23 comments on “Well said George!

  1. And how many CEOs are there who are taking excessive (defined by plucking a number out of thin air) compared to the total number of CEOs. And where are the sample of CEOs who are taking excessive pay from. Just the FTSE which is mainly non-UK companies? So if 0.1% of CEOs are taking excessive pay is that still a problem or just a perceived problem of those who think it unfair and that all CEOs should get the same salary.

  2. Of course, all these CEOs are adding so much more value to their companies than they were 10 years ago that the huge wage settlements are entirely justified. We can tell that because companies are so much more profitable than in the past. It’s absolute bonanza time for shareholders. Isn’t it?

    Also, there simply isn’t anyone else capable of doing the job and willing to do it for a dollar less, is there?

  3. The more the CEOs are paid, the more the UK treasury gets at the expense of the monied owners of the company. It’s pretty Robin Hood as it stands. Can’t he see his argument is just based on hate?

  4. JamesV, you’re totally missing the point. Even if every one of these CEOs would work for free, you’re still only increasing profits/reducing losses on the order of 0.1%. The claim that reducing pay would somehow increase performance isn’t borne out by evidence; every study on executive compensation that I’ve seen either finds a positive correlation between pay and performance or no correlation. Whichever way you think the causation runs you can’t justify the claim that increasing pay REDUCES performance. So if this proposal worked, it would increase dividends by a tiny percentage. If it didn’t work it would collapse the economy.

  5. I’m sure Moonbat doesn’t give a toss about the implications for his editor’s salary. “Silly but brave” pretty much sums him up.

  6. Funny how pop stars are never used as examples of hate, only businessmen. Why should some twat who warbles some crap be immune while someone who manages a successful global company is targeted?

  7. Have you ever noticed how those who want a maximum wage pick a level more than their own pay but less than someone else’s.

  8. @Richard Allan. I shall use that argument on my employer next pay review. They can triple my salary and it only cuts into profits by 0.1%, or whatever.

    Look, I’m not on the moonbat’s side at all, I simply fail to believe that the frequency of huge pay deals at the top of certain companies is indicative of the healthy functioning of a free market. I’m against all market rigging all of the time, not just some market rigging some of the time.

  9. If they are going to do this, then they’d have to cap self-employment income as well, where it’s received from a single source (or connected sources). Otherwise it would just be too easy to avoid.

    Wonder how much Polly gets for writing her Guardian articles?

  10. I’m in favour of English football clubs getting back to representing their locality. Put at £500k cap on pay and the Premier League will shed all its foreign “stars”.

  11. @Matthew L – I agree it’s not a matter for the government. Surely you don’t believe the gummint is the only thing standing in the way of free and open markets? Every businessman hates the market (at least once established) and CEOs are exemplary businessmen. Their salaries are not determined in a free and open market.

  12. I agree with JamesV. I have met many CEOs who seem smart, and quite a few who come across as …. well intellectually challenged. I am sure that the free market is not really working properly at the top.

    The problem is that choosing a CEO is as much black art as science, and vast numbers of potential CEOs don’t get high enough up the ladder to get a shot, whereas plenty of chancers do.

  13. So, earning over £500k should be illegal?
    The 50% tax rate certainly wouldn’t raise very much!
    I also wonder how he thinks this would make Premiership football better? How about films with any actor that we have actually heard of? I suspect that Formula 1 would avoid the UK like the plague etc. etc. etc.

  14. “If you want to make more money as a salaried worker – in other words while other people carry the risks – you can go abroad, and good riddance to you. Another country, incautious enough to set no cap, can deal with the consequences of your destructive greed.”

    I love the attitude of these people:d. ” good riddance to you, this is my country and I own it!” The sense of entitlment to control others must cause many sleepless nights.

  15. JamesV, Serf,

    The most correct answer imo *is not* for the state to regulate CEO wages. It is to encourage shareholders to be much more active in their decision making – up to and including removing their investment if the company is being badly run.

    The route to influence in a traded company is to buy lots of shares. Smaller share holders can cobble themselves together into effective campaign groups if they wish. Individual shareholders must not be kidded into thinking the Government should sort out the company *they* have invested in.

  16. @Gareth, indeed the route to influence is to buy lots of shares. But relationships between the huge investors with real influence and top management tends to be rather cosy – to the detriment of the people whose money is actually being invested.

    Then we get justifications like that proposed by Richard Allan.

    “Of course, we wouldn’t think about not giving you that 33% pay rise plus options this year old boy, after all it’ll only cut into profit by 0.1%. I think we can live with that.

    Meanwhile, how are those “increase profits by 0.1%” measures going? Absolutely vital we get them through to squeeze every penny out of the company. I see you’ve already downgraded staff travel, closed the canteen, cancelled the christmas party, and started charging staff for parking. That should do it – everyone who actually does the work has to get used to the realities of a tough environment, after all. Well great, if that and the other things you have planned gets those profits up by 0.1%, we can talk about another 33% pay rise next year! Trebles all round!

  17. With salary, dividends and capital growth I earn more than George’s maximum. I am a partner in a medium size company that we started from scratch which now employs over 100 people. Bar the ridiculous notion that we should continue to work our arses off and borrow millions to give money to the Govermint, the only feasible option to meet George’s maximum wage would be to cut our debt and our workforce. Perhaps we could have a reality show: Who gets fired? Though of course we couldn’t make any money out of it.

  18. Pingback: On Excessive Executive Pay « Decline of the Logos

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.