Occupy Wall Street Fail
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
And you didn't have enough chips for your dip. I understand.
I know!.. Those damned bankers... If only we would tax the rich, I'd have plenty of dip for my chips, and maybe - just maybe - little girls everywhere would be able to get the ponies that they so desire... It's a right, ya know!
You just can't imagine how frustrating it is to run out of dip.... You just don't understand; you'll never understand... Moooommmm! Dad's pickin' on me again.
Actually, if those who were on the boards of the large corporations weren't all members of the 'club' and believed that a mildly-capable CEO should be paid 300 times what the typical employee makes, the corporation would have more money to invest in growth and create employment.
But, all of the boards and CEOs are entitled to million dollar bonuses as they run their employers into bankruptcy, and then ask for government handouts to keep from failing.
Taxing the rich isn't the solution, ending the robber baron mentality that rules pretty much all of the boards and executive offices would help. But you and I both know that won't happen.
D.C.’s Occupy protest, attracting only the usual suspects
By Dana Milbank, Published: October 11
By the time they got to Woodstock, they were half a million strong. But by the time they assembled on Freedom Plaza on Tuesday morning to plan the day’s civil disobedience, they numbered only 53.
Attempting to emulate the Occupy Wall Street protests, Washington activists and some out-of-town guests set themselves the lofty goal of occupying the Hart Senate Office Building. “We are there to shut the place down!” organizer David Swanson told his small band of followers.
more...
D.C.’s Occupy protest, attracting only the usual suspects - The Washington Post
We're here to shut the place down. There ya have it. Geniuses all. 53 or 53 hundred. It's still la meme chose.
Deluded semi-pro 'occupiers'. No direction other than the current hip-popular blame wall street/blame the right. Mental midgets is more the word kids. Knock at 1600.
By Dana Milbank, Published: October 11
By the time they got to Woodstock, they were half a million strong. But by the time they assembled on Freedom Plaza on Tuesday morning to plan the day’s civil disobedience, they numbered only 53.
Attempting to emulate the Occupy Wall Street protests, Washington activists and some out-of-town guests set themselves the lofty goal of occupying the Hart Senate Office Building. “We are there to shut the place down!” organizer David Swanson told his small band of followers.
more...
D.C.’s Occupy protest, attracting only the usual suspects - The Washington Post
We're here to shut the place down. There ya have it. Geniuses all. 53 or 53 hundred. It's still la meme chose.
Deluded semi-pro 'occupiers'. No direction other than the current hip-popular blame wall street/blame the right. Mental midgets is more the word kids. Knock at 1600.
So do bailouts of lame Wall Street financiers rigging the government to let regulations go so they can collapse things into getting a bailout.
The main difference is that properly paid civil servants can't be bribed like if they were working in a third-world country, whereas bailed-out Wall Streeters get to rip money out of a civilization in order to move it out of the nation in order to pay less to get more work out of third-worlders.
Last edited:
What can I say... If your view is such that these CEO's are being paid unfairly, then so be it.
No doubt that you can cut their wages to 1/10 of the current values or provide 'em with minimum wage for all I care, there will also be a corresponding reaction to it as well.
Yep... You got the ones that are worth every penny and others that aren't worth minimum wage
So you're not denying it.
It's not current "value". It's current "rate". There's no way it's "valuable" to leach all the money out of an economy into the hands of a few who don't know how to re-invest it any more than it's "valuable" for oncogenes to take all the nutrients out of a body and not participate as an organ.
Oh gee, and what might that reaction be? People actually qualified to organize filling the gap as proper managers?
What's that supposed to mean?
That baseball managers bribe umpires like how Goldman sacked Washington?
That is what it sounds like.
They haven't really said anything. It is a question I'dlike answered.
Because they would get their azzes kicked.
They would be ignored.
They're part of the protests or at least doing their best to allign themselves to it.
I don't disagree. I hated these bailouts and particularly when they still gave themselves huge bonuses.
WHAAAAAAT! You can't be serious! They are bribed all the time! Not just that, quite a few extort money. Our Massachusetts Speaker of the House just went to jail for taking money from a Canadian company for a state contract!
Yup... I agree there.
Then how come they don't invest it back in the economy from which they made the money?
Hey asshole taxpayers. I need $125K. $100K to gamble at the Casino and another $25k to stuff in my pocket as a fee for pulling the lever and losing your money.
You need to rephrase that.
You need to say, "Hey dumb-f*ck taxpayers. I need you to be duped by hate-advertizing into voting for the candidate who will give me your taxes to gamble at the Casino and bail me out if I loose".
Well, we know that you can't say much.
And yes, my view is that these CEOs are over paid. And I know what the reaction to cutting CEO pay would be, very little. Sure, a bunch would run away crying. But in the end, they'd be replaced by equally, or more highly capable people. They are out there, despite what the fear mongers say.
Yeah, we could outsource them from China.
At their corruption rate the CEOs make only 7-12 times more than the workers.
Last edited:
One tiny example:
Nash Finch Co., Minneapolis, was forced to delay reporting its 2002 third- and fourth-quarter results because of a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into the company's procedures of accounting for vendor allowances. Its stock plunged 75.14% in the course of the year.
The only two publicly traded supermarket companies that fared worse on Wall Street last year -- Pathmark Stores, Carteret, N.J., (whose stock fell 79.44%) and Spartan Stores, Grand Rapids, Mich., (whose shares tumbled 87.37%) -- now feature newly minted chief executives at their helm.
And yet, Ron Marshall, Nash Finch's CEO, saw his compensation package increase 80.5% in 2002 to $2,785,359
Perfect - you get an 80% increase for making your stock go down 75%
No wonder we have to pay CEOs so highly, it's hard to get talent like that.
Oh, by the way, if you're an investor, be wary of overpaid CEOs:
Pay for Performance
According to Business Week, the average CEO of a major corporation made 42 times the average hourly worker's pay in 1980. By 1990 that had almost doubled to 85 times. In 2000, the average CEO salary reached an unbelievable 531 times that of the average hourly worker.
"Pay for performance", tying executive compensation to the financial success of their company, has become very popular in the past decade. In the face of the largest bull market ever, that isn't surprising. It also isn't realistic. What CEO honestly believes that all or most of the appreciation in value of their company is due to their own talent? ZD Net's Total Compensation Vs. Total Return To Shareholders chart (no longer online), shows that total return to shareholders was higher for many companies whose CEO compensation was under $500,000 than for companies who paid their CEOs multi-million dollar compensation.
Nash Finch Co., Minneapolis, was forced to delay reporting its 2002 third- and fourth-quarter results because of a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation into the company's procedures of accounting for vendor allowances. Its stock plunged 75.14% in the course of the year.
The only two publicly traded supermarket companies that fared worse on Wall Street last year -- Pathmark Stores, Carteret, N.J., (whose stock fell 79.44%) and Spartan Stores, Grand Rapids, Mich., (whose shares tumbled 87.37%) -- now feature newly minted chief executives at their helm.
And yet, Ron Marshall, Nash Finch's CEO, saw his compensation package increase 80.5% in 2002 to $2,785,359
Perfect - you get an 80% increase for making your stock go down 75%
No wonder we have to pay CEOs so highly, it's hard to get talent like that.
Oh, by the way, if you're an investor, be wary of overpaid CEOs:
Pay for Performance
According to Business Week, the average CEO of a major corporation made 42 times the average hourly worker's pay in 1980. By 1990 that had almost doubled to 85 times. In 2000, the average CEO salary reached an unbelievable 531 times that of the average hourly worker.
"Pay for performance", tying executive compensation to the financial success of their company, has become very popular in the past decade. In the face of the largest bull market ever, that isn't surprising. It also isn't realistic. What CEO honestly believes that all or most of the appreciation in value of their company is due to their own talent? ZD Net's Total Compensation Vs. Total Return To Shareholders chart (no longer online), shows that total return to shareholders was higher for many companies whose CEO compensation was under $500,000 than for companies who paid their CEOs multi-million dollar compensation.