Should there be limits on executive pay?

[RSS News]

US President Barack Obama has announced new rules limiting executive pay for firms getting a taxpayer bail-out. What do you think?

(Feed provided by BBC News | Have your Say (http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/2/hi/talking_point/default.stm))

[Lisa]

Absolutely, positively YES!!!!!

Those fat cat CEO executives get paid megabucks for not only doing virtually notihing, but for doing stupid things and what they are paid is a true crime.

[kiki75]

I would answer "yes", but something about this turns me off.

Oh, yeah. It's the "taxpayer bailout" part. If you've messed up to the point of needing a bailout (which shouldn't even be legal, imo), you should lose your job. How about that for an executive pay limit?

[Dr Mindbender]

*tchoh*

Executive ''pay'' is an oxymoron, theres no such thing.

There is only executive theft.

[Circle E Society]

There should be limits on executives. The limit should be nothing short of 0. As revolutionaries it is our job to see to that. Dont take this is me advocating for killing either as I'm not saying how I'm just saying the position of executive needs to end.

[Vahanian]

the one senator proposed that any CEO getting bailed out shouldn't make more the the president. i guess they think no one should make more money then the lead CEO himself


i agree with kiki they should be fired for screwing up that badly

[Invincible Summer]

Only for the executives of companies that get bail-out money? How about the executives of other companies? They can still continue to exploit indefinite amounts of money?

What a crock.

[Glorious Union]

Oh, yeah. It's the "taxpayer bailout" part. If you've messed up to the point of needing a bailout (which shouldn't even be legal, imo), you should lose your job. How about that for an executive pay limit?
It used to be called going bankrupt, but now they have the trampoline of bailout to get right back up there where they used to be.

[genstrike]

There should be no executives.

Also, they're limiting it to what, $500,000? There's a lot of workers who would be lucky to get a tenth of that.

[cyu]

This is a reformist question - kind of like, should the minimum wage be $.25 higher than it is now?

No matter how you answer, it still leaves the fundamental problems of capitalism in place.

Some better questions might be: Should the pay in any corporation be decided democratically by the employees? Or, should the people of the area in which the corporation is operating in, simply assume democratic control of the corporation?

[Yehuda Stern]

I don't think communists would object to limits on executive pay. However, the move by Obama is just a way of casting sand in the eyes of the working class. The problem is not "fat cat CEOs" - this is just a classic case of the bourgeoisie casting the blame for capitalism's problems on the petty-bourgeoisie and the lower ranks of the bourgeoisie (much like Stalinist and nationalist leaders use demagogy against "bureaucrats" to avoid the masses' wrath). The problem is with capitalism and with the bourgeoisie. And even from the perspective of fighting for reforms, the demand for a pay limit for executives doesn't have even one tenth of the importance of the demand for raising the minimum wage, or ending the war in Iraq, or ending racial profiling, or dozens of other democratic and social minimum demands one could make.

[Post-Something]

This is a reformist question - kind of like, should the minimum wage be $.25 higher than it is now?

No matter how you answer, it still leaves the fundamental problems of capitalism in place.

Some better questions might be: Should the pay in any corporation be decided democratically by the employees? Or, should the people of the area in which the corporation is operating in, simply assume democratic control of the corporation?

Hahahaha! Welcome to Politics :)

[Mindtoaster]

I don't think communists would object to limits on executive pay. However, the move by Obama is just a way of casting sand in the eyes of the working class. The problem is not "fat cat CEOs" - this is just a classic case of the bourgeoisie casting the blame for capitalism's problems on the petty-bourgeoisie and the lower ranks of the bourgeoisie (much like Stalinist and nationalist leaders use demagogy against "bureaucrats" to avoid the masses' wrath). The problem is with capitalism and with the bourgeoisie. And even from the perspective of fighting for reforms, the demand for a pay limit for executives doesn't have even one tenth of the importance of the demand for raising the minimum wage, or ending the war in Iraq, or ending racial profiling, or dozens of other democratic and social minimum demands one could make.

...... Multi-million dollar executive CEOs are petty-bourgeois?

Then who the hell are the bourgeois? :confused:

The CEOs we're talking about make even more money then Obama

[Comrade Anarchist]

I think it is good that he is, but all that means is that the executives will move to a new position in the same company or a different company in a different field where he can the millions they are making now.

[Charles Xavier]

I don't think communists would object to limits on executive pay. However, the move by Obama is just a way of casting sand in the eyes of the working class. The problem is not "fat cat CEOs" - this is just a classic case of the bourgeoisie casting the blame for capitalism's problems on the petty-bourgeoisie and the lower ranks of the bourgeoisie (much like Stalinist and nationalist leaders use demagogy against "bureaucrats" to avoid the masses' wrath). The problem is with capitalism and with the bourgeoisie. And even from the perspective of fighting for reforms, the demand for a pay limit for executives doesn't have even one tenth of the importance of the demand for raising the minimum wage, or ending the war in Iraq, or ending racial profiling, or dozens of other democratic and social minimum demands one could make.

The petty bourgeioisie is someone who invests their labour out of necessity into their own private enterprise. A blacksmith, a shop keeper, a barber, an artisan.

[Kassad]

Massive executive pay is a product of surplus value. Executives and the wealthy who have a lot invested in a company or organization stand to make massive profits for not really contributing, whereas those who labor for the bourgeoisie owners are forced to sell their labor to make ends meet. In the end, if we eliminated surplus value, it would stand to create incredible wealth for workers and the world as a whole. I guess at this current time, the best we can hope for from a petty reformed like Barack Obama, the new face of the ruling class, is a few positive changes here and there. Still, his actions will just serve as a larger band-aid on the capitalist system that has failed time and time again.

As we are all aware, the system fails because the flaws and recessions are not only going to happen constantly, but they are innate in the profit system. Executives are completely unnecessary, as anything an executive can do, so can a laborer of the working class with the proper means and education, which the elimination of surplus value and the destruction of capitalism would pay for many times over.

[Yazman]

There should be no executives.

What is it that these people do, that we actually need a dedicated position for? They do nothing that we cannot do ourselves.