| Author |
Message |
    
Fahren
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 06:55 pm: | 
|
Yeah, "Being a CEO isn't a job, it's your life." Like the former CEO of BP, whose only wish was for the oil spill to be fixed, "so he could get his life back." Like the yacht racing he took time out of oil spill management to go attend? Most CEO's have plenty of "life" outside their job, believe me. |
Sifo
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 07:08 pm: |
|
Think he spends more time on his yacht than you or I do on our bikes? I don't. They get bigger toys, but far less time to play with them.
Why don't you go for the big bucks? I'd be curious to know if it's so easy? |
Whisperstealth
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 07:19 pm: |
|
Excuse me gentlemen but I believe its "Senator Boxer". Please address her properly.
Being a Native Californian who has left, I'll do as you ask.
That Bitch, Senator(spit)Boxer, is a great example of why I didn't just "leave" CA, but rather practically fled.
Look at this map:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/polit ics/election-results-2010/
The LEFT COAST indeed. And thanks Socal once again. Absent LA, and Alameda, counties it's even. CA is two different states! Wished for many years for a split, but it will never happen.
Arkansas got rid of (FORMER SENATOR) Branch Lincoln. Maybe I picked wisely  |
Court
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 08:05 pm: |
|
>>>> executive compensation committees would allow CEO pay to reach those levels is as bad as what politicians do with taxpayer money.
Interesting.
I need to try to understand you. Answer a few questions for me . . . . let me know which of the following would be in that "sycophantic incestuous" category.
A) A young man who has both his parents killed in a car accident when he is 12, is passed about 10 different orphanages, starts a fruit and vegetable stand at the front gate of the Eudora Munitions Plant, lives in his truck while he saves, opens a grocery store, grows it to nearly 400 grocery stores, pioneers things like the "big box store" and the first IBM bar code scanned, is still sacking groceries from time to time at 87 and sells out for $365,00,000. Is he over compensated.
B) How about the son of a painting contractor in South Carolina who works two jobs, puts himself through school, starts his own Hedge Fund, works entirely off commission and makes $1,000,000,000 by the time he is 40. Over compensated?
C) How about an electrical lineman who is tired of being screwed around by the company he works for . . goes into a bar around Christmas 1963. . . borrows $50 a piece from 10 lineman, starts a firm, grows it over 19 years and sells it for $64,000,000. Over compensated? (Note: both he and the grocer never bought a new car, always bought 2 year old Oldsmobiles to save money and neither ever set foot on a private jet)
I could provide about 5 more examples . . . . . but I need to know if you are angry because someone is wealthy or because of the way they got wealthy? So far it sounds like envy, not logic.
Help me out here.
There is a line in the Desiderata that I always liked . . .
quote:If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain or bitter,
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.
Keep interested in your own career, however humble;
it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
One of the things you learn when you wife works on Wall Street is to never judge folks by their wealth, it's a poor measure of character. I know wealthy assholes and poor geniuses.
Court
P.S. - The grocer has passed away, his $$ went primarily to the Boy Scouts of America. The lineman, who bought 100,000 shares of Harley-Davidson when he sold out and did quite well as a shareholder, had a theory called "Leaving' Even" . . a deal he made with his son. Said "I'll pay for you education but anything I gave you beyond that would simply soften you and make you lazy". He died in 2000. |
Boltrider
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 10:11 pm: |
|
One crazy thing to consider - in the eyes of the law, this is Jerry Brown's "first" term. The term limit law that was passed is not retroactive. So that leaves the door open for ANOTHER term after this upcoming one. Only in California does 4 = 2.
(Message edited by boltrider on November 03, 2010) |
Blake
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 10:32 pm: |
|
You have a great family Court. |
Sayitaintso
| | Posted on Wednesday, November 03, 2010 - 11:37 pm: |
|
Court; I have no problem with wealth or its accumulation by its owner(s). In fact its part of what makes this country so great. All the examples you gave were of company owners, and obviously great men. Bill Gates, Larry Ellison, Rupert Murdoch, and on and on, deserve what they've gotten.
My problem is with the Carly Fiorina's and Bob Nardelli's of the corporate world.
If a CEO guides a company well and increases the value of the company the owners should compensate the CEO appropriately. The problem is that for the most part it no longer works that way, and in some cases hasn't for a while.
There is some BS in this article, but at the same time there are valid points and truths.
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_arc hive/2006/07/10/8380866/index.htm
I've got to get some sleep and we can talk more later. But in general those that create wealth should reap the benefits of that creation, those that fail shouldn't. Failed CEOs still get huge pay in spite of their failure, and the only explanation that I've ever heard is that makes any sense is that CEOs "take care of their own". If you have a better explanation I'd love to hear it. (no sarcasm or antagonism intended, I'd honestly like to hear something that makes sense of what happens with failed CEOs and their pay)
(Message edited by sayitaintso on November 03, 2010) |
Court
| | Posted on Thursday, November 04, 2010 - 07:33 am: |
|
That's a great article and I agree with all 5 points.
Both Whitman (perhaps the most powerful example) and Fiorina are folks who, literally, hundrwds of millions of that money they earned to offer themselves up for service in California.
Both are proven executives who likely could have made an impact.
Barbara Boxer is really scary, doesn't seem all that bright (from the few times I've seen her speak) and has shown little inclination to advance anything but herself. I find stealing from taxpayers as offensive as stealing from shareholders.
California should be begging for talent like this . . . they type of talent they couldn't afford to hire and instead they opt for "warmed over Jerry Brown".
Well . . . he knows the problems, we've heard what he intends to do and I'll be eager to see if he has the same success with California in the next couple years (now that I'm going there frequently) that Carly or Meg did at their respective companies. |
Slaughter
| | Posted on Thursday, November 04, 2010 - 07:46 am: |
|
California continues to amaze and frighten me.
Within 5 years, we WILL be selling out here and living in Arizona (where Sunny owns her parents' house)
I'm more than a little bit burned out by a state legislature who thinks we can tax ourselves to prosperity and now the taxpayers have just said that they WANT to make it EASIER to pass budgets with a simple majority vote - rather than a 2/3 majority. We're doomed financially.
70% of live births in our County are to non-citizen parents - up 10% from a decade ago.
I should stop typing now. |
Sayitaintso
| | Posted on Thursday, November 04, 2010 - 08:40 am: |
|
I dont understand California, its as simple as that. There is something about the state that seems to draw idealists and dreamers. They seem to vote and make many of lifes decisions based on those ideas and dreams rather than hard facts that are right in front of them. Politicians that play to those ideas and dreams succeed.
I find stealing from taxpayers as offensive as stealing from shareholders. IMO its worse by far, shareholders can move their money much easier than a citizen and move his/her family. Shareholders can vote out executives rather quickly, elections are on 2 or 4 year cycles. Also there is a great deal of "inertia" in regard to the law, its much harder to repeal something than it is to put the law/program in place initially (there's no chance "Obamacare" get repealed). Companies on the other hand can be very agile when needed. |
Xbimmer
| | Posted on Thursday, November 04, 2010 - 10:10 am: |
|
When is that fault supposed to drop Kaly into the ocean anyways?
It's workin' on it:
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsus / |
|
