• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CEOs lay off thousands, rake in millions

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,317
Reaction score
14,358
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
If those CEO's had any confidence in the current administration, they wouldn't be laying off people and would be investing their money. As long as this anti-business administration keeps threatening big business, this trend will continue.

Both big business and small business are the key to economic growth and the creation of jobs in this country, and as long as the administration threatens to punish them with higher taxes and increased costs for employee health benefits, we will never recover from this economic downturn. See FDR for details.

.
 

tacomancer

Capitalist Social Democrat
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
41,714
Reaction score
22,299
Location
Akron
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
If those CEO's had any confidence in the current administration, they wouldn't be laying off people and would be investing their money. As long as this anti-business administration keeps threatening big business, this trend will continue.

Both big business and small business are the key to economic growth and the creation of jobs in this country, and as long as the administration threatens to punish them with higher taxes and increased costs for employee health benefits, we will never recover from this economic downturn. See FDR for details.

.
BS this behavior has been common long before 2008.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
If those CEO's had any confidence in the current administration, they wouldn't be laying off people and would be investing their money. As long as this anti-business administration keeps threatening big business, this trend will continue.

Both big business and small business are the key to economic growth and the creation of jobs in this country, and as long as the administration threatens to punish them with higher taxes and increased costs for employee health benefits, we will never recover from this economic downturn. See FDR for details.

.
Wait. So is it that CEOs don't have any confidence in the administration running the nation? Or is it that investors don't have any confidence in the CEOs running the businesses? Because, let's face it, CEOs and Wall Street haven't been the most deserving of the trust of investors these past few years.
 

Spartacus FPV

Better You = Better World
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 19, 2006
Messages
14,870
Reaction score
7,126
Location
Your Echochamber
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
They were going to "rake in" those millions anyway if the company did well, these lay offs save the company and thus SAVE jobs.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,317
Reaction score
14,358
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Wait. So is it that CEOs don't have any confidence in the administration running the nation? Or is it that investors don't have any confidence in the CEOs running the businesses? Because, let's face it, CEOs and Wall Street haven't been the most deserving of the trust of investors these past few years.
Watch CNBC or Fox Business and you will understand. Companies have no clue what's coming next from this administration. They won't invest their money in their businesses or expand their workforce when they have no clue how much money this administration is going to make them pay in taxes, via Cap & Trade and Obamacare. As long as this anti-business environment exists, companies are going to continue to sit on their money.
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
If those CEO's had any confidence in the current administration, they wouldn't be laying off people and would be investing their money. As long as this anti-business administration keeps threatening big business, this trend will continue.

Both big business and small business are the key to economic growth and the creation of jobs in this country, and as long as the administration threatens to punish them with higher taxes and increased costs for employee health benefits, we will never recover from this economic downturn. See FDR for details.

.
did you completely miss the point of my post, or are you just typically spouting talking points that mean nothing?
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
They were going to "rake in" those millions anyway if the company did well, these lay offs save the company and thus SAVE jobs.
not the point of my post. they should not recieve those millions when they are firing people.
 

pbrauer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
25,394
Reaction score
7,206
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal

Gipper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,120
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
So you'd rather them keep around inefficient workers? That's not how you run a major corporation. Businesses hire and fire in cycles. This is nothing new.

What's new is the impact of the cycles, much of which you can base on insecurity of this administration.
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Corporations are in business to make money and maximize profits. In fact, they are in violation of their charters if they do otherwise. If they are laying off people, that is their right. It doesn't necessarily make them evil people. After all, we don't want to force a company into bankruptcy by forcing bloat on them. If they go bankrupt, let it be because they themselves are responsible, not because the government forced it on them. Let me add, by the same token, if they go under, then don't bail them out. Let the market determine whether or not they stay in business. The government should act like a government, and not a charity for big business.
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
So you'd rather them keep around inefficient workers? That's not how you run a major corporation. Businesses hire and fire in cycles. This is nothing new.

What's new is the impact of the cycles, much of which you can base on insecurity of this administration.
of course not.....but ceos didn't used to make 50 times what the average employee makes, and salaries and bonuses have become completely out of control. the ceo of a company that loses money should be penalized, imo.
 

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,356
Reaction score
8,095
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
So you want to force them to employ people?

How very Vladimir Lenin of you.

Businesses don't like the threat of increased taxes - both personal and business alike - and the massive potential cost increases associated with an evolving universal healthcare tax strain.

Businesses have Obama-proofed themselves. When he's gone and sane, conservative business principles are restored, the hiring will return. But not a minute before a sense of predictablility from the federal government returns.
 

VanceMack

MSG Benavides TAB
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
73,572
Reaction score
30,972
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

Cyborg

New member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
18
Reaction score
11
Location
Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
It's easy for Liberals to attack corporations and corporate profits - particularly if the have a smattering of Conservatism. Corporate Boards provide the compensation package and they are often gilded. You can find similar comparison in the Sports World with Coaches. A Coach is looked at as the key to whether the Team will be first or last. The best player makes ten times or more of what the lowest paid does.

You "Never" hear Liberals attacking Compensation for distinctly Liberal entities like Google, Wikipeda, NPR, PBS and others. Google CEO's only paid themselves $1 in compensation. "Poor Babies!"
But they don't say out loud they are both Billionaires in all Capital Letters as a result of their ownership interest.

Isn't that a little like saying I own 5 Billion dollars of stock in my company but I am no longer going to take the pay I get from my Lemonade Stand by the front door! (Now everybody 3 cheers for me.)

Some of you may remember Lee Iaacoca who took control (CEO ) of GM and brought it out of the garbage can in profits.

All this attacking is part of the driven Liberal Politics package of attack and smear - attack and smear.
How loudly have those same Liberals attacked Democrat / Progressives for the $26 million dollar bonus package of Valerie Jarett when she was with one of the sub prime twins Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac.
How loudly did they scream about Johnson who took $20 million (Obama's short lived financial adviser in his campaign ) or Obamas personal friend at Fannie Mae Claude Raines $ 90 million.
How louldly are they screaming about both of them being conveniently exempted in Obama's ballyhooed financial Reform package? Even Rahm Emanuel was there for a short time and was given a sweetheart deal that netted him $6 million.
Does anybody "Ever" remembering hearing any of those Leftist Bullhorn Cries of "FOUL"
 

Hoplite

Technomancer
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
3,779
Reaction score
1,077
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I figured there would be companies who would use the economic downturn as an excuse to "save money" by cutting costs they didnt need to cut and the first to go is usually workers.

The corporate system is unaccountable, corrupting, and beneficial only to those who have invested in it. We seriously need to develop a new model for running business and break the grip of private interests over our daily and political lives.
 

Deuce

Outer space potato man
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
75,206
Reaction score
32,975
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Eh, it may be showing a lack of loyalty to your employees, but a company is not really obligated to take care of the employees. If a company can increase its profits by cutting employees, those employees probably weren't truly necessary in the first place. I certainly abhor this type of behavior, as I see loyalty in both directions as being very important, but business is business. This sort of activity makes them jerks, but not evil.
 

Phoenix

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2008
Messages
1,808
Reaction score
622
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
not the point of my post. they should not recieve those millions when they are firing people.
Why not? They are getting paid their agreed upon salary. Would you want a company to tell you, "We had to let Joe go, So in light of that fact we are going to pay you 25% less for the work you did last month." Of course not. I don't understand why people think it's okay to screw people out of money they have earned simply because they earn a lot of it. It's part of a CEO's job to fire people when neccesary.
 

Gipper

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 6, 2008
Messages
25,120
Reaction score
7,658
Location
Theoretical Physics Lab
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
liblady said:
of course not.....but ceos didn't used to make 50 times what the average employee makes, and salaries and bonuses have become completely out of control. the ceo of a company that loses money should be penalized, imo.
I agree with CEOs not receiving bonuses when they bleed red ink...disagree on everything else.

CEOs have every right to make ridiculously more than the average employee, because the position is infinitely more difficult. Most "average employees" don't have the education, management skills, coping ability, or thought processes involved with the upper tier of control. In addition, their salaries -through options - are based upon market value of the company.

Why cut off the nose to spite the face?
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
this kind of greed is what makes everyday workers snap. the board members taking care of each other, a good old boys club. **** em. they run a business into the ground, then get PAID for it.
Well, there are sure plenty of things I disagree with LibLady about, but I do understand where OP is coming from here. What a wonderful message it would be to "the troops" if corporate staff took paycuts when there are layoffs. Imagine how much more fair a company would be if they actually did that. I could imagine a company having lots of good reasons for doing that -- starting with employee morale and ending with stockholder morale. Why don't they???

Then, of course, my next question is, "Would employees ever consider they took enough of a cut? I think that answer is, probably, a resounding, "Never."

I'm reminded of a friend of mine. She supervises Accounts Payable at a large hospital....has four or five people working under her supervision. Last fiscal year, she received a $30K bonus for her department's renegotiation of major contracts and other cost-saving moves. The people she supervises don't receive a bonus, although they are surely responsible for renegotiating, just as she is. She told me it was getting harder and harder to motivate her people to renegotiate because it's a tough job. She said she felt they too easily took "no" for an answer.

I suggested she have a monthly contest awarding $100 (or more even) to the employee who saved the most money that month. She said, "Oh, corporate'll NEVER go for that. No money." I said, "Not corporate's money, YOURS." She looked at me like I was crazy and said, "You have GOT to be kidding!!! Like I'd EVER do that!!!"

(Outside of business, she's a nice person and friend. I marvel at her business selfishness, though.
 
Last edited:

Vespasian

Banned
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
39
Reaction score
8
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian
this kind of greed is what makes everyday workers snap. the board members taking care of each other, a good old boys club. **** em. they run a business into the ground, then get PAID for it.
]
Pure ignorance. The CEOs job is to make money for the shareholders. It isn't to provide a job for those stupid and lazy enough to be relegated to worker bee status.

BS this behavior has been common long before 2008.
Yes. Firing employees whose services are no longer beneficial to the company is an integral part of running a successful business.

Shhhh Mega!

Private Business is Infallable.
How's it not? The only time it appears fallable is when the dumbass government sticks their nose into it.

So you'd rather them keep around inefficient workers? That's not how you run a major corporation. Businesses hire and fire in cycles. This is nothing new.
Exactly.

of course not.....but ceosdidn't used to make 50 times what the average employee makes, and salaries and bonuses have become completely out of control. the ceo of a company that loses money should be penalized, imo.
Yes, most CEOs/founders/owners/businessmen are in better financial shape than you and the like. There's a reason for that.

What a company/CEO decides about their pay/bonuses is none of your, a likely 9-5 ham and egger, damn business.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Moderator's Warning:
Threads merged


of course not.....but ceos didn't used to make 50 times what the average employee makes, and salaries and bonuses have become completely out of control.
This figure is thrown around a lot, but I don't think it really holds up under scrutiny. If you adjust for size of companies and total profits, I would wager that CEO compensation hasn't skyrocketed in the way that many claim.

the ceo of a company that loses money should be penalized, imo.
And they often are, by being removed by the board or losing out on bonuses. However, decisions of compensation are entirely up to the board (and in some cases the shareholders).


The corporate system is unaccountable, corrupting, and beneficial only to those who have invested in it.
That's the fundamental nature of the corporate form. A corporation exists to earn profits for its investors, not to pay workers, not to do socially beneficial things, and not to help people through tough times. Each of those things occasionally coincides with the corporate goal, but the corporation is required by law to pursue its underlying goal of earning profit for investors.
 

EnigmaO01

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
13,230
Reaction score
5,786
Location
Indiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
of course not.....but ceos didn't used to make 50 times what the average employee makes, and salaries and bonuses have become completely out of control. the ceo of a company that loses money should be penalized, imo.
Give it up liblady. You can't makes pigs fly and if you try it only makes them mad. Some on here are so partisan they skim the thread and move right to blaming Obama. Pretty sad.

You know what kills me? The same people that piss and moan about the bailouts are perfectly fine with CEO's getting bonuses even though their company did poorly due to the crap the CEO's were pulling, which lead to the bailout. Anyone else see something wrong with this logic?
 
Last edited:

pbrauer

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
25,394
Reaction score
7,206
Location
Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
If those CEO's had any confidence in the current administration, they wouldn't be laying off people and would be investing their money. As long as this anti-business administration keeps threatening big business, this trend will continue.

Both big business and small business are the key to economic growth and the creation of jobs in this country, and as long as the administration threatens to punish them with higher taxes and increased costs for employee health benefits, we will never recover from this economic downturn. See FDR for details.

.
Why don't you read the article BEFORE commenting?
 
Top Bottom