Neal, please stop playing the 'wealth envy' card for those of us who think this is a good idea. That tactic doesn't bother me anymore than people who play the 'race card' when ever a black or minority is criticized no matter how well deserved the criticism is. All criticism towards the rich is not motivated by envy. What is there to envy? That they have been given golden opportunities and are so inept that they drove their companies into the ground? Yes, I am very envious of these people. . .NOT!! I am a small business owner myself and while my salary may not be in the same ballpark as these guys at least I succeeding on my own and not having to rely on other people's money to which I have no right.

I beleive that Executive pay should be tied to the performance of the company. If the company looses money then the Exe - looses money. If a company is loosing money and a new exe CUTs the losses from 5 billion to 1 Billion he deservice a good bonuse. Now to the point of takeing tax payer money. Yes there should be some requirements but NOT a Dictatorship. Government has no right to say what is a just salary. What they could do is give the companies a percentage range. If the company, while using bailout money will limit bonuses to 20%. This way the gov has put requirements on the company but yet doesn't tie the hands of the company for hiring future CEO's. The CEO's would still take the jobs because the hard they work, the more money they could make. And lets not kid any buddy here. This is not about image or being the MAN. ITS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY.

I think this idea could work, all those BIG CEO's making their BIG companies money, Getting BIG checks, lets add that trickle down affect to it. All Government jobs, you know the ones, Congressmen, Senators, we are going to cap you out with your BIG salaries also, I think 50,000 should be enough that's my pay and I don't get bonuses, so you get no bonuses. I fly commercial, so shall you, I drive myself to work, so should you. I work on some Holidays, so should you. I pay my own cell, internet, cable, and gas. So should you. I say we Cap you at my salary, even you Mr. President, I think that 100,000 a year is good until you get the economy back on it's feet.

Jacob,

Regarding your comment on "...how little common sense there is on this board...;

"Will Mr. Obama have to give up his bonuses and severance pay too? And, what about his private jets?"

Why should he you idiot? He's not the one that started this mess.

Read this entire article and report back to us if you still feel Obama was not involved in "starting this whole mess".


http://www.nypost.com/seven/10132008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/spreading_the_virus_133375.htm?page=0

The more rules the government adds that effects peoples money is only going to force them to find loopholes to bypass the situation. What's to stop the banks from selling the CEO's million dollar plus foreclosed homes for $1 as part of their contract. They get a tax write off and the CEO's are happy. Then they sell it to their spouse for a $1 and they sell it on the market. Everybody happy...make it the world go round!

If you suckle up to the government teet, don't complain when mommy limits your allowance!

Neal,
You’re logic is in error. I’m a Conservative White Male and quite frankly your points lambasting President Obama’s decision to limit pay of the CEOs’ whose companies are receiving TAXPAYER BAILOUT DOLLARS is JUSTIFIED!

You mutter:
“ These new rules are certain to do two things. First, as I explained earlier this week, the new rules will make it tough for these financial institutions to recruit or to keep the executive talent they so badly need to turn their companies around so that they can once again become profitable.”

Well, LET’s HOPE SO! As if they have done such a BANG-UP job so far!???? By trashing their company’s finances so far into the toilet that they need Taxpayer Bailouts?…. Is that the proposed business model we are to accept? I don’t think so. Good riddance! I don’t believe ANY business needs THAT TYPE of (as you phrase it..) “EXECUTIVE TALENT”.

But let’s not stop there. Let us continue to analyze more of your insanity shall we?

You once again utter in a drunken stupor:
“As these rules loom on the horizon you be assured that many of the top executives in these companies are looking to bail - and head to industries where the government isn't limiting their compensation “

Again, I say: “GOOD RIDDANCE!” If your talent is trashing company’s finances through ineptness then not only will open the door for you as you meander your way to MY COMPETITION but I will sure enough give you a letter of reference that will ensure your employment at “my competition’s business”. As far as the industries that are “ not limiting compensation in other industries “, I say not until YOU arrive there! Once your “TALENTED EXECUTIVE” gets to work there, they will soon be another industry needing Taxpayer Bail-out money.

Now, your final act of ignorance you say:
“ Secondly, people wallowing in wealth envy will think that this is just wonderful .. those evil rich people are getting just what they deserved .. and Democrats will gain their undying loyalty. “

No my misguided political and social, ‘special needs’ senior orator, its not “WEALTH ENVY” we are wallowing in, it’s the loss of trust and dismay in those who employ us, those who we invest in, that we are wallowing in, not to mention the “forced’ decision to bail certain companies out when most of us would have rather let them fail and let the FREE MARKET decide who should remain in business. But since “We the People” really didn’t get a say in this Bail-out, if we are going to be fleeced then at least we demand that we will have some appearance of integrity and honor for OUR MONEY that we are soon to spew out.

Oh, and for the record, …. It was the BUSH administration that started the Bail-Outs.

I am just wondering how they came up with the "....no more than the president makes" figure?? Why not the speaker of the house or the senates janitor? Just wondering.

If they want to make sure these execs get no more than PrezBo, then make sure they have the same perks, private jet, free room and board, luxury dining 24/7, protection and countless other benefits. Bye Bye American Pie, Drove my Chevy to the levy then it was taken out by Owl Gore in a Prius. 02/04/09 the day the American Dream died. Just goes to show that smart people get out and succeed and the dumb masses work for the Guvunment.

So if you limit the executive's pay if they received TARP funds, are these execs still going to pay those under them top dollar? Many top managers can make that much if you talk about options and bonuses. I can only imagine that their compensation will be reduced, and now you've got a trickle-down process where everyone's pay is reduced. Including the all powerful Middle Class.

And how long is it before the govt sees this working and tries to impose this on companies not receiving funds so that the others can still be competitive?

How long until tax deductions will be classified similar to bailout funds, and any business who deducts large amounts (maybe $1,000,000, maybe more) will be subject to similar salary caps? Aren't tax deductions another way of receiving public money, and under our new way of thinking shouldn't anyone who takes these deductions face limitations on how they run their business?

I don't see where this behavior is justified, morally or legally, nor where it is limited.

Neal: What very few are admitting to is the fact that the financial markets will not recover due to the fact that their good times were due to the house of cards built upon the foundation of the derivatives products. Now that these have been exposed, what is left of the finincial markets will be less than 25% of the size of the markets from 2008. Watch and see, watch and learn.

Limit the pay. It should be a punishment for a company that should have failed. If you don't want the government dictating how to spend stockholders money then DON'T GET INTO BED WITH THE GOVERNMENT. Stop putting your hand out.

Once the executives leave for better pay then the company will collapse JUST LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE TO BEGIN WITH.

If they are going to do this, it should be for all government handouts. Sorry UCLA, you received a $5000 grant to study red ant behavior this year, you have to cut chancellor and dean pay for the year.

If they're going to go after CEO's taking handouts, lets go after everybody slopping at the government trough.

Can we say -- market correction -- which would include real estate and just maybe CEO pay...

There are probably quite a few people on this web site that could do a better job of running a major corporation than some of the multi-million dollar guys that are doing it now. An effective CEO is one that listens to good advice and acts on it, learns from their own mistakes, and always looks good and in control in any situation. Unfortunately, many top executives like to surround themselves with simpering sycophants and can't believe they ever make a mistake. However, they usually look good and in control in every situation with the latter qualification being the most important by far. My ol' Daddy used to say that a smart man will learn fom his own mistakes and a wise man will learn from the mistakes of others.
Solution? Pay executives on a strictly commission basis. If they make the stockholders rich they get rich and vice-versa.

If we could pay more for a president wouldn't we get someone who could actually run a business to run our country? We don't need the pres or congress overriding contractural obligations, that's a dangerous road. We also need to look at this on a case by case basis, not all the CEO's were crooks.

You guys just don't get it. The mayority of the banks are broke, they are worth nothing. The only reason the doors are open is because of the federal government to make you think they are solvent, so you won't make a run to get what little money you have left. Anybody that thinks that a bank today is based on capitilist principles is just way off base.

Let's see. Mr. Boortz argues that limiting the banks' executive pay will mean the institutions can attract top talent. So, when there were no limits on pay, they did attract top talent? The same top talent that caused this mess. Maybe talent that isn't "top" might do a much better job, it seems.

'KEEP IT CLEAN' I didn't see anything unclean about my comment, but not listed and I get the message 'keep it clean'. I didn't swear, degrade anyone, just facts.

The same rules should and must apply to Congress Members and the Prez! Detail each and every gratuity, expense, freebie as outlined in his speech. Congress needs to terminate their pay raise for incompetent performance and GREED.

Won't this keep CEO's from seeking corporate welfare in the first place? We are against corporate welfare aren't we?

What are we talking about here? Limiting the pay of people recieving public money, who do not act in a responsible manner? I agree, we should hold these folks accountable and until they show that they can be responsible with the PUBLIC money that they are recieving, then the POLITICIANS should work for MINIMUM WAGE. BTW, how long will it be before they vote another pay raise for themsevles in the cover of darkness or worse, tell you what you can earn?

If Senator McCaskill thinks exec pay should be no higher than Presidential compensation, is she also taking into account the perks of that office?

If CEOs are to be paid what the President gets, they should also get a 30K square foot home, a private police force, a few hummers and Cadillacs for transportation, and a private 747! Right?

More government interference in the public sector. Shareholders and board members should limit the pay of executives not some idiot in the federal government. Sure executive pay is out of hand in some cases but limiting salaries and benefits through the strong arm of the Fed is not good for the future of the country. (However,in the current economic environment I do not believe there may be many options available for so called "talent". If they are so talented why are their organizations in the toilet.)

Forget for a moment whether you agree or disagree with capping executive salaries, whether you think it is right or wrong to have the ability to make more than $500,000, whether you think the performance of these executives does or does not warrant higher pay.

What has just happened was a minority owner (i.e. less than 50% ownership in the firm) whose ownership stake is represented by non-voting shares (the Treasury bought preferred shares when it invested in these firms - preferred shares have no voting rights) just dictated corporate policy to these institutions without so much as a discussion with the board of directors (the body that normally sets executive compensation) let alone a shareholder vote. A very dangerous precedent has just been set.

I think most of you are missing the back story here. This is just the first step in Nationalizing corporate America. You have to start with the banks. If the democrats can take the banks over, then they can control what industries get bank loans, i.e. "green companies". One by one other industries will go down the toilet because they can't get loans to grow, so slowly all business in this country will be under the control of the FEDS, which is FACISM.

I'm not the smartest person in the room, but I can't help but wonder: If the CEO did such a great job of running the company, then why does said company need a bailout? They probably need to go back and reexamine their business model. I can only hope that this measure makes them think twice about receiving bailout money. I think the bailout was a bad idea and I'm none too thrilled about the extra taxes I'll be paying as a result.

Neal-- get over it ! Exec. compensation has NOTHING to do with a company's success. You must read "GOOD TO GREAT".

Your thinking is all wrong on this issue !

$400K is better than no money at all after your bank goes belly up. Gee...should I hire you, didn’t you run Bank of America into the hole? Come on, better talent will rise to the occasion than what has been out there at the current salary range.

I was listening to this book yesterday on the psychology of economic behavior. Those executive pays got big when they were published and each knew what the other was making. It was THEIR wealth envy that demanded more than the other guy. It escalated from there. It must be 'reset' to a lower number because 'they' won't agree to lower their own pay/bonuses. It has nothing to do with talent or this financial crisis wouldn't have happened. Money buys ego, not talent.

Capping executive pay is irrelevant; these "execs" can just change his/her position as a "consultant" (thus not formally holding any sort of executive position), and rake in all they want. The government throws out these bones to the dumb general public...thinking that we're all dumb because we buy into the lingo...

in McCaskill's state, tens of thousands are without electricity and many basic services for yet another week. Since the ice storm in the last week of January, she's been conspicuously quite. The Governor of the state did not ask for Federal assistance, nor deploy any state agencies to the hardest hit areas until a few days ago. FEMA didn't even respond until two days ago.

Katrina anyone????

So some banks, like Umpqua Bank, which were strongarmed by Paulson into taking money they really didn't need or want, will now have salary caps. This new era is just becoming more fabulous by the moment.

Limiting executive pay violates the Contracts Clause. Most, if not all, CEOs are onboard for a specified period of time for a specified pay band with specified performance bonuses. What Congress is attempting to do, like they already did with the housing/mortgage industry, is to insert themselves into the process that started out with two parties coming to an agreement based on voluntary exchange. This proves that Congess critters are violating their oath of office..... "to protect and defend".

I still disagree with you here. I love this idea because it's essentially a poison pill, forcing banks to forgo the bailout if at all possible. Only desperate banks will participate.

What this is going to do is drive the talented people in this country to seek a country that celebrates economic liberty, since the U.S is no longer interested in the concept of freedom. Really though we can take people's misunderstanding of a person like Ron Paul as a misunderstanding of liberty itself. Thank you Obama,Bush,Mccain- the creators of modern United States Socialism. Just think in a few years the entire U.S will look like California does now....broke with a talented middle class trying to escape punishment at gun point for having an acheivement mentality. The answer? Our last hope...Gary Johnson in 2012

The Salary Caps should ensure mediocraty this will pave the way for bureaucracy and new government jobs in those companies. Just imagine going for a car loan and being told what kind of car you should have ... and only the tip of the iceberg ...

We've arrived at the "Hillary Step." It's an easy climb to the summit from here.
What will be next? Doctors who receive Medicaid/Medicare reimbursments cannot earn more than a United States Senator? Pilots of airlines cannot earn more than a Congressional aide? Business owners and corporate CEO's with government contracts cannot earn more than the salary of the department head with which they do business?
We, the lemmings, are approaching the "Hillary Step" and we'd better all hope we can't make it to the summit.
However, I predict there will be certain areas of expertise too valuable to our nation and its economy to fall subject to these sorts of wage restrictions. Lawyers.

I am kinda indifferent on this executive pay limits issue. This is NOT wealth envy, Neal. The only wealth I envy is mine; I earned it. Then Uncle Sam sends a welfare check (yeah, I'll keep on calling it that) to these businesses that made bad investment decisions! If the executive wants to bail and go somewhere else, let him!

Guess they'll be headed to their own version of "Galt's Gulch."

The current crop of CEOs of these wunnerful institutions now sucking at the public teat needs to go - they screwed up bigtime and deserve neither base compensation nor bonus nor severance package ... but capping the pay of the future replacement (i.e., locking the barn door after the horse is gone) only ensures the mediocrity of the replacement ...

these executives do not need pay limits, they NEED TO BE FIRED!!!!!!!

It is about damn time! If they are going to take taxpayer (my) money, they do NOT deserve million dollar salaries and multimillion dollar bonuses. If they would have done their jobs right they would not have needed a bailout.

How many employees of private companies (including those that took bailout money) have a pension plan that guarantees them their full salary with pay raises for as long as they or their spouse is alive?

If Barak lives to age 90, with a 3% COLA, he'll rake in over 34 million dollars in pay alone.

Now, let's talk about the perks of his job.....

Not even close. Part of what these CEOs' motivation is EGO. You think the CEO of a big bank is going to leave because he can only earn 500k but unlimited stock options? You think he'll leave and tell his friends that he's no longer the head of an influential institution?

Not a single CEO will leave because of a salary cap. Plus, what company would hire "talent" that left a failing institution and pay them any more?

I think you're throwing the "talent" adjective around quite loosely.