Let's Give Them All Another Tax Cut

[Rohirrim]

CEO pay hikes double

Corporate Library survey finds median raise for S&P 500 CEO was 22.18% in 2003.
July 28, 2004: 8:34 AM EDT


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The CEO's at the nation's largest companies saw their raises more than doubled in 2003 as the median raise handed out by S&P 500 companies to their top executives was 22.18 percent, according to a study by The Corporate Library.

The watchdog group said that stock options and awards of restricted stock drove the larger pay hikes. But most elements of the pay -- base salary, annual bonuses, restricted stock, long-term incentive payout, value realized from stock options and total compensation -- showed increases. The only type of compensation not to show a gain was the value of stock option grants during the year.

"This double-digit rise in pay shows that calls for pay restraint appear to be being ignored," said the statement from the group.

It said four S&P 500 companies -- Apple Computer (AAPL: Research, Estimates), Oracle (ORCL: Research, Estimates), Yahoo! (YHOO: Research, Estimates) and Colgate-Palmolive (CL: Research, Estimates), upped their CEO pay by well over 1,000 percent.

The compensation for all CEOs, a total sample of 1,429 companies, show median pay increases of 15 percent, up from 9 percent increases in 2002. The median is the pay increase at which there are the same number of pay increases that are greater and that are less.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I guess the windfall resulting from all that job outsourcing and from all those offshore tax shelters has to go somewhere.

Why not give it to the richest of the rich and people who don't really need it?

Makes perfect sense.

"Trickle-down. That's the key to a strong economy!'
http://www.bartcop.com/ho-orielly.jpg

Uh, Mr. O'Liely, isn't this sort of policy the reason why the first George Bush was just a one-term president?

[watermock]

This is something that started happening during the Bush Administration?

This went without notice during the 90's.

I don't like it whatsoever. They are generally based on if the corporation makes it's objectives, the CEO gets his Turkey.

I don't like it, but damn you dimwits, this isn't somthing that happened under Bush.

You don't get it do you.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I don't like it, but damn you dimwits, this isn't somthing that happened under Bush.

You're right--it happened under his daddy and Teflon Ron.

When Clinton came down the pike, suddenly these same CEOs were forced to shoulder their fair share of the burden.

They didn't like that.

Hence, Whitewater and Travelgate and Filegate and Monicagate and a thousand right-wing loony radio personalities were born.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

CEO gets 1000% pay raise

Just amazing! It is so nice to see the boards looking out for stock holders and employees.

Jobs pay-package up 1,000%

By Macworld staff

Apple CEO Steve Jobs may officially take home a yearly wage of $1, but he saw his compensation package surge by more that 1,000 per cent in 2003, an official survey reveals.


According to an Associated Press report, Jobs was one of four CEOs who watched their total compensation packages surge by more than 1,000 per cent in 2003. The increase was "largely through exercising stock options and receiving restricted stock," claims the report.


The survey by The Corporate Library found that the average pay for a CEO in the United States increased by 15 per cent last year. For chiefs of larger companies it rose by 22 per cent, despite calls for restraint in CEO pay, reports Associated Press.


The median compensation for CEOs rose 22.18 per cent. Compensation packages include base salary, annual bonus, total annual compensation, restricted stock, long-term incentive payouts and the value realized from the exercise of stock options. In 2002 total compensation rose by a median of 9.5 per cent.


The report states: "With statistics such as these, it would appear that any chance of reining in executive compensation has disappeared. Since every other element of pay has increased, both in magnitude and frequency, CEOs are unlikely to feel the squeeze for at least three years, perhaps never."


Increases were seen in almost every category of executive compensation. The only category to decline from 2002 to 2003 was the value of stock option grants.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=9273&Page=1&pagePos=4

[watermock]

I am not going to be backed into a corner with this rhetoric.

You leave no room for discussion.

Your an idealogue, and totally clueless.

You don't have a solution, which makes you a prime patriot for clueless ideology.

I hate to tell you this, but I pity people that can't understand fundamental economics.

Complain Complain Complain but never bring an answer.

You dumbasses always complain about freedom but still manage to promote protectionism.

You scream oppression yet whine about how we are not protected.

It's a brave new world.

It's not a matter of perception anymore.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You don't have a solution

That's where you're full of sh*t.

Last time we had a Democrat in the white house, we had eight years of peace and prosperity.

The criminal POS you're blowing has given us nothing but war, recession, unemployment, and total disorder.

[Rascal]

And you accuse me of being foul mouthed. Tis tis tis. So hypocritical.

We HAD peace and prosperity. Because of his actions, or lack their off, the economy was going down before he left, and Bin Laden had planned 9-11 (not to mention already attacking the US Cole, bombing two US embassies, etc.)

[Spider]

He can go Cheney himself ...........

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

"...chances are your America and George W. Bush's America are not the same place. If you are dead center on the earning scale in real-world twenty-first-century America, you make a bit less than $32,000 a year, and $32,000 is not a sum that Mr. Bush has ever associated with getting by in his world. Bush, who has always managed to fail upwards in his various careers, has never had a job the way you have a job—where not showing up one morning gets you fired, costing you your health benefits. He may find it difficult to relate personally to any of the nearly two million citizens who've lost their jobs under his administration, the first administration since Herbert Hoover's to post a net loss of jobs. Mr. Bush has never had to worry that he couldn't afford the best available health care for his children. For him, forty-three million people without health insurance may be no more than a politically inconvenient abstraction. When Mr. Bush talks about the economy, he is not talking about your economy. His economy is filled with pals called Kenny-boy who fly around in their own airplanes. In Bush's economy, his world, friends relocate offshore to avoid paying taxes. Taxes are for chumps like you. You are not a friend. You're the help. When the party Mr. Bush is hosting in his world ends, you'll be left picking shrimp toast out of the carpet."

--Ron Reagan

http://www.esquire.com/features/articles/2004/040729_mfe_reagan_1.html

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

And you accuse me of being foul mouthed. Tis tis tis. So hypocritical.

Just giving your buddy water-on-the-brain a dose of his own medicine to see how he (and you) like it.

Not very much, apparently.

[patteeu]

CEO pay hikes double

Corporate Library survey finds median raise for S&P 500 CEO was 22.18% in 2003.
July 28, 2004: 8:34 AM EDT


NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The CEO's at the nation's largest companies saw their raises more than doubled in 2003 as the median raise handed out by S&P 500 companies to their top executives was 22.18 percent, according to a study by The Corporate Library.

The watchdog group said that stock options and awards of restricted stock drove the larger pay hikes. But most elements of the pay -- base salary, annual bonuses, restricted stock, long-term incentive payout, value realized from stock options and total compensation -- showed increases. The only type of compensation not to show a gain was the value of stock option grants during the year.

"This double-digit rise in pay shows that calls for pay restraint appear to be being ignored," said the statement from the group.

It said four S&P 500 companies -- Apple Computer (AAPL: Research, Estimates), Oracle (ORCL: Research, Estimates), Yahoo! (YHOO: Research, Estimates) and Colgate-Palmolive (CL: Research, Estimates), upped their CEO pay by well over 1,000 percent.

The compensation for all CEOs, a total sample of 1,429 companies, show median pay increases of 15 percent, up from 9 percent increases in 2002. The median is the pay increase at which there are the same number of pay increases that are greater and that are less.


Is it really that big of a surprise that when our economy turned around and grew strongly, CEOs started making their bonus targets?

As for the CEOs who had pay increases in excess of 1,000 percent, I'd like to know more about those situations. At Apple, Steve Jobs was working for next to nothing, so it's not alarming to me if his compensation this year was closer to market value. 1,000 percent sure sounds like a lot though.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Subject: Bush Recession: Biggest Stock Mkt Crash since 1929

Your 401K is now a 201K, thanks to Bush's trickle-down tax cut for the wealthy.

This stupid tax cut and phony war also gave us the biggest deficit in history.

Bush went AWOL in the 70s when he had a chance to serve his country,
and he should go AWOL now before he does more damage to this country.

[Crushaholic]

Hence, Whitewater and Travelgate and Filegate and Monicagate and a thousand right-wing loony radio personalities were born.

No...hence the Republican Revolution of 1994 came about. Clinton had a tough time getting his wishes when the Republicans controlled Congress. :strong:

[alkemical]

but we have a new toby keith cd to give ya!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Clinton had a tough time getting his wishes when the Republicans controlled Congress.

That's true.

Republicans were much more interested in Clinton's zipper than fighting terrorism.

[watermock]

I feel that these rediculous bonus/stock option checks have to stop.

Your hired to do a job, then do it. The crazies think that the average american could care less, LABF seems to thing 90 percent are in some sort of conspiracy.

Before this raving turd came in lambasting reality, I talked openly about retribution against players like Enron, MCI and Global Crossing. It was all lost in the sewage of politico.

The whole forum has gone south, and if I made that happen I appoligize. But I don't think that is the case.

I'm not going to pull rank in a situation where the board is rather odd in a political year. I don't think Kerry will blow up the world. He will just move it towards it.

The World needs to know that we are "Just a little bit crazy".

[Cito Pelon]

We need to pull together, because we're in danger of losing our chance at the brass ring of world dominance. We can do it, and nobody deserves it more than us. Somebody will end up on top, we're in the prime position, but GWB has to go, Kerry better be able to hold our power at par, and we have to find somebody that the media and money can't make or break.

We're losing a window of opportunity, that much I know. How to keep that window open a little longer until we find another Teddy Roosevelt or Abe Lincoln, I don't know how to do that, except by being level-headed.

[watermock]

I think there should be limits on performance bonus and stock options for CEO's.

What idiotboy doesn't understand is this isn't anything new that was created during the "Bush Years". This clown has no concept of reality.

If you want to look at solid hard core facts, more CEO's have been prosecuted allready under Bush than the combinded Presidency of Clinton.

Want to deny it Biatch?

Clinton rode the internet wave and you know it. Get off the horse dimwit.

[Rohirrim]

What I don't get is this: Dennis Hastert was on Meet the Press yesterday talking about how the Europeans aren't suffering from outsourcing and all these other economic ills because they aren't over-regulated, over-taxed, etc. (you know, the same old GOP bs). He argued that if we dump the corporate taxes (I thought we already had!) and dump the over-regulation (you know, like letting them dump whatever they want into the groundwater) the outsourcing would stop. What I don't understand is this: If the American corporation is so oppressed by taxes and regulation which forces them to outsource jobs and factories, why are their CEOs making more money than ever? Which one is right, Dennis?

[patteeu]

What I don't get is this: Dennis Hastert was on Meet the Press yesterday talking about how the Europeans aren't suffering from outsourcing and all these other economic ills because they aren't over-regulated, over-taxed, etc. (you know, the same old GOP bs). He argued that if we dump the corporate taxes (I thought we already had!) and dump the over-regulation (you know, like letting them dump whatever they want into the groundwater) the outsourcing would stop. What I don't understand is this: If the American corporation is so oppressed by taxes and regulation which forces them to outsource jobs and factories, why are their CEOs making more money than ever? Which one is right, Dennis?

I don't understand what you think is inconsistent. Isn't it possible that corporations are reacting to a high cost structure (e.g. US taxes and regulation) by taking steps to reduce the cost structure (e.g. by outsourcing and off-shoring) in order to maximize competitiveness? And if they are successfully keeping the corporations competitive and hitting their financial targets, why would you not expect the CEOs to be compensated for their successes? I see no contradiction here.

[Rohirrim]

I don't understand what you think is inconsistent. Isn't it possible that corporations are reacting to a high cost structure (e.g. US taxes and regulation) by taking steps to reduce the cost structure (e.g. by outsourcing and off-shoring) in order to maximize competitiveness? And if they are successfully keeping the corporations competitive and hitting their financial targets, why would you not expect the CEOs to be compensated for their successes? I see no contradiction here.

While wages remain flat or downsizing continues? I suppose you're right. It could just be priorities.

[patteeu]

While wages remain flat or downsizing continues? I suppose you're right. It could just be priorities.

You sound sarcastic, but I think you are right on target. It IS just priorities; and a CEO's priority is usually corporate profit as opposed to jobs or wages. I think it makes things work out better in the long run that way, but I understand there are plenty of reasonable people who don't see it that way.