The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.
Obama Calls Executive Pay an Outrage
politicususa.com — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama spoke today in Indianapolis, IN where he called for passage of a bill he proposed in the Senate that would require a non-binding shareholder vote on executive pay packages. "We all believe in that fundamental, American value that if you do good work, if you're successful, you should be rewarded..."
capj71- 47 diggs
- digg it
- srodolff, on 04/11/2008, -5/+2If Barack is outraged, then that tells me he's not ready to be President.
- BlueSunshine, on 04/11/2008, -3/+1Ugh, CEO's do get paid far too much, but I'd much rather have the government have no say so on how much anyone "deserves" to be paid.
- jforjools, on 04/11/2008, -1/+5Who's saying the govt tells anyone anything?
Obama's talking about **shareholders** having more say.- BlueSunshine, on 04/11/2008, -2/+1I'm all for having the shareholders having more say. However, the government needs not to be involved.
- motivatedmama, on 04/11/2008, -0/+3What's the likelihood anything will be done about it otherwise?
- jforjools, on 04/13/2008, -0/+1Unforunately for folks of your view, corporations ARE run by corporate law. ...It's nothing new. In fact, some of what people don't like about corporations is due to the fundamentals of corporate law. Such as: corporations are views as moral-less money-grubbing entities. ...If corporations do NOT focus on optimizing every single profit opportunity they are breaking their legal/feduciary responsiblity to their shareholders to do so.
Ain't that kinda funny? They're moneygrubbers cuz they're legally bound to be?
Corporate law is NOTHING new in this country...Tweaking it on a regular basis is not only good, but it is a necessity.
- BlueSunshine, on 04/11/2008, -2/+1I'm all for having the shareholders having more say. However, the government needs not to be involved.
- jforjools, on 04/11/2008, -1/+5Who's saying the govt tells anyone anything?
- br0ck, on 04/11/2008, -1/+9Obama is not saying that he wants the government to limit CEO pay. He's saying that the owners of the company--the shareholders--should be able to find out what the CEO makes and be able to have some call in how much a CEO makes when things go bad. The economy is being destroyed by corporations that are being run with one purpose - to stuff the pockets of the CEO and Enron and a multitude of other companies like it have been raped by the top management. He wants to reduce the ability of these CEOs to manipulate the government and he wants to protect the real owners of the company from plundering from the top.
- SHv2, on 04/12/2008, -0/+0"the shareholders--should be able to find out what the CEO makes and be able to have some call in how much a CEO makes when things go bad"
And then on the flipside when things go good he makes more money? Wait... no, that isn't what we want, hold on a sec...
- SHv2, on 04/12/2008, -0/+0"the shareholders--should be able to find out what the CEO makes and be able to have some call in how much a CEO makes when things go bad"
- NameTry2468, on 04/11/2008, -1/+8If you look at the entirety of his message, he is right on point, and shows a clearer understanding of capitalism than those CEO's.
“We all believe in that fundamental, American value that if you do good work, if you’re successful, you should be rewarded. But if you’re a Wall Street CEO today, it doesn’t seem to matter whether you’re doing a good job or a bad job for your shareholders and workers: You’ll be rewarded either way,”
And he's absolutely right. Now corporate moguls argue, and rightly so, that the government should step out of market regulation because the profits they earn are a result of their intelligence in navigating a risk vs reward market. This is a fair argument. The problem is when CEO's fail, and don't get punished for it, but rather, bailed out by the government. Like obstinate teenagers, they want their parents to get out of their business and let them live independently, but as soon as they get into a little trouble, who's coming home crying to mommy? It's time for the government to stop underwriting risk. - LewP, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1Can't we please get back to talking about race? This story sounds too political...oh yeah, that's right...he does want to be president doesn't he?
- fedupamerica, on 04/12/2008, -1/+1Like he would turn the pay down himself. GEE WIZZ! Typical Politician
- izackcarson, on 04/12/2008, -0/+1He did turn down the pay. He turned down high paying jobs that would have done much more to advance his career as a lawyer than the community based jobs he did take.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is