S
stinkcat_14
Guest
What regulation have I advocated for? I fail to see how this is relevant?
- Status
E
estesbob
Guest
The topic of this thread is “Should salaries be capped”? And if that is not what we are discussion how is anything that happened at Circuit City relevant?
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
I would think that the morality of compensation is quite relevant to the topic at hand. Are you going to argue that one’s salary is always and everywhere morally neutral, regardless of the circumstances?
B
BamaRider
Guest
:ehh:
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
A thing is worth what a willing buyer will offer and a willing seller will accept. My wages are an agreement between myself and my employer.
If someone offers me a dollar an hour and I accept the job, then he and I have agreed my labor is worth a dollar an hour.
If someone offers me a million dollars an hour and I accept the job, then he and I have agreed my labor is worth a million dollars an hour.
What is “immoral” about either the offers or the acceptance? And what person not party to our agreement has moral athourity to condemn it as “immoral?”
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
The shareholders are a party to the agreement, and certainly they have the right to argue that it is immoral.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
The shareholders have a right to be a** party** to the agreement – but Congress in its wisdom altered the balance of power between the owners of the business (the shareholders) and management in order to curtail "hostile takeovers.’
In a truly free system, the shareholders could quickly put a stop to what they consider excessive compensation – but they are blocked by law from running their own business.
So take it up with Congress.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
So the the morality of compensation is relevant to the topic at hand.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Nope. The morality of the law may be, however.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
So the law makes it moral? Under current law, CEO’s can help themselves to too much of the goodies. So, therefore it is ok, because it is legal? That is like saying that abortion is morally ok, because it is legal.
E
estesbob
Guest
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Stop and take a deep breath.
You said:
I take from your previous comments you did not mean all compensation is morally okay.
Then I said:
And you think I meant that a law that circumvents the basic agreement between employer and employee is moral?
Fiat economics, however well-intentioned, tend to have negative consequences – and no one who is aware of that can entertain such a law without considering the immorality of hurting those one intends to protect.
Or to put it another way, it is indeed a crime for corporate officers to over-pay themselves, and Congress is their partner in crime.
Let the owners (the shareholders) set the compensation and there is no crime.
E
estesbob
Guest
No-they have the right to argue that it is more than are willing to pay. There is no morality involved-just a business transaction between two parties. Lets not add a third party(the Govt) to the equation.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
There is a morality issue if their interests are not being well represented by those legally charged with representing their interests.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
And the immorality lies in the misguided laws that were intended to keep the stockholders from taking control of their own businesses and running it to their satisfaction.
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
And in the taking advantage of those laws.
V
vern_humphrey
Guest
Okay – but the way to fight immorality is not to rail against the people who take advantage of the law, but to work to change the law.
I personally think a single sentence inserted in the existing law would work: “For all publicly traded stocks, the compensation of the corporate officers shall be set by the stockholders at their annual convention.”
E
estesbob
Guest
Unfortunately such laws often had unintended effects. Sarbanes-Oxley has cost American billions of dollars to comply with and has done little to limit the abuses it was intended to stop.
Another example is the alternative minimum tax. Originally passed in 1969 to target 160 or so millionaires who didn’t pay tax in the now grown to the extent that that it effects tens of millions of middle-class taxpayers.
Then there was the famous luxury tax on yachts which collected almost no new money but put thousands of people out of work in northeastern shipyards.
Hopefully at some point those you push excessive regulation will realize that have employees you have to have employers
S
stinkcat_14
Guest
What excessive regulation have I pushed?
E
estesbob
Guest
Are you being paranoid? I’m not commenting on you. I am Commenting on those, and they are legion, who think the government should regulate business more.
I am paranoid myself. When I go to a football game and the teams go into a huddle I am sure they are talking about me
- Status