17
   

Executive Pay limitation!

 
 
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 01:56 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Comparing chief executive wages against average wages of the remainder of the employees...IS THE WAY IT IS DONE WORLDWIDE.

What in hell are you talking about????


I am stating that comparison is irrelevant.

I can compare my income to the lady who empties my waste basket...but to what end?

Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 01:56 pm
@BigTexN,
BigTexN wrote:

Quote:
My argument is that executives are overpaid in almost every company in America; this becomes quickly apparent upon examination of the facts, the history, and comparison between executive pay rates in America and outside of it.


Continuing on with this...I don't suppose you would dare apply this statement as follows:

"My argument is that auto union workers are overpaid in almost every company in America; this becomes quickly apparent upon examination of the facts, the history, and comparison between auto union worker pay rates in America and outside of it"

No extremes here...just reflecting the core fallacy in your argument.



There is no core fallacy in either my statement or yours. You could very well make an argument that auto union workers are overpaid compared to other similar employees in other industries and companies.

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:04 pm
@OGIONIK,
The classic list.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Cycloptichorn
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:05 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
You could very well make an argument that auto union workers are overpaid compared to other similar employees in other industries and companies.


You are correct that you could compare the two but the comparison would have what merit given when you look at the disparity in cost of living, quality of life, regulatory environment, etc?

Just because you can compare some things things, sometimes there is no legitimacy in doing so.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:09 pm
@BigTexN,
BigTexN wrote:

Quote:
You could very well make an argument that auto union workers are overpaid compared to other similar employees in other industries and companies.


You are correct that you could compare the two but the comparison would have what merit given then disparity in cost of living, quality of life, regulatory environment, etc?

Just because you can compare some things things, sometimes there is no legitimacy in doing so.


Well, the points you bring up are certainly factors in any equation, but there's no real thrust to your post. You haven't shown that there is no legitimacy in comparing relative levels of pay between employees and executives in America vs. abroad; you've only asserted it.

Please present a logical argument as to why there is no legitimacy in comparing these rates - especially amongst industrialized countries whose cost of living is comparable to ours.

Cycloptichorn
OGIONIK
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:13 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

The classic list.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

Cycloptichorn


ty.!!!!
0 Replies
 
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:24 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Please present a logical argument as to why there is no legitimacy in comparing these rates - especially amongst industrialized countries whose cost of living is comparable to ours.


There is no legitimacy in comparing income rates with other countries because of the most obvious fact...we are discussing jobs in the United States and their fair market value to similar jobs within the United Sates.

Frankly, I could care less what someone doing my job in France/UK/Germany is making in income for several reasons:

1) Even if they paid more, I would not be moving overseas to attain that income
2) If they paid less, I would thank my lucky stars for living in this great country.
3) Because I live in this country and intend to stay in this country, the more legitimate comparison would be to the person of the same caliber in the same profession doing the same job who lives in or around my same geographic area....not France/Germany/UK/Australia/Japan/etc
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:26 pm
@BigTexN,
Quote:
I am stating that comparison is irrelevant.

I can compare my income to the lady who empties my waste basket...but to what end?


One of the points Cyclon has been making is about the relationship of executive salaries to the salaries of employees of their company.

How in the hell can you call the comparison irrelevant...when the only way the point can be made is to make the comparison.

You do realize that in the United States...the difference between executive salaries and the average salaries of employees...is off the goddam board?

No other country even comes close to the disparity we have in that regard.

It is an appropriate and germane point to make.

And if you are not bright enough to see that...you really should just stay out of it...rather than spotlighting your deficiencies by making a big thing of it.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:28 pm
@BigTexN,
BigTexN wrote:

Quote:
Please present a logical argument as to why there is no legitimacy in comparing these rates - especially amongst industrialized countries whose cost of living is comparable to ours.


There is no legitimacy in comparing income rates with other countries because of the most obvious fact...we are discussing jobs in the United States and their fair market value to similar jobs within the United Sates.

Frankly, I could care less what someone doing my job in France/UK/Germany is making in income for several reasons:

1) Even if they paid more, I would not be moving overseas to attain that income
2) If they paid less, I would thank my lucky stars for living in this great country.
3) Because I live in this country and intend to stay in this country, the more legitimate comparison would be to the person of the same caliber in the same profession doing the same job who lives in or around my same geographic area....not France/Germany/UK/Australia/Japan/etc


Think hard about why this post does not address the request I made you. I'll be back after lunch to explain it to you if you haven't posted the answer by then.

Cycloptichorn
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:36 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You do realize that in the United States...the difference between executive salaries and the average salaries of employees...is off the goddam board?


The same argument could be made in comparing the President's pay to teachers pay....still irrelevant...still illegitimate.
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:44 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Quote:
Think hard about why this post does not address the request I made you.


Each of my posts addressed each and every issue you attempted to bring up.

You may continue to hold out hope that I will somehow come around to some form of thinking that would defy common sense...this will not happen.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:47 pm
@BigTexN,
The conservative masters count on people like you, Tex.

Keep doing your thing.

It helps my cause.
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 02:56 pm
@Frank Apisa,
How funny that you have no legitimate response when the light of day is shined on the foolishness of your disagreement...
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 03:32 pm
@BigTexN,
BigTexN wrote:

Quote:
Think hard about why this post does not address the request I made you.


Each of my posts addressed each and every issue you attempted to bring up.

You may continue to hold out hope that I will somehow come around to some form of thinking that would defy common sense...this will not happen.


No, your posts did not. Instead, they relied on logical fallacies to try and avoid discussing the necessity of cutting CEO and executive pay in American companies; and then you attempted to limit the discussion to terms that you have set.

But you didn't start this thread; I did. You're welcome to talk about whatever you like, and if you want to withdraw from the discussion, that's cool too. But please don't attempt to limit the discussion to the part you think best supports your argument when others bring up inconvenient facts.

Cycloptichorn
BigTexN
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 03:37 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Sit in denial, but common sense is not a logical fallacy.

Oops, maybe it is to some people...and therein lies the basis for our disagreement...
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 04:26 pm
@BigTexN,
tex wrote :

Quote:
So, that means shareholders fire them and hire new talent.

New talent...better talent...talent qualified to turn these companies around would NOT work for a mere $500,000 when they could find better elsewhere with less headache, less stress and NO government intervention.


hbg replied :

Quote:
to sum up my thoughts :
many executives of large corporations had a very narrow field of vision .
they assumed that just by looking at their own business would be enough .
they either didn't have the foresight to constantly scan what's going on in the world and adjust their course accordingly ... ... or they were simply incompetent .


tex :
my question is : since just about every large corporation is in the dumpster - banks , insurance , tech , retail , airlines , construction ... ... ) where are those "saviours" to come from ?

my experiance has been that "failed" executives get picked up by some other corporation thinking that they'll get the scoop on the competition .
haven't heard of any former top executives that lost their jobs and are now in the unemployment line or doing low paying jobs .
the top executives belong to a very closely knit circle of people and they usually know "how to take care of each other" .
(they aren't much differnt from a "closed" shop . if one looks at annual reports one usually finds that the chairman of A corporation sits on the board of B corporation - B sits on C and C sits on A ... it's like a merry-go-round) .

even paying large fines for financial misdeeds (such as backdating share options ) , is an accepetd and condoned practive in those lofty circles .

i doubt very much that there are many (any ?) top executives that have not been tainted by the financial meltdown of the recent past .
just my opinion - from watching what's going on in the market and looking at my investments (i'm glad most of our income comes out of canadian and german pensions - at the moment they seem - relatively - safe .
hbg

0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 04:46 pm
@BigTexN,
The arguments have been made...and they are logical and to the point.

You are simply dismissing them as unimportant.

They are measurements made all over the world...and all sorts of commentary on the disparity shows up on the Internet...and in the media.

You just do not want to concede that point.

Continue your childish rant.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 04:54 pm
@BigTexN,
BigTexN wrote:

Sit in denial, but common sense is not a logical fallacy.

Oops, maybe it is to some people...and therein lies the basis for our disagreement...


'Common sense' cannot be appealed to without committing a logical fallacy. Your idea of 'common sense,' - a Republican one, obviously - may not be the same as the next guy. So it's useless assertation.

You're really batting a thousand today, man

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 05:45 pm
@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:

It could function in the sense that it is easier to replace a mailroom clerk than a CEO. You could hire a 16 year and train him in a week.


Linkat - You or I could go into any one of the TARP receiving companies and do what the CEO's have done to those companies WITHOUT a week of training. That's what makes their compensation so ridiculous. It isn't earned.
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2009 06:04 pm
@squinney,
sqinnney wrote :

Quote:
Linkat wrote:

It could function in the sense that it is easier to replace a mailroom clerk than a CEO. You could hire a 16 year and train him in a week.


Linkat - You or I could go into any one of the TARP receiving companies and do what the CEO's have done to those companies WITHOUT a week of training. That's what makes their compensation so ridiculous. It isn't earned.


got a friend on one of the boards of those companies ?
someone you did a favour for once and now he'll "scratch your back" ?
oh , you don't ... ... that's too bad .
hbg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/29/2024 at 03:24:33