If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   CEO pay jumped 27% in 2010. Meanwhile, be happy with your 2% raise, peasant   (usatoday.com) divider line 349
    More: Obvious, stalls, proxy murder, total return, UMass, reversals, publicly traded company, contemporary history, University of Southern California  
•       •       •

7158 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Apr 2011 at 8:09 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



349 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-04-01 01:33:39 PM
What 2% raise?
Obama took mine :(
 
2011-04-01 01:34:46 PM
You only got 2%?

HAHAHAHAHAHA
 
2011-04-01 01:39:18 PM
CEO pay is determined by other CEOs whose pay is determined by CEOs. Of course they deserve a 27% raise, they all said so.
 
2011-04-01 01:53:49 PM
"CEOs' 2010 median pay jumped 27% from $7.1 million in 2009, one of the largest increases in recent history. The jump was a complete reversal from 2009 and 2008, when most CEOs took a pay haircut. "

Ok, raise your hand if you took pay cuts in 2008 and 2009.

*crickets*

Guess what? When your pay is tied directly to company performance you'll see big shifts in pay during turbulent economic times. Workers don't like that, though, for obvious reasons, so their pay doesn't flux like it does at other levels.

No risk, no reward.
 
2011-04-01 02:16:08 PM

kbronsito: What 2% raise?
Obama took mine :(


How did you manage to have that happen, when every other person in America got a tax cut?
 
2011-04-01 02:21:28 PM

Cyberluddite: kbronsito: What 2% raise?
Obama took mine :(

How did you manage to have that happen, when every other person in America got a tax cut?


Government job. He wants to do away with the cost of living increases for a few years. I actually do agree with the move. Its a small sacrifice that can be made during these tough times to rein in some government spending. It only bothers me in the context of him capitulating on the tax cuts for the rich.
 
2011-04-01 02:24:32 PM

jbuist: When your pay is tied directly to company performance


lol
 
2011-04-01 02:25:46 PM

kbronsito: Government job. He wants to do away with the cost of living increases for a few years.


Ah. OK, then, you're right.
 
2011-04-01 02:34:48 PM
Farking insane. We've had class warfare in this country for several decades now and the top 1% are winning. Everyone else gets farked. Welcome to America.

jbuist
Guess what? When your pay is tied directly to company performance you'll see big shifts in pay during turbulent economic times. Workers don't like that, though, for obvious reasons, so their pay doesn't flux like it does at other levels.

No risk, no reward.


Too bad you have no clue what you're talking about. For decades now executive pay has been rising at a double digit pace, adjusted for inflation, per year. Look it up. The data isn't hard to find. Meanwhile median wages have stagnated over that time.
 
2011-04-01 02:36:40 PM

kbronsito: It only bothers me in the context of him capitulating on the tax cuts for the rich.


Ding! Ding! Ding!

We were led to believe that Obama was not going to ask the middle class to sacrifice unless the rich paid their fair share. Turns out he is a corporate stooge like the last guy was.

We could heal the farking deficit if corporations were not allowed to park their money off shore and pay no taxes on it. Instead of closing these loopholes, they get Republicans to go on TV and cry for them about how high the corporate tax rate is.

We are well and truly farked.
 
wib
2011-04-01 02:39:57 PM
2.8 biatches.
 
2011-04-01 02:42:50 PM
Hahahaha, losers!

I got a whole extra full-time job at my office, and even though I have two jobs I still get my one salar...

Hey, wait a minute...
 
2011-04-01 02:46:28 PM

patrick767: Too bad you have no clue what you're talking about. For decades now executive pay has been rising at a double digit pace, adjusted for inflation, per year. Look it up. The data isn't hard to find.


Actually I'm having a little trouble finding it. Care to point me in the right direction?
 
2011-04-01 02:58:32 PM

jbuist: "CEOs' 2010 median pay jumped 27% from $7.1 million in 2009, one of the largest increases in recent history. The jump was a complete reversal from 2009 and 2008, when most CEOs took a pay haircut. "

Ok, raise your hand if you took pay cuts in 2008 and 2009.


Ok, raise your hand if you're a CEO who took a pay cut that affected your standard of living.
 
2011-04-01 03:00:02 PM
What 2% raise? The economy took mine.
 
2011-04-01 03:02:28 PM
Color me surprised.
 
2011-04-01 03:03:46 PM

kingoomieiii: Ok, raise your hand if you're a CEO who took a pay cut that affected your standard of living.


So that's the only metric that counts now? If it doesn't really "hurt" them it didn't matter?
 
2011-04-01 03:08:47 PM

jbuist: kingoomieiii: Ok, raise your hand if you're a CEO who took a pay cut that affected your standard of living.

So that's the only metric that counts now? If it doesn't really "hurt" them it didn't matter?


Those were my exact words, right?

Oh hey, no they weren't.
 
2011-04-01 03:11:40 PM

AdolfOliverPanties: We could heal the farking deficit if corporations were not allowed to park their money off shore and pay no taxes on it. Instead of closing these loopholes, they get Republicans to go on TV and cry for them about how high the corporate tax rate is.


And he happily joins in and promises corporate tax cuts.

And people wonder why I intend to find a Democrat to vote for.
 
2011-04-01 03:12:17 PM

jbuist: When your pay is tied directly to company performance

, when shiat hits the fan, you pull the ripcord on your golden parachute, or take a huge bonus check to stay put, and then the company fires a few thousand bottom-level workers.
 
2011-04-01 03:17:45 PM

kingoomieiii: jbuist: kingoomieiii: Ok, raise your hand if you're a CEO who took a pay cut that affected your standard of living.

So that's the only metric that counts now? If it doesn't really "hurt" them it didn't matter?

Those were my exact words, right?

Oh hey, no they weren't.


I'm just asking a question trying to ascertain why you felt the need to make the distinction. Perhaps you could expand on your line of reasoning a bit more so I won't be so confused.
 
2011-04-01 03:22:17 PM

jbuist: kingoomieiii: jbuist: kingoomieiii: Ok, raise your hand if you're a CEO who took a pay cut that affected your standard of living.

So that's the only metric that counts now? If it doesn't really "hurt" them it didn't matter?

Those were my exact words, right?

Oh hey, no they weren't.

I'm just asking a question trying to ascertain why you felt the need to make the distinction. Perhaps you could expand on your line of reasoning a bit more so I won't be so confused.


The article didn't say "CEOs took a 27% paycut last year", it says they took a "haircut". Which implies (at least to me) that this 27% is a net gain. Whereas your post seemed to imply that it was a zero-sum temporary cut that's now being exactly reversed.
 
2011-04-01 03:38:47 PM
The article didn't say "CEOs took a 27% paycut last year", it says they took a "haircut". Which implies (at least to me) that this 27% is a net gain. Whereas your post seemed to imply that it was a zero-sum temporary cut that's now being exactly reversed.

Ahh, I understand. No, I didn't mean to imply that there was a zero-sum game. Just that when your compensation can be decreased in poor financial times you'd expect it to bounce back faster than employees that don't take a direct hit due to missing performance goals. That whole risk/reward thing in action and all.
 
2011-04-01 03:55:55 PM

kbronsito: What 2% raise?
Obama took mine :(


really? how?
 
2011-04-01 04:17:04 PM
jbuist
Actually I'm having a little trouble finding it. Care to point me in the right direction?

One google search, first source I checked:

Ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay by year:
1978: 35
1989: 71
2000: 300
2005: 262

CEO pay compared to average worker pay (new window)

Another source that shows an even higher ratio. (new window)

Yet another source (new window)

The last link has lots of other data about income inequality in the US... in a study of 134 countries, the US ranked 93rd in income equality, trailing China, Russia, and Iran. Another graph shows how corporate profits increased over 100% from 1990 to 2005, the S&P rose 141%, CEO pay rose 298%, but production worker pay stagnated at +4.3%.
 
2011-04-01 04:31:38 PM
2% raise?

Oh, you work for other people. Pfft.
 
2011-04-01 04:54:08 PM
DarthBrooks : Oh, you work for other people. Pfft.

Yeah. Don't you guys know that people who work for a paycheck are scum? You 40 hr schlubs aren't fit to lick the Koch brothers' Florsheims.
 
2011-04-01 04:58:04 PM

kbronsito: What 2% raise?
Obama took mine :(


That's right. OBAMA took yours.
 
2011-04-01 05:20:53 PM

patrick767: One google search, first source I checked:

Ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay by year:
1978: 35
1989: 71
2000: 300
2005: 262

CEO pay compared to average worker pay (new window)

Another source that shows an even higher ratio. (new window)


These seem a bit simplistic to me. We just add up all the CEO salaries from major US corporations, average them, then compare that to median wage?

Why not compare the ratio of CEO compensation to the salaries of everybody else within their organization? If there are sectors of the economy performing poorly that aren't under control of these CEOs why hold them responsible for the wage disparity? They're not in control of what people outside their organization get paid.

Why not chart them as percentages of a corporation's revenue or profits? That would enable us to see if the CEO compensation stays in line with growth. Especially after mergers.

What are the population numbers of each group? Are we seeing fewer CEOs of major corporations these days? If that population is dwindling I believe it is only natural that the compensation would rise to attract the best in the business.
 
2011-04-01 05:23:50 PM
hey! questioning CEO pay is pure SOCIALISM!
 
2011-04-01 05:27:19 PM
One simple change would raise peasant's wages: publicly report everyone's wages, benefits, and take-home pay.

I can pretty much guarantee that most people earning below the median wage will think they live in Lake Wobegon, and demand higher wages. A few cycles of this, and it'll be like there was universal unionization.

Of course, there is always the privacy issue, but no plan is perfect.
 
2011-04-01 05:29:27 PM

Weaver95: hey! questioning CEO pay is pure SOCIALISM!


Because keeping costs down is one of Lenin's Ten Steps to True Socialism.
 
2011-04-01 05:34:46 PM
Fartbongo's Milk and Gas prices took my paycheck

Guess I should do like Michelle suggested and start drinking breast milk...
 
2011-04-01 05:36:15 PM
Incidentally, the best way to start a socialist revolution is to create massive income disparity.
 
2011-04-01 05:38:44 PM
And Jeff Bezos has refused any raises since the mid 90s. Perhaps the most successful American CEO of the last 20 years and he's just fine being paid less than quite a good number of his employees.
 
2011-04-01 05:51:36 PM

WhyteRaven74: And Jeff Bezos has refused any raises since the mid 90s. Perhaps the most successful American CEO of the last 20 years and he's just fine being paid less than quite a good number of his employees.


Yeah but thanks to stock, he's worth like 18 billion.
 
2011-04-01 05:59:17 PM
They worked 13.5x harder than you.
 
2011-04-01 06:02:51 PM

elchip: Yeah but thanks to stock, he's worth like 18 billion.


Yeah but his actual salary makes him a pauper among CEO's. I have no issue with what he's worth, he's damn well earned Amazon's stock price by the way he's run Amazon.
 
2011-04-01 06:21:06 PM

jbuist: That whole risk/reward thing in action and all.


When the government bails you and your company out with public funds, there's really very little risk.
 
2011-04-01 06:25:59 PM

DarthBrooks: Oh, you work for other people. Pfft.


Ding ding! biatch and moan or quit and find a way to capitalize on your skill set. Work for yourself, doing something you love. Then your pay's irrelevant.
 
2011-04-01 06:33:53 PM

jbuist: Guess what? When your pay is tied directly to company performance you'll see big shifts in pay during turbulent economic times. Workers don't like that, though, for obvious reasons, so their pay doesn't flux like it does at other levels.

No risk, no reward.


Getting a 40 million bonus vs. a 20 million bonus is EXACTLY like worker wages being stagnant for over a decade.
 
2011-04-01 06:49:07 PM

jbuist: Ok, raise your hand if you took pay cuts in 2008 and 2009.


I took pay cuts in both years. Substantial ones. So did a lot of public workers. We're not getting that back. White-knighting for CEO's won't get you laid by them either.
 
2011-04-01 07:23:54 PM

Somacandra: White-knighting for CEO's won't get you laid by them either.


But if you JUST WORK HARDER then you'll make more!

isn't that the mantra?
 
2011-04-01 07:34:12 PM

jbuist: When your pay is tied directly to company performance you'll see big shifts in pay during turbulent economic times.

...

No risk, no reward.


Uh huh, and CEOs have a commensurate amount of income/wealth taken away when their company's stock drops.

Please don't equate executive pay with the actual concept of risk-reward.
 
2011-04-01 08:03:30 PM
fark it, lets get the pitchforks and torches ready!
 
2011-04-01 08:12:56 PM
Here in IL, my 2% raise was taken directly into higher taxes.
 
2011-04-01 08:13:35 PM

KvanCetre: Here in IL, my 2% raise was taken directly into higher taxes.


And I don't even want to think how much I'm going to lose this year in increased gas costs...
 
2011-04-01 08:13:50 PM
I was told there would be cake.
 
2011-04-01 08:16:41 PM
What's a raise?

Apparently where I work, there haven't been any raises in nearly three years, regardless of performance. That includes cost of living.
 
2011-04-01 08:18:32 PM
Look, some dumb bastards have to pay taxes, may as well be you morons. ME? no.

/have fun. I'm keeping my dough..........
 
Displayed 50 of 349 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report