Editorial: No time for bonuses
Published 11:49am Tuesday, November 3, 2009Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2009
Here in Michigan the effects of the recession are everywhere. Symbolically, in the lack of raises or salary increases, pay cuts and layoffs.
They are effects that are shared by communities large and small across the country.
Which is why a disconnect between the average American and those steering the finances flowing through the country is so alarming.
Recently the federal government once again took the nation’s most influential financial institutions to task when it was announced that several executives would be receiving performance bonuses at a time when many Americans say they don’t believe the recession is over.
The line between governmental control and influence is a thin one at best. It is important for our political entities to continue to govern the people without losing sight of the boundaries that have been set upon them so as to avoid the threat of an oppressive and intrusive government.
But boundaries are the point in the government’s actions to see those bonuses, handed down to the very same executives who sat in posh offices as they ushered America into one of the most debilitating financial eras in its history – taken away.
It is a scary societal era that America would find itself in when those who manage the money of hardworking citizens, parents, families across all economic spectrums can not see their failure in the rising unemployment, the still struggling housing market and the decrease in consumer spending, the depletion of savings accounts the struggling of a shrinking middle America.
They are but one variable in the country’s current situation – yet in no way a variable worthy of becoming an exception.
Washington should not merely suggest these bonuses be revoked – but encourage the action until action is taken.
There is a shared culture to be repaired here.
For America was not destined to be a country of the privileged presiding over the poor.
The question is not whether the government should be allowed to tell any business how to pay its employees – surely such an action would seem excessive.
But this is not an action with no context. In such a matter, where American tax dollars have gone to bailout these financial institutions, one would think that the pay off to those Americans, who are carrying the weight of the recession on their shoulders should come before the financial executives who have dropped the ball.
If such financial institutions doesn’t want the government taking an active look at the way they dole out their money – maybe they should take an active look at themselves.
Cloudy / 19° F
Once again the Star advocates government intrusion into private industry by dictating what a company can and cannot pay its employees. This is not to say that there are not issues with the private sector, but there are bigger problems with the public sector and waste. Our entire society has gotten the notion that it can operate without impunity witn other people’s money, and that the folks are willing to tolerate it. Let’s look ad Chris Dodd, a “Friend of Angelo,” Barney Frank and Maxine Watters who gave several billion dollars to a minority bank, even though it was not in trouble! Nancy Pelosi, who claims that Universal Health Care will be revenue neutral, and other politicians who have for decades fed from the public trough. Private industry is, and should be regulated, but the government has NO place having a “pay czar” that can tell a company what to pay its executives. That is tyranny. The Star is wrong in its assertion that there is a place for this. Having the government dictate financial responsibility is like having the fox watch the henhouse.
Mike is a Libertarian who has learned from the knees of Ayn Rand
governments job is ONLY to maintain a strong Military as a tool
of Industry, everything else is unnecessary.
even Fire and police should be to protect the rich against the poor.
I hold that it is the Governments job to protect the people, even from
itself and foolish unthought out silly philosophies.
Is it’s job to protect our economy? I believe it is, Mike does not.
he believes in the same old Trickle down Lazy Unfair thoughts
that was dreamed up in Austria in the 1840′s to protect the Hapsburg
dynasty from the serfs,
In fact it worked for the Hapsburgs in Austria, does not mean it worked
anywhere else.
In North America this party philosophy has failed over 8 times,
yet We seem to come to the same end we recently experienced again.
If we do actually re institute the regulations of the past 30 Years from now
the Trickle Down nonsense will reemerge once again, as We seem to forget
History, and the lessons of Human Nature.
Mike must also believe if we really want to do away with Crime, all
we must do is do away with Laws making criminality a crime.
the only person I know was not Sam Walton but a successful shoplifter on thieves corner in L.A.
the only person I knowto have a relly free market was not Sam Walton but a successful shoplifter on thieves corner in L.A.
but it cost everybody else, even sam walton.
Sam and I have debated this on more than one occasion. His Kenseyian economic philosophy is what he and BARACK OBAMA believe in, where government is the provider through wealth redistribution and control of the means of production, banking, and life decisions. The problem with that model is that wealth redistribution does not work-ever. Taxing the producers in order to raise the standards of the non producers soon produces a society of non producers, causing the system to fail. As history tells us, this has failed every time it has been tried, and BARACK OBAMA and his merry band of thieves are not any smarter than people who were professionals at it. Crime, Sam will always exist, I just prefer that my bandits NOT be in control of the government.
Mike,
The question is Emphasis
Is our Economy a tool for Wall Street,
……………………….or………………………..
is Wall street a tool for our Economy?
then after that is decided regulate it
accordingly.