Author Topic: Obama moves to cap executive pay (Read 13588 times)

lone_gunman · « **Reply #25 on:** February 04, 2009, 10:21:13 PM »

Specifically what laws and powers would he call on to limit pay? I would ask for specifics, not vaguaries.

Headless Thompson Gunner · « **Reply #26 on:** February 04, 2009, 10:23:03 PM »

What specific power do you think he needs? Or, rather, what makes you think he'll call upon some pre-existing power to do whatever he wants to business?

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #27 on:** February 04, 2009, 10:28:40 PM »

Quote from: lone_gunman on February 04, 2009, 10:21:13 PM

Specifically what laws and powers would he call on to limit pay? I would ask for specifics, not vaguaries.

He would use his political pull to support bills to that effect?

lone_gunman · « **Reply #28 on:** February 04, 2009, 10:31:22 PM »

So you agree it would take new legislation from Congress, and this legislation would have to fall within the powers allowed to Congress as set forth by the Constitution. Do you really believe there are votes in the Congress to do that? And even if so, do you think it would be Constitutional?

I think folks are now straying towards insanity if they believe Obama could accomplish this, or that he even wants to accomplish this.

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #29 on:** February 04, 2009, 10:36:38 PM »

Quote

And even if so, do you think it would be Constitutional?

This is by an large irrelevant, as the Congressional powers have been interpreted very broadly by the courts. THe courts ruled, for example, that if you grow corn and feed it to your own animals, this falls under the power of Congress to regulate under interstate commerce. The courts ruled that Congress can regulate the length of your shotgun.

Remember that there was a time in very recent history that the wealthier Americans were fined up to 99% of their income. Do you think it can't happen again?

john828 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 04, 2009, 11:07:49 PM »

Educate me this:

Quote

Remember that there was a time in very recent history that the wealthier Americans were fined up to 99% of their income.

The percentage may be wrong but the egregiousness has not worn off. From a naive newbie, teach me.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #31 on:** February 04, 2009, 11:26:43 PM »

Quote

THe courts ruled, for example, that if you grow corn and feed it to your own animals, this falls under the power of Congress to regulate under interstate commerce.

What law are you referring to in that example?

MicroBalrog · « **Reply #32 on:** February 04, 2009, 11:30:05 PM »

It was called the Agricultural Adjustment Act.

The ruling is referred to as Wickard v. Filburn.

RocketMan · « **Reply #33 on:** February 05, 2009, 01:14:22 AM »

Quote from: lone_gunman on February 04, 2009, 10:31:22 PM

So you agree it would take new legislation from Congress, and this legislation would have to fall within the powers allowed to Congress as set forth by the Constitution. Do you really believe there are votes in the Congress to do that? And even if so, do you think it would be Constitutional?

There have been rumblings on and off for years from the Left that executive pay should be limited in some fashion. Obama has taken the first step.
Looking at our current Congressional makeup and who we have in the White House, it's not much of a stretch (and certainly not insane) to wonder when broader limitations will be advanced.
According to many on the Left, we have a "living" Constitution. What would be so difficult?

lone_gunman · « **Reply #34 on:** February 05, 2009, 08:02:52 AM »

Quote

What would be so difficult?

Getting it past he Supreme Court. Conservatives hold a majority there now.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #35 on:** February 05, 2009, 08:08:45 AM »

Quote

It was called the Agricultural Adjustment Act.

The ruling is referred to as Wickard v. Filburn.

Thanks for the info. That is a pretty scary decision. After reading that, it sounds like the federal government can do anything it wants to under the disguise of interstate commerce. My question would be whether or not the current court would tend to agree.

HankB · « **Reply #36 on:** February 05, 2009, 08:56:58 AM »

Quote from: lone_gunman on February 04, 2009, 08:50:42 PM

I don't think it is fair to cap the exec salaries after the fact. If the money was originally promised no strings attached, then I think the govt should honor that, and not add conditions to the deal after it is done.

In priniciple though I think it is totally reasonable to cap salaries if a business is taking tax payer money. But the business needs to know that up front.

A newspaper story today stated that BHO's rule would not affect companies that had already received bailout money, but would apply to companies that accept it in the future. (The article also said there were ways to weasel around the rule.

)

Personally, I think a thorough housecleaning - CEO, CFO, & Board - would be a good start if a company receives a billion or more in bailout funds. And no company receiving bailout funds ought to be able to fill those positions with execs who'd lost their jobs because they mismanaged another company that needed bailout money.

If a company does NOT get bailout money . . . the .gov ought to keep it's nose out of things like compensation.

lone_gunman · « **Reply #37 on:** February 05, 2009, 09:00:58 AM »

If this rule would only apply to new bailout money, then I think I am in favor of it. It is not unreasonable for the government to regulate a company if the company voluntarily receives tax payer money. The government needs to make sure that our money is spent and managed appropriately.

RevDisk · « **Reply #38 on:** February 05, 2009, 09:27:28 AM »

Quote from: lupinus on February 04, 2009, 02:43:01 PM

bad at it or not, I want the government no where NEAR wages for anyone but their own employees.

If you take the King's shilling, you are the King's man.

As I recall, the govt going around forcing banks to take the money. They knew, or damn well should have, that money isn't exactly free and that there would be a price to be paid. I fail to see why any exec in such a situation could bitch. Through their general incompotence, they demanded and got money directly out of my paycheck. I fail to see why taxpayer dollars should be used for salaries or bonuses for the upper echelon of those fools.

But yes, if a bank or any other company did not take a dime of fed money, the fed.gov should not have any say in wage caps.

Turkey Creek · « **Reply #39 on:** February 05, 2009, 09:59:11 AM »

With this new policy, I can almost guarentee that many of these institutions that are coming to the feds with hat in hand, will all of a sudden say that they are not that bad off and decline any bailouts-

ronnyreagan · « **Reply #40 on:** February 05, 2009, 10:29:06 AM »

Quote from: Turkey Creek on February 05, 2009, 09:59:11 AM

With this new policy, I can almost guarentee that many of these institutions that are coming to the feds with hat in hand, will all of a sudden say that they are not that bad off and decline any bailouts-

Goldman Sachs is already.

Nitrogen · « **Reply #41 on:** February 05, 2009, 11:20:47 AM »

Quote from: RocketMan on February 04, 2009, 09:18:42 PM

This is just the beginning, folks. Obama will eventually go farther than this, capping executive salaries in other industries not receiving federal bailout monies. A slippery slope, indeed.

Nitrogen · « **Reply #42 on:** February 05, 2009, 11:22:11 AM »

Quote from: ronnyreagan on February 05, 2009, 10:29:06 AM

Goldman Sachs is already.

Wow, amazing how sucking at the government teat looks less ideal once it begins to hurt, huh?

EDIT: check this out. The caps are Male Bovine Excrement:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=azVLk.22AkLI

Headless Thompson Gunner · « **Reply #43 on:** February 05, 2009, 12:50:33 PM »

Quote from: lone_gunman on February 04, 2009, 10:31:22 PM

So you agree it would take new legislation from Congress, and this legislation would have to fall within the powers allowed to Congress as set forth by the Constitution. Do you really believe there are votes in the Congress to do that? And even if so, do you think it would be Constitutional?

I think folks are now straying towards insanity if they believe Obama could accomplish this, or that he even wants to accomplish this.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that Obama would need an actual authority or power granted to him. There's no reason he couldn't or wouldn't just go ahead and do it anyway.

And even if you conclude that he does need to be given some sort of authority, what makes you think the liberal Democrats controlling congress wouldn't pass a law granting it?

They already impose minimum salary requirements. Why is it so hard to fathom that they'd try to impose maximum salary requirements?

lone_gunman · « **Reply #44 on:** February 05, 2009, 02:01:51 PM »

My point is Obama could not simply and easily decree salary caps. It would take legislation, and almost certainly a test in the Supreme Court. I highly doubt corporate America would idly sit by and let that happen.

lupinus · « **Reply #45 on:** February 05, 2009, 02:27:59 PM »

You forget, the left believes it rules, not that it serves.

When was the last time a politician paid attention to the constitution again?

lone_gunman · « **Reply #46 on:** February 05, 2009, 02:35:34 PM »

Quote

When was the last time a politician paid attention to the constitution again?

Well, the Heller case perhaps? Obama is now on record saying he agrees with the Heller decision that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right.

El Tejon · « **Reply #47 on:** February 05, 2009, 02:40:02 PM »

Quote

My question would be whether or not the current court would tend to agree.

Have you asked a glancing goose?

lupinus · « **Reply #48 on:** February 05, 2009, 02:51:36 PM »

Quote

Well, the Heller case perhaps? Obama is now on record saying he agrees with the Heller decision that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right.

He's also on record saying he thought DC's gun laws were not infringements :rolleyes:

Don't care · « **Reply #49 on:** February 05, 2009, 04:14:11 PM »

News:

Author Topic: Obama moves to cap executive pay (Read 13588 times)