11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier (/Thread-11-CEOs-bust-through-30M-a-year-barrier) |
11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - GMDino - 04-14-2016 http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/04/14/11-ceos-bust-through-30m--year-barrier/82956426/ Quote:Investors didn't see a big pay day last year since the stock market was flat. But some CEOs sure did. RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - Bilbo Saggins - 04-14-2016 That's it? RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - JustWinBaby - 04-15-2016 And how many athletes, singers and actors made $30M+ last year? RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - Benton - 04-15-2016 I don't have a problem with CEOs who make $30 million. Go for it, if you can get it. My problem is with CEOs who make $30 million (or $1 million for that matter) as part of companies that benefit from a number of loopholes, deferments and aide. Back during TARP, the top 10 CEOs receiving funds earned $240 million. That's (averaged) $24 million each to be so incredibly bad at your job that Congress has to do it for you. RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - GMDino - 04-15-2016 (04-15-2016, 12:08 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: And how many athletes, singers and actors made $30M+ last year? (04-15-2016, 12:57 AM)Benton Wrote: I don't have a problem with CEOs who make $30 million. Go for it, if you can get it. Except most of these companies saw their value drop over the last year. One example in the story showed the CEO would have seen a 16% drop in compensation...but they gave him a $17 million resigning bonus so it actually went UP 22%. When folks ***** about big business I sometimes hear the argument that "your retirement plan must like it". Well, according to the story, stocks and investment returns sunk while the guy with "all the responsibility" got a raise. Welcome to business in America. RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - fredtoast - 04-15-2016 The problem I have with our current tax structure is that the top bracket is less than half a million. So we divide all the people making less than $400 thousand into 4 different brackets, but then just have one bracket for everyone making between half a million and $100 million. This will sound a little strange to some of you, but a person with a few kids making $400K a year ($300K after taxes) can burn through it pretty quick. Sending 3 kids to top private colleges could easily burn a million dollars. Now I am NOT saying that people making $400K a year are struggling in any way. They can easily live in comfort on that much money. All I am saying is that a family like that would notice the difference of a few thousand dollars a year in taxes. But when you are making ten times that amount ($4 million year) a few thousand dollars is almost meaningless. If we are going to raise taxes then it should only be on people making more than $3 million a year or something like that. And remember that any higher tax bracket rate only applies to the income above that bracket. So a guy making $3 million a year would still pay at the lowest rate on the first $25K he earns just like all the rest of us. RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - JustWinBaby - 04-15-2016 (04-15-2016, 07:34 AM)GMDino Wrote: Except most of these companies saw their value drop over the last year. Just saw an article the other day about how many mutual funds aren't actually advocating for their proxy shareholders as they should...rubber-stamping Exec comp far too often. It's been a common practice to link Exec comp to stock performance, and that's a perfectly rational and aligned incentive. The problem is stock performance tends to be heavily correlated with the industry and overall market. The incentive should actually be on outperforming your industry. That was the "leading edge" thinking when I was in grad school over a decade ago....have not seen anything more about it since. Boards who select CEO's tend to have a laziness and fear (sometimes legal, as fiduciaries) of the unknown. That causes them not only to stick with losers, but to pay ridiculous premiums for "known" quantities because for whatever reason they fail to identify up-and-comers who would probably be better (and much cheaper). RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - JustWinBaby - 04-15-2016 (04-15-2016, 12:08 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The problem I have with our current tax structure is that the top bracket is less than half a million. So we divide all the people making less than $400 thousand into 4 different brackets, but then just have one bracket for everyone making between half a million and $100 million. I don't disagree, but most of what you are talking about as it relates to the 0.5% or whatever is going to be capital gains or deferred income. So simply raising their marginal income rates isn't going to accomplish much. Really I think raising or eliminating capital gains treatment to offset lower corporate taxes would solve a lot of issues. Alternatively, maybe they need a few more brackets for capital gains. But global competition for capital investment is fierce, and we have to be cognizant of becoming competitive there if the taxes on investment gains are too high. The theory behind lower capital gains rates has always been double (or triple) taxation, but in reality the money invested yielding cap gains increasingly is never subjected to double or triple taxation. RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - fredtoast - 04-15-2016 (04-15-2016, 03:23 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Boards who select CEO's tend to have a laziness and fear (sometimes legal, as fiduciaries) of the unknown. That causes them not only to stick with losers, but to pay ridiculous premiums for "known" quantities because for whatever reason they fail to identify up-and-comers who would probably be better (and much cheaper). This. CEO's get their contracts bought out for failing then go get other great jbs. it is just like professional sports where teams keep hiring coaches and managers who have been fired for failing with other teams. RE: 11 CEOs bust through $30M-a-year barrier - JustWinBaby - 04-15-2016 (04-15-2016, 03:37 PM)fredtoast Wrote: it is just like professional sports where teams keep hiring coaches and managers who have been fired for failing with other teams. That comparison is spot-on. And I think it's less about being an insiders club and more about the people making these decisions are afraid of taking a risk on an unknown that fails. No idea how someone decides a known failure is a smart choice. |