PDA

View Full Version : Annual Bonus. I love an annual bonus!



David G
08-31-2014, 05:04 PM
What do you think of this level of bonuses? Fair & reasonable? Justly deserved? Or have we tilted the playing field a bit too much?

https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/t1.0-9/10385279_10152381080211275_3993772126552180408_n.j pg

Sky Blue
08-31-2014, 05:14 PM
Yeah. In fact those bonuses should be greater, inasmuch as without the skill and sales ability of those peddling the stock associated with the jobs that employ by so many people, there would not be so many jobs.

Well, in truth, there are not so many jobs now. So yes, let us disincentivize even further by doing away with bonus payments to those skilled at bringing in the capital largely given over by millions of people worldwide for little or no enforceable security. That'll create more jobs.

Paul Pless
08-31-2014, 05:32 PM
Yeah. In fact those bonuses should be greater, inasmuch as without the skill and sales ability of those peddling the stock associated with the jobs that employ by so many people, there would not be so many jobs.now there is an interesting theory: that aggregate stock prices and trading creates and supports the broader economy and employment, rather than the other way around. . . :D

Too Little Time
09-01-2014, 09:21 AM
I don't know what paying a group of people a bonus has to do with the poverty of others.

Should the businesses keep the money or perhaps pay higher wages rather than bonuses? Still does not help the poor.


I own very small interests in large companies. I can do so because there is an active market in the buying and selling of these small interests.

Bubba L.
09-01-2014, 10:22 AM
Yeah. In fact those bonuses should be greater, inasmuch as without the skill and sales ability of those peddling the stock associated with the jobs that employ by so many people, there would not be so many jobs.

Well, in truth, there are not so many jobs now. So yes, let us disincentivize even further by doing away with bonus payments to those skilled at bringing in the capital largely given over by millions of people worldwide for little or no enforceable security. That'll create more jobs.

Can't think of a civil response so you jst get a thumb down. r<

Gene

Jim Mahan
09-01-2014, 10:43 AM
The best corporate gig I ever managed to snag, was there seven years, had a tradition (sadly ended just before I got hired) of having a month end meet at a local watering hole (Grants Pass, Oregon), to announce and celebrate a good month of sales and revenue. They would wait 'til everyone had a chance to get a drink, about fifty employees, and then the CEO founder, very informally, would pass out bonuses in cash.
My best friend at the time told me that when he had been working there for just about a week, they had his first such meeting and even though he was brand new, he got a share of the cash. Well, the first he had heard about the whole thing was just before work ended on that Friday, and he didn't have time to get word to his spouse about it, so he got home late, and a little drunk, having stuffed his wad of bonus cash in his back pocket. When he walked in through the front door, wife asks where he's been, and he reaches in his back pocket, pulls out the several hundred bucks, and flings it across the living room, saying, "That's where I've been!"

Then some time later, someone got toasted during the party and had a wreck on the way home, so they decide it wasn't a good idea to have a company function that promoted getting soused. Damnit. Missed it by that much.

TomF
09-01-2014, 06:47 PM
Here's an idea. T
Let's lower prices on the sevices and products provided by those firms giving out such bonuses. So that the benefits actually trickle down a bit at least to their immediate consumers. Priorizing those services and products actually more likely to be used by those in lower income quintiles.

Too Little Time
09-01-2014, 06:55 PM
Here's an idea. T
Let's lower prices on the sevices and products provided by those firms giving out such bonuses. So that the benefits actually trickle down a bit at least to their immediate consumers. Priorizing those services and products actually more likely to be used by those in lower income quintiles.

I don't know if many of the poor use Wall Street products. But we could tax those products and give that to the poor.


$26 billion in bonuses that you want to redistribute to the poor. I think it is a good idea. $46 billion in uncompensated health care was taken from the poor in the ACA. I did not hear anyone supporting giving that to the poor.

bobbys
09-01-2014, 06:59 PM
Can't think of a civil response so you jst get a thumb down. r<

Gene.

You miss the irony of you're own post.

Waddie
09-01-2014, 10:17 PM
Nothing like stock buybacks to put a little bonus change in the execs pockets.

(over 40% of their compensation is stock related. Got to keep those stock prices climbing. So it's buyback stocks and pay out the rest in bonus', and forget long term growth).

BTW; Did you know the Fed Board members are allowed to, and do, invest in the market. No conflict of interest there. (Just keep the actual interest rates low so that the market will continue bubbling.)

regards,
Waddie

Rum_Pirate
09-01-2014, 11:00 PM
What do you think of this level of bonuses? Fair & reasonable? Justly deserved? Or have we tilted the playing field a bit too much?



Far too high.

That money should accrue to the shareholders.

If those guys want that share - in excess of their already high salaries - let them buy shares.

Waddie
09-02-2014, 12:22 AM
I'm not prepared to say the bonus' are too high. It depends on what the company gets for that bonus. If that exec earned me one billion I'd gladly pay out one million to him/her as a bonus. Considering profits are at an all time high maybe those bonus' are justified.

http://www.businessinsider.com/profit-margins-expand-in-q2-2014-8

There is an easy way for unions to share in all that profit - buy stock. Considering how much unions make within a decade they could be major stock holders.

My wife's primary pension comes from a big union. Her defined benefit pension isn't paid for by union contributions, it's paid out of the unions investment portfolio. That portfolio includes lots of stocks. There's nothing to prevent unions from buying even more stocks. There's an old saying; if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. And that's just what unions should do. Let then take on more of the risk.

My wife told me that it was ironic to hear the union president rail against the companies at union rallies and then go back to the office for a meeting to look after their stock market investments. Nothing like a little hypocrisy.

regards,
Waddie

Duncan Gibbs
09-02-2014, 12:52 AM
Yeah. In fact those bonuses should be greater, inasmuch as without the skill and sales ability of those peddling the stock associated with the jobs that employ by so many people, there would not be so many jobs.
You've been reading Ayn Rand again, haven't you!?

The fact of the matter is that these companies are being run based an ideology of continually cutting costs as the primary method of delivering "shareholder value," rather than actually running a profitable and sustainable business. Private equity raiding techniques have been transformed to ensure publicly listed companies get gutted so that they are running on the barest of minimum staffing levels and wages so that the fat cats can buy their apartments at 470 Park Avenue and screw the rest of the planet.

The Kochs, the Waltons, the Murdochs and so on only want to keep on getting more and more and will only reward those that directly help consolidate their power and wealth.

They need to be taxed and taxed hard... Really bloody hard. I suggest 90 cent in the dollar as an appropriate benchmark.

Rum_Pirate
09-02-2014, 12:55 AM
You've been reading Ayn Rand again, haven't you!?

The fact of the matter is that these companies are being run based an ideology of continually cutting costs as the primary method of delivering "shareholder value," rather than actually running a profitable and sustainable business. Private equity raiding techniques have been transformed to ensure publicly listed companies get gutted so that they are running on the barest of minimum staffing levels and wages so that the fat cats can buy their apartments at 470 Park Avenue and screw the rest of the planet.

The Kochs, the Waltons, the Murdochs and so on only want to keep on getting more and more and will only reward those that directly help consolidate their power and wealth.

They need to be taxed and taxed hard... Really bloody hard. I suggest 90 cent in the dollar as an appropriate benchmark.


Quite right, minimize the incentive to do well. :rolleyes:

Duncan Gibbs
09-02-2014, 01:29 AM
Quite right, minimize the incentive to do well. :rolleyes:
There is, if you care to examine it, quite a difference between doing well and daylight robbery. Corporate salaries, and I use the word 'salaries' with large measure of salt, are so vast and the Gini index of income inequality in most OECD countries so great, as large as it was in the Victorian era, that "doing well" and "creating jobs" and "supporting industry" and any other of those bland corporate motherhood phrases are all facades to deliberately entrenched inequality.

I'm a capitalist. I'm just not a greedy pig.

hokiefan
09-02-2014, 01:33 AM
There is, if you care to examine it, quite a difference between doing well and daylight robbery. Corporate salaries, and I use the word 'salaries' with large measure of salt, are so vast and the Gini index of income inequality in most OECD countries so great, as large as it was in the Victorian era, that "doing well" and "creating jobs" and "supporting industry" and any other of those bland corporate motherhood phrases are all facades to deliberately entrenched inequality.

I'm a capitalist. I'm just not a greedy pig.

I guess Rummy hasn't figured out that bulls make money, and bears make money, but pigs get slaughtered.

Jim Mahan
09-02-2014, 05:45 AM
There is an easy way for unions to share in all that profit - buy stock. ... Nothing like a little hypocrisy.

Labor should just use their paycheck to buy stock in the company. As the way to share in the success of the company. They don't want to give squat for work done in the present, to make the company thrive, so the members of labor should make their paycheck smaller, so the company will do well in the stockmarket, by having the shares sell for a higher price, making the paycheck for labor smaller still. Great to be in business. More productivity from fewer people working less hours for less money with fewer benefits for record profits. And all labor has to do to have a share in the record profits is use that dwinding paycheck to give even more to the company, for shares. Brilliant. If the company could just figure a way to justify charging labor a fee for the privilege of competing for their largesse.