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.

(Independent)   If getting a $13M salary while one's company is being propped up by taxpayers is wrong, bank CEOs don't want to be right. "If anything $13M is a modest income for a person." The WSJ nods in agreement   (independent.co.uk) divider line 146
    More: Obvious, CEO, RBs, Wall Street Journal, Libor, Financial Services Authority, incomes, salary, creative accounting  
•       •       •

3067 clicks; posted to Business » on 12 Feb 2013 at 9:20 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



146 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-12 06:48:09 AM
Republican logic:
13 million isn't a whole lot when you think about the fact that it's a CEO's in come - while also believing that $250 a month for TANIF is too much money.

/I rewrote this three times
//I'm still too asleep to determine if this makes sense
///sorry
 
2013-02-12 07:57:03 AM
"Stephen is doing one of the most difficult, demanding and challenging jobs in world business.

What's really sick is they actually believe this. The really think they are the smartest people in the room.
 
2013-02-12 08:20:25 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2013-02-12 09:09:35 AM

Dinki: "Stephen is doing one of the most difficult, demanding and challenging jobs in world business.

What's really sick is they actually believe this. The really think they are the smartest people in the room.


It's amazing that a notable portion of their time goes into making sure they are never in a position to where someone can point this out to them.
 
2013-02-12 09:13:44 AM

Jackson Herring: [i.imgur.com image 615x799]


The Grapes of Wrath style photography is a nice touch. If The White Man's Blues could auto-play, it would be perfect.
 
2013-02-12 09:30:04 AM
www.independent.co.uk

See these hands? These hands have never once been used for honest labor.
 
2013-02-12 09:33:19 AM
Hmm...education, plus drive, plus business savvy...you're right! No way anyone should earn any money!

Let's biatch on the internet!

/wants a $13M modest income
 
2013-02-12 09:34:38 AM
TONE DEAF
 
2013-02-12 09:35:42 AM
Just transplant him to the U.S. where a teacher making $50,000 a year is raking in an exorbitant salary that should be cut but we can't raise taxes on people making $250,000 a year or more because $250,000 isn't that much money.

/ plus most of the poors still have refrigerators
// we must never forget that injustice
 
2013-02-12 09:36:58 AM
{guillotine.jpg}
 
2013-02-12 09:39:33 AM

Spad31: plus business savvy


So savvy he needed an enormous bailout to keep his business running and then had no idea it was engaged in one the most far-reaching rate-fixing scandal in history.

I wish I could get a couple million dollars salary for being a completely incompetent and amoral douchebagsavvy businessman.
 
2013-02-12 09:40:01 AM

Dinki: "Stephen is doing one of the most difficult, demanding and challenging jobs in world business.

What's really sick is they actually believe this. The really think they are the smartest people in the room.


There's a word for that.  

Narcis-something.
 
2013-02-12 09:43:01 AM
Where's that quote from?
 
2013-02-12 09:48:03 AM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Spad31: plus business savvy

So savvy he needed an enormous bailout to keep his business running and then had no idea it was engaged in one the most far-reaching rate-fixing scandal in history.

I wish I could get a couple million dollars salary for being a completely incompetent and amoral douchebagsavvy businessman.


Well it is easier if your daddy was rich, but I hear if you remove your conscious, soul, and accept the morality of Supply Side Jesus you too can be rich.
 
kab
2013-02-12 09:49:30 AM
We're this many posts in, and the exec-pay white knight brigade hasn't dropped in yet?

Huh.
 
2013-02-12 10:00:26 AM
I'm just waiting for a bank to promote some $250,000/year exec to boss (throwing him or her, oh, a $50,000 raise).

When that bank's profits suddenly go up by, say, $12,700,000, the board will look like geniuses.

And when that same bank continues to be competitive with other banks in spite of not paying crazy salaries, the emperor will have been completely de-pantsed.

I'm also waiting to hit the powerball.
 
2013-02-12 10:01:15 AM
$13m would be an exceptional salary for a lifetime!

$13000000/65 (working years) = $200,000 per year

/In-farking-sane
 
2013-02-12 10:04:04 AM
dailyreckoning.com
 
2013-02-12 10:09:09 AM

spelletrader: $13m would be an exceptional salary for a lifetime!

$13000000/65 (working years) = $200,000 per year

/In-farking-sane


Even more insane when you realize most people won't live to be >81 (= 65 + >16. Most people don't start working as infants, and many delay working full-time until their 20s. Stupid degree-getting).
 
2013-02-12 10:09:09 AM
Mr Hester described the traders' conduct as "disgraceful" and said it "brought shame on the bank". He was also highly critical of the banking industry's "hubris" and "excessively self-centred culture".

I just can't fathom the derp. While there are some peoplebankers claiming that not enough has changed, I can't help but agree. Bring out the firing squads.
 
2013-02-12 10:15:41 AM
Modest? Jesus these people really are from another planet
 
2013-02-12 10:17:30 AM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Just transplant him to the U.S. where a teacher making $50,000 a year is raking in an exorbitant salary that should be cut but we can't raise taxes on people making $250,000 a year or more because $250,000 isn't that much money.


I'll take 'Cognitive Dissonance' for $800, Alex.
 
2013-02-12 10:21:12 AM
FTFA: "...it had been decided that RBS needed "a single point of accountability and not a series of mass assassinations". "

When I put that through my BS translator with optional spin filter it comes up with to possible results.
1: "We found a suitable scapegoat"
2: "We've delivered the required sacrificial lamb."
 
2013-02-12 10:28:13 AM

Sir Not Sure The Unscannable: Mr Hester described the traders' conduct as "disgraceful" and said it "brought shame on the bank". He was also highly critical of the banking industry's "hubris" and "excessively self-centred culture".

I just can't fathom the derp. While there are some peoplebankers claiming that not enough has changed, I can't help but agree. Bring out the firing squads.


It will never change until government's get the balls to start throwing these crooks in jail, or the public starts taking matters into their own hands.
 
2013-02-12 10:34:33 AM
I don't care what those guys make. It's not my money, I didn't earn it. Somehow they did. Those bastards.
 
2013-02-12 10:57:32 AM
"If anything $13M is a modest income for a person."

is this century's version of

"Let them eat cake"

/yes I know the questionable historical veracity of that second quote
 
2013-02-12 10:59:50 AM

xkillyourfacex: I don't care what those guys make. It's not my money, I didn't earn it. Somehow they did. Those bastards.


And there's the difficulty with our economic analysis/philosophy.  Companies are no longer judged on how successful they are, the only metric that matters is how much more successful they were than last year.  When the largest company in the world is considered struggling because their rate of growth slows down, there is a flaw in the thinking.

Creating fees for things that were previously considered a standard part of your product is not "earning" anything, you are simply making a necessary commodity more expensive.  Then, when your competitors follow suit, the fees becomes the norm, rinse and repeat.

///Unless you want to argue that banking isn't a necessary commodity, which would be stupid.
 
2013-02-12 11:00:53 AM
Nah, the CEO just sees the big picture.

By the time that package goes into effect it WILL be a modest salary for the average person.
He and his ilk will make sure of that...
 
2013-02-12 11:07:43 AM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: Just transplant him to the U.S. where a teacher making $50,000 a year is raking in an exorbitant salary that should be cut but we can't raise taxes on people making $250,000 a year or more because $250,000 isn't that much money.

/ plus most of the poors still have refrigerators
// we must never forget that injustice


IOW, "Gimme!".
 
2013-02-12 11:09:19 AM
Debeo Summa Credo:
IOW, "Gimme!".

That is certainly the attitude of these modestly paid CEOs.
 
2013-02-12 11:14:43 AM

aaronx: I'm just waiting for a bank to promote some $250,000/year exec to boss (throwing him or her, oh, a $50,000 raise).

When that bank's profits suddenly go up by, say, $12,700,000, the board will look like geniuses.

And when that same bank continues to be competitive with other banks in spite of not paying crazy salaries, the emperor will have been completely de-pantsed.

I'm also waiting to hit the powerball.


See, youd think that would happen if the bank would actually be as competitive or profitable if they promoted some mid level schlub. But people who know what the fark they are talking about understand that a company giving a $300k guy the CEO spot is not going to be doing as well as they would have if they paid up for a market rate executive. Because for 300k, you're not going to be able to get as good or smart an individual as you can for $13m.

Do you think Alabama would have as successful a football program if they fired Saban and let the team manager coach?
 
2013-02-12 11:16:17 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Debeo Summa Credo:
IOW, "Gimme!".

That is certainly the attitude of these modestly paid CEOs.


You mean the ones who get a market based wage agreed to by the owners of the companies for which they work?
 
2013-02-12 11:16:21 AM
I would happily accept 10%, or even 1% of this "modest income".  I'd even pay taxes, legit, post-cut-expiration and all, on 1% of that "modest income", with a smile on my face and a song in my heart.  I would work 60 hours a week for that kind of money, and bite my tongue every time I felt like complaining.  I would never have to look at a bill, or a price on a shelf, or a credit card statement again.  i would just buy what I want and not worry (my tastes are modest, admittedly, and I have no kids).

That means that, basically, 100 people could live worry-free (outside Manhattan, of course) on what this douchebag gets.  I say shoot him and take it.  I've had about enough after seven years of wage freezes, tax increases, gas prices, food prices, spiraling rent, longer hours as more and more people are cut year after year.  I don't think I have it in me to pull the trigger or anything, but if someone did so, and his tearful trophy wife came on the news to whine about it, I'd feel very little sympathy at this point.In the old days, it used to be "Live by the sword, die by the sword".  Put more generally, if you live by creating misery instead of prosperity around you, don't be surprised when you eventually drown in it.  You and I may never get past the point of griping on the Internet about it, but somebody watching their children starve sure as hell will rise up at some point.  Having money in and of itself is hardly immoral, we all do it after all; conspicuously profiting so heavily from the things that directly impoverish nearly everyone else should be punishable by (slow) death.
 
2013-02-12 11:24:08 AM

TheOtherGuy: I would happily accept 10%, or even 1% of this "modest income".  I'd even pay taxes, legit, post-cut-expiration and all, on 1% of that "modest income", with a smile on my face and a song in my heart.  I would work 60 hours a week for that kind of money, and bite my tongue every time I felt like complaining.  I would never have to look at a bill, or a price on a shelf, or a credit card statement again.  i would just buy what I want and not worry (my tastes are modest, admittedly, and I have no kids).

That means that, basically, 100 people could live worry-free (outside Manhattan, of course) on what this douchebag gets.  I say shoot him and take it.  I've had about enough after seven years of wage freezes, tax increases, gas prices, food prices, spiraling rent, longer hours as more and more people are cut year after year.  I don't think I have it in me to pull the trigger or anything, but if someone did so, and his tearful trophy wife came on the news to whine about it, I'd feel very little sympathy at this point.In the old days, it used to be "Live by the sword, die by the sword".  Put more generally, if you live by creating misery instead of prosperity around you, don't be surprised when you eventually drown in it.  You and I may never get past the point of griping on the Internet about it, but somebody watching their children starve sure as hell will rise up at some point.  Having money in and of itself is hardly immoral, we all do it after all; conspicuously profiting so heavily from the things that directly impoverish nearly everyone else should be punishable by (slow) death.


"shoot him and take it".

Nice. This is what fark liberals actually believe is appropriate.

Your misery is your own fault. Take some responsibility for your own actions and plight, instead of griping that some clown in London makes more than you. It's not his fault.
 
2013-02-12 11:27:21 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Do you think Alabama would have as successful a football program if they fired Saban and let the team manager coach?


I don't know - no one's ever tried it (or the equivalent in the world of finance). They did figure out that computers made better stock picks than people with education and experience, though. So there's that.

// also, the SABR-metricians figured out that MLB managers were actively hurting their lineups by relying on the "conventional wisdom"
// it wasn't until someone actually tried it and found it to work that other teams adopted it - so which financial firm will make the gamble first?
 
2013-02-12 11:29:39 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: TheOtherGuy: I would happily accept 10%, or even 1% of this "modest income".  I'd even pay taxes, legit, post-cut-expiration and all, on 1% of that "modest income", with a smile on my face and a song in my heart.  I would work 60 hours a week for that kind of money, and bite my tongue every time I felt like complaining.  I would never have to look at a bill, or a price on a shelf, or a credit card statement again.  i would just buy what I want and not worry (my tastes are modest, admittedly, and I have no kids).

That means that, basically, 100 people could live worry-free (outside Manhattan, of course) on what this douchebag gets.  I say shoot him and take it.  I've had about enough after seven years of wage freezes, tax increases, gas prices, food prices, spiraling rent, longer hours as more and more people are cut year after year.  I don't think I have it in me to pull the trigger or anything, but if someone did so, and his tearful trophy wife came on the news to whine about it, I'd feel very little sympathy at this point.In the old days, it used to be "Live by the sword, die by the sword".  Put more generally, if you live by creating misery instead of prosperity around you, don't be surprised when you eventually drown in it.  You and I may never get past the point of griping on the Internet about it, but somebody watching their children starve sure as hell will rise up at some point.  Having money in and of itself is hardly immoral, we all do it after all; conspicuously profiting so heavily from the things that directly impoverish nearly everyone else should be punishable by (slow) death.

"shoot him and take it".

Nice. This is what fark liberals actually believe is appropriate.

Your misery is your own fault. Take some responsibility for your own actions and plight, instead of griping that some clown in London makes more than you. It's not his fault.


Are you raking in the millions each year? If not, what's your defect that's holding you back? By your own logic, if you Debeo, aren't making these big bucks you're either stupid or lazy.
 
2013-02-12 11:37:15 AM

Dr Dreidel: Debeo Summa Credo: Do you think Alabama would have as successful a football program if they fired Saban and let the team manager coach?

I don't know - no one's ever tried it (or the equivalent in the world of finance). They did figure out that computers made better stock picks than people with education and experience, though. So there's that.

// also, the SABR-metricians figured out that MLB managers were actively hurting their lineups by relying on the "conventional wisdom"
// it wasn't until someone actually tried it and found it to work that other teams adopted it - so which financial firm will make the gamble first?


Have baseball teams stopped paying million dollar salaries, to managers or players, instead hiring whomever is cheapest? No.

Do high budget teams generally do better than low budget teams? Yes.

You get what you pay for. To suggest a company wouldn't be likely to be adversely affected by promoting a mid level manager to CEO because he's cheaper is ridiculous. You might get lucky and pick a guy who is brilliant, but generally speaking people get salaries that they are worth, and of you go cheap you are going to get lesser quality. That goes for football coaches, baseball players, CEOs, almost anybody.

The question is whether the savings is worth the decrease in quality.
 
2013-02-12 11:37:54 AM
Do you hear the people sing?
Singing the songs of angry men.
It is the singing of a people who will not be slaves again.

Seriously Republicans? Atlas Shrugged?  you think that is the literary analogy to the current state of affairs in America?
 
2013-02-12 11:41:59 AM
Capitalism is a farking sickness.  It creates nothing but selfishness and antipathy.
 
2013-02-12 11:42:48 AM

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Debeo Summa Credo: TheOtherGuy: I would happily accept 10%, or even 1% of this "modest income".  I'd even pay taxes, legit, post-cut-expiration and all, on 1% of that "modest income", with a smile on my face and a song in my heart.  I would work 60 hours a week for that kind of money, and bite my tongue every time I felt like complaining.  I would never have to look at a bill, or a price on a shelf, or a credit card statement again.  i would just buy what I want and not worry (my tastes are modest, admittedly, and I have no kids).

That means that, basically, 100 people could live worry-free (outside Manhattan, of course) on what this douchebag gets.  I say shoot him and take it.  I've had about enough after seven years of wage freezes, tax increases, gas prices, food prices, spiraling rent, longer hours as more and more people are cut year after year.  I don't think I have it in me to pull the trigger or anything, but if someone did so, and his tearful trophy wife came on the news to whine about it, I'd feel very little sympathy at this point.In the old days, it used to be "Live by the sword, die by the sword".  Put more generally, if you live by creating misery instead of prosperity around you, don't be surprised when you eventually drown in it.  You and I may never get past the point of griping on the Internet about it, but somebody watching their children starve sure as hell will rise up at some point.  Having money in and of itself is hardly immoral, we all do it after all; conspicuously profiting so heavily from the things that directly impoverish nearly everyone else should be punishable by (slow) death.

"shoot him and take it".

Nice. This is what fark liberals actually believe is appropriate.

Your misery is your own fault. Take some responsibility for your own actions and plight, instead of griping that some clown in London makes more than you. It's not his fault.

Are you raking in the millions each year? If not, what's your defect that's holding you back? By your own logic, if you Debeo, aren't making these big bucks you're either stupid or lazy.


I'll readily admit that I'm too stupid and/or lazy to make a million dollars a year. I am smart and hard working enough to make what i make, however. And I don't gripe that those who are smarter or more hard working might make more than I.

/maybe if I stopped posting to fark and worked harder I'd make a million
//nah, I'll just keep goofing off and whine that those who make more should be killed with their assets distributed to me. It's farkonomics!!
 
2013-02-12 11:45:12 AM
You get what you pay for. To suggest a company wouldn't be likely to be adversely affected by promoting a mid level manager to CEO because he's cheaper is ridiculous. You might get lucky and pick a guy who is brilliant, but generally speaking people get salaries that they are worth, and of you go cheap you are going to get lesser quality. That goes for football coaches, baseball players, CEOs, almost anybody.

The question is whether the savings is worth the decrease in quality.


Please tell me more about how CEOs are worth so much to their companies because of their direct contributions. I'm certain that it has nothing to do with Boards, staffed by other CEOs, with a vested interest in raising their buddies' pay rate so that they in turn will receive the same considerations. I'm certain they earn every bit of their salary as well as those platinum health insurance plans, golden parachutes, deferred stock options, etc...
 
2013-02-12 11:58:08 AM
If you can't survive on $13 million A LIFETIME, there ought to be a law allowing retroactive 150th trimester abortions.
 
2013-02-12 11:58:23 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Do high budget teams generally do better than low budget teams? Yes. You get what you pay for.


This is your argument.  This is honestly your argument?  You are going to use Major League Baseball as evidence that society is a meritocracy?  You're really going there?

I'm a Mariners fan.  I've seen guys make $16 million a year to bat just above the Mendoza line and say with a straight face that they deserve it.  I've seen Oakland kick our asses with Beane's shoestring budget teams.  My team is under the thumb of a guy who has repeatedly shown he not only doesn't know what he's doing but doesn't care, has publicly said as much, yet he's not going anywhere because he's buddy-buddy with the team owner.

You got it all wrong, true believer.  You DO get what you pay for.  And when your organization is a bunch of backward-thinking narcissists, you pay for an overvalued, overpriced product.

It's amazing.  First you're completely blind to the fact that nepotism and corruption don't exist within businesses, then you try to use pro sports as an example.  While you're at it gimme a nice paper cut and pour lemon juice on it; the M's haven't been to the World Series for their entire existence and aren't going anytime soon.  Meanwhile Howard Lincoln is being paid a nice fat salary to not give a shiat, and you're saying this is how the world should work.
 
2013-02-12 11:59:15 AM
Maybe what's needed is a "worker exchange" program. Like students go live with families in other countries to learn about other cultures? For every, say, 3 years on the job as a banker or CEO or whatever, a person must spend a year as a janitor, or a fast food worker. Or hell, as a data entry clerk in their own company.
 
2013-02-12 12:01:52 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Dr Dreidel: Debeo Summa Credo: Do you think Alabama would have as successful a football program if they fired Saban and let the team manager coach?

I don't know - no one's ever tried it (or the equivalent in the world of finance). They did figure out that computers made better stock picks than people with education and experience, though. So there's that.

// also, the SABR-metricians figured out that MLB managers were actively hurting their lineups by relying on the "conventional wisdom"
// it wasn't until someone actually tried it and found it to work that other teams adopted it - so which financial firm will make the gamble first?

Have baseball teams stopped paying million dollar salaries, to managers or players, instead hiring whomever is cheapest? No.


I was referring to the idea that if you order your lineup by OBS/OPS (with the "power guy" batting 3), that's the optimal lineup. Years and years (over a century) of "conventional wisdom" undone by a scheme derided by "baseball guys" as mathematical wizardry that would fail if ever it was tried. That has nothing to do with salary, though I wonder how many of those "baseball guys" - who are allowed to be totally wrong year after year, same as finance guys, BTW - are still highly paid scouts selling yesteryear's "conventional wisdom".

And yes, I have the same wonder about finance. The devil you know vs the devil you don't. I get it - large finance companies are insanely risk-averse (which is ironic), so they'd rather stick with a system they can predict 30% of, rather than one they could only predict 20% of for half the price.

To suggest a company wouldn't be likely to be adversely affected by promoting a mid level manager to CEO because he's cheaper is ridiculous. You might get lucky and pick a guy who is brilliant, but generally speaking people get salaries that they are worth, and of you go cheap you are going to get lesser quality. That goes for football coaches, baseball players, CEOs, almost anybody.

The question is whether the savings is worth the decrease in quality.


The question is whether you're willing to consider a guy from outside the board-member class in the first place. Until then, you assume that no one "valued" (by whom? based on what?) over $1m is "fit" to be a CEO, and I assume (based solely on the number) that the $13m occupant of that chair is overpaid.

// to say nothing of the incestuous relationships between board members/boards
 
2013-02-12 12:03:25 PM

dragonchild: First you're completely blind to the fact that nepotism and corruption don't exist within businesses, then you try to use pro sports as an example.


To be fair, I brought up SABRmetrics.
 
2013-02-12 12:09:31 PM

Dinki: "Stephen is doing one of the most difficult, demanding and challenging jobs in world business.

What's really sick is they actually believe this. The really think they are the smartest people in the room.


And if the business ever goes under or is caught massively breaking the law, it's NEVER their fault.  They're a hands off CEO who doesn't even know what's going on in the company, just a figure head really.
 
2013-02-12 12:22:35 PM
Up against the wall.  Seriously.
 
2013-02-12 12:22:49 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: Your misery is your own fault. Take some responsibility for your own actions and plight, instead of griping that some clown in London makes more than you. It's not his fault.


You do understand that you are making this statement about the head of a bank that had traders that were illegally manipulating a bank rate that is used to set interest rates on things like credit cards, mortgages, and car and student loans, in addition to many other commercial loans?  It actually is this guy's failure that people have to pay more than the "real" market rate for daily necessities, while his bankers profited.

You do also understand that we do not live in individual economic vacuums, and that people are the product of a variety of factors including their genetics, environment, and experiences.

You do also understand that hard work and intelligence are neither guarantees, nor requirements for success.  There are stupid, lazy rich people and hard working, intelligent poor people.  Will working hard get you farther than complaining?  Sometimes.

Stop pretending everyone is the same and there is an equal playing field.  In a world of 6 billion people, the success of several hundred thousand is still an outlier.
 
2013-02-12 12:32:51 PM
Is this the htread where we actually have people who think anyone's work is worth hundreds of times the median income
 
Displayed 50 of 146 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report