That is their goal for themselves and their stakeholders. And they can only do this by providing a good/service that the private sector accepts. It’s a free system of transactions in which no one is forced to participate (until we are forced to buy health insurance).

We don’t want our public sector employees to be motivated by wealth as the government does not generate wealth and that does not serve the best interest of the public.

[quote=TexasLine]
Point is….and I hope you get this…not all City employees are acting like greedy, selfish little bastards. Most of us actually struggle, unlike most of you…(that’s my little dig at those of you with two incomes making over 200,000+ and actually doing quite well on a daily basis, and with your investments…am implying you should take the plank out of your eye…etc…etc…)[/quote]

We’re doing well as a result of hard work and the risks we have to take in the private sector. Inherent risks that don’t exist in the public sector. And I think that it is OK that you do not have to face those risks as, presumably, you are serving a “higher calling.” No one is upset at all public sector employees. We are upset at those that have the gall to defend their ridiculous pensions, just as you have a right to be upset at private sector individuals that cheat/steal, which we have laws against and we prosecute fairly well in comparison to other societies. That kind of check doesn’t exist for this kind of nonsense in the public sector (sans false info given during bond sales which no one served jail time for). Our only check is at the voting booth and I hope we stir things up enough to kick these liberals out.

I’m sure there are some great real-estate web sites focused on the Berkeley, San Francisco market they can check out.

[pjwal]

[quote=TexasLine]
There are people at the “top” of every company who receive more money than what we think is appropriate(another discussion)…Right or Wrong?

Working for any municipality one should expect that some people have taken their positions based on an anticipated financial gain….is this different from a fortune 500 Co….?[/quote]

The difference it’s a good thing for the private sector to focus on financial gain. That is their goal for themselves and their stakeholders. And they can only do this by providing a good/service that the private sector accepts. It’s a free system of transactions in which no one is forced to participate (until we are forced to buy health insurance).

We don’t want our public sector employees to be motivated by wealth as the government does not generate wealth and that does not serve the best interest of the public.

[quote=TexasLine]
Point is….and I hope you get this…not all City employees are acting like greedy, selfish little bastards. Most of us actually struggle, unlike most of you…(that’s my little dig at those of you with two incomes making over 200,000+ and actually doing quite well on a daily basis, and with your investments…am implying you should take the plank out of your eye…etc…etc…)[/quote]

We’re doing well as a result of hard work and the risks we have to take in the private sector. Inherent risks that don’t exist in the public sector. And I think that it is OK that you do not have to face those risks as, presumably, you are serving a “higher calling.” No one is upset at all public sector employees. We are upset at those that have the gall to defend their ridiculous pensions, just as you have a right to be upset at private sector individuals that cheat/steal, which we have laws against and we prosecute fairly well in comparison to other societies. That kind of check doesn’t exist for this kind of nonsense in the public sector (sans false info given during bond sales which no one served jail time for). Our only check is at the voting booth and I hope we stir things up enough to kick these liberals out.

I’m sure there are some great real-estate web sites focused on the Berkeley, San Francisco market they can check out.

[pjwal]

[quote=CA renter]Again, I despise the fact that **workers of all stripes** are being made (brainwashed) to turn agaist each other when the culprits who created our problems are sailing away on their yachts, unscathed.[/quote]

More class warfare from the left. Oh, don’t look at the public sector that doesn’t have to answer to the free market, whose employees are living off a pension that only a few million dollar investment fund could reasonably return. No it’s those evil CEOs and fund managers of the private sector that are creating all of our problems. As if failure in the private sector and losing investment dollars is automatically a crime. There is no arguing that on the whole private sector companies BIG and small, have created the standard of living today. What are you arguing exactly? That we should have some laws to punish CEOs and their families when they fail?

[pjwal]

[quote=CA renter]Again, I despise the fact that **workers of all stripes** are being made (brainwashed) to turn agaist each other when the culprits who created our problems are sailing away on their yachts, unscathed.[/quote]

More class warfare from the left. Oh, don’t look at the public sector that doesn’t have to answer to the free market, whose employees are living off a pension that only a few million dollar investment fund could reasonably return. No it’s those evil CEOs and fund managers of the private sector that are creating all of our problems. As if failure in the private sector and losing investment dollars is automatically a crime. There is no arguing that on the whole private sector companies BIG and small, have created the standard of living today. What are you arguing exactly? That we should have some laws to punish CEOs and their families when they fail?

[Author]

Posts