General Question

Bri_L's avatar

How could this possibly be fair for the execs to receive bonuses?

Asked by Bri_L (12219points) October 19th, 2008

As shown here
There bonuses and pay are determined by how the company does. The company did really well by preforming because of questionable practices. That, at least in my mind, was an unjust way of inflating the value of the company stock and performance. That makes the excecs seem a lot more valuable than they are.

Why in the world should they get this money.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

11 Answers

windex's avatar

Because you and I can’t do anything about it.

REALLY, what do you think we can do? Even if I go in front of their building and SET MYSELF on FIRE, they will get their $.

They are Greedy Evil Pigs, there are so many corrupt creatures on earth…must fight…evil

Bri_L's avatar

@windex – But Trickle down works. It works. They will spend their money so it trickles down. Go Rich!

Then I found this.

Imagine what could be done here and abroad.

kevbo's avatar

This isn’t about fairness, equality or merit. It’s an orchestrated plot to extract and consolidate wealth (and/or to pay Asia for debts that are being called in). It’s their payoff/hush money. Those AIG execs weren’t having a conference, I’m sure. They were probably having a giant celebration.

Depending on who you believe, we are either witnessing the deliberate dismantling of western economies in order to justify a new world currency/financial authority or an intervention from Asia to put US/western imperialism in check (by calling in debts owed).

windex's avatar

wow…NWO…yes….YES.. that is what this is about…Nowwwww I get it…

Thanks Kev

jvgr's avatar

@Bri_Lunjust “way of inflating the value of the company stock and performance”

Dishonest it was since the information wasn’t available to shareholders.
The whole point of the pyramid scheme was to inflate stock values.

I think of all the firms that we have to bail out should be required to fire their executives.

Trustinglife's avatar

@Bri_L, wow, amazing link.

We could end hunger with “only” $30 billion?
With $200 billion, we could achieve ALL the Millenium Development goals?

And we just wasted – ahem, spent – $700 billion on something that’s questionable at best? Wow. Kev, great explanation – that makes sense.

critter1982's avatar

This has been a huge problem since stock options and stock bonuses have taken over the ridiculous salaries of these company executives. The boards of these companies hire top level execs and tell them in 5 years we will give you x% of our stock equity, and then they work to simply improve their stock capital by that 5th year. It’s incredible the kind of immoral and unjust things these companies can do to legally inflate their stock price and therefore their company performance.

@Bri: Supply side economic theories can work but it is something that needs to be highly regulated and as of right now it’s not.

Bri_L's avatar

So then what do we do?

Deregulation didn’t work. But the other side is saying don’t let big government get into it.

What does that leave us?

critter1982's avatar

I’m not sure there is a clear cut answer to that question? I wish I had one because I might be rich then :). Obviously more regulation is necessary. We saw what happened when the government stepped in and deregulated the mortgage industry. Things get out of control and greed by a select few can ruin the lives of many. I’m not sure though how government can step into a privately/publicly held company and regulate the amount of money their executives make? In the particular situation that you mention though, there has to be some sort of government oversight to where our tax dollars are going. And I agree with jvgr, that all the executives that are taking these incredible bonuses after what has come to light should be canned.

Bri_L's avatar

I once read an article where the ceo of the company not only made a contract to not make more than a certain multiple of his percentage but he made it contingent on their feedback, not just the boards AND he made his benefits contingent on their feedback as well. So their happiness was in his own best interest. It wasn’t to say he didn’t need to go to golf meetings and such but he had to make a case for them and did. And he also reciprocated with programs for his hard workers to

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther