What caused the income inequality gap that started in the 70's?

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by LSUpride123, May 30, 2015.

Page 8 of 16
  1. Bengal B

    Bengal B Founding Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2002
    Messages:
    47,986
    Likes Received:
    22,994
    Sure, CEO's of huge corporations are vastly overpaid. But there are only a few of them relative to the number of workers at those corporations so even if All the CEO's pay was suddenly reduced to a fraction of what it is now it wouldn't give the workers any kind of huge pay raise.
     
    Bengal B, Jun 4, 2015
    #71
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Yet they all seem to be populated mostly with other corporate executives. Birds of a feather . . .
     
    red55, Jun 4, 2015
    #72
  3. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    So a company should not have business leaders unrelated to itself or its management on its board? Who do you want on boards then?
     
    LSUsupaFan, Jun 4, 2015
    #73
  4. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Me.

    I at least want to feel that the board is representing my interests. But I have observed many boards for many decades and they tend to serve themselves and the executives first. If they buck that, they find themselves replaced.

    A good board has some experts in the industry, but they don't all have to be high-level executives. Better to have some serious technical experts on the board as well as some corporate guys who know how to manage business. There should also be some people from other backgrounds who are concerned with the betterment of the company as a whole, not just with stock evaluations and executive compensation. A judge, or a teacher, or an accountant . . .somebody outside of the box. At least one person that represents small stockholders interests, which are not always aligned with the big hedge funds and pension funds best interests.
     
    red55, Jun 4, 2015
    #74
  5. gumborue

    gumborue Throwin Ched

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    577
    the us was living in a fantasy-land in the 50s and 60s and that is what most are comparing today to. the us was existing off of the destruction of the rest of the world from two wars. the other countries recovered and things normalized. competition took jobs to cheaper places so now the bottom third have crap and the middle third get by. capitalism doesn't exist to make its people happy, so when it sucks, it'll suck. taxes should be restructured and education emphasized.

    the a-holes that run things just try to get reelected. they do what they think the stupid constituents want and not whats best for the country.
     
    gumborue, Jun 7, 2015
    #75
    Winston1 likes this.
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    I don't think they care about their constituents at all. They care about the people that are funding their campaigns, the lobbyists, and following the party line. They put all of these above the wishes of their constituents and the best interests of the country.
     
    red55, Jun 7, 2015
    #76
  7. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    I have to say I am most proud of the LA legislature right now in this regard. They slammed the door on the lobbyists. Influential and powerful lobbies are walking around scratching their heads because they can't get anybody's ear.
     
    LSUsupaFan, Jun 8, 2015
    #77
  8. gumborue

    gumborue Throwin Ched

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,839
    Likes Received:
    577
    to the extent that constituents = votes, they care.
     
    gumborue, Jun 8, 2015
    #78
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    I'm not seeing it. The lobbyists aren't getting everything that wanted like they are used to, but they have effectively fought and got modified every revenue measure that affected them. The movie credits didn't get eliminated or cut, just limited. The cigarette tax ended up less than what was wanted and needed. Lobbyists still spend millions on legislators who are starting realize that they have to raise enough income to make the state function.

    http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/05/lobbyists_spent_3_million_on_l_1.html

    The legislature is still puckering up and kissing Bobby Jindal's ass, too. I don't think they understand how this is going to play in the next election. Even Republicans are fed up with Jindal, his unbridled ambition, his blind ideology, and his utter contempt for the people of Louisiana. Legislators have to be basically competent and fund the government that they are in charge of.

    It is not a good time to be seen as a sycophant to Jindal. Vitter was the first republican to see this. The sonofabitch will probably get elected on it.
     
    red55, Jun 8, 2015
    #79
  10. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    Concessions have been made, but that is only because the bills started off in such radical postures. Some like HB 629 have serious constitutional issues. Some of the changes were to at least mitigate some of those issues. The cigarette tax was a massive increase, and the changes to the film statute will kill the industry. The program will still exist, but no new productions will come here. I spoke with one of the lobbyists featured prominently in the link you posted this weekend and he never seemed so defeated and beaten down. I loved it.

    I don't see this. They are bucking Jindal every chance the get, with the exception of Sen. Donahue who sponsored the SAVE legislation, or DUMB if you prefer.

    Unfortunately I don't see any other possible outcome. If Dardenne and Angelle can take enough votes to make it a Vitter Bell Edwards run off then Bell Edwards might have a shot. I think the most likely scenario is Dardenne and Vitter end up in the run off. Vitter wins easily, and it sucks.
     
    LSUsupaFan, Jun 8, 2015
    #80
Page 8 of 16

Share This Page