Crooks and Liars: "WILL: Can I propose Will’s Law? We can all agree on this. Three liberals and Will. Will’s Law is that no company, such as JPMorgan now, or BearStearns, that is getting substantial subvention from the federal government shall be allowed to pay any of its executives for than the GS-15, that’s $124,000. That would stop the run to Washington..."
Of course, George Will will get the credit for this variation on a theme, but I've heard the same thing for years. albeit in different forms such as "No CEO can be paid more than 100 times the wage of the lowest paid person in an organization." I am highly in favor of any variation that keeps the undeserving rich from getting richer.
9 comments:
From your comment, I believe you may have missed the point of Will's Law - he's not suggesting that all companies follow this rule, just those that elect to suckle at the government teet. This is straight forward economic conservatism, not a liberal-style restriction on executive wages.
Uh, I'm not that dense. I was listening to him and I heard what he said; and I agree with his position on slopping at the government trough. I didn't snip that part of the C&L post out because it seems obvious to me that any successful company can do what it wants as long as the CEO et. al. are not defrauding the stockholders.
Like being paid to ref a sports event, taking money from the government changes the rules.
OK. I thought it was possible you got it - it just wasn't completely evident from your post.
Thanks for the commentary.
It's easy for Will to rally the liberals on the panel into an agreement on this issue. Will knows it will never,ever happen as long as corporate donors own the politicians.
I'd love to see this law a law but you're right it's happening no time soon because it is a step away from the laisse-faire (sp?) captialism that has been in vogue since the 70's.
Well, to fade's point, Mr. Will knows it's highly unlikely but he's rarely insincere - he wasn't rallying the liberals just for the sake of doing so. What's remarkable about his idea is the bipartisan agreement I've found in my journeys online - rank-and-file liberals and conservatives alike seem to think it is an appropriate response to this kind of situation.
As for stepping away from laissez-faire capitalism, it appears to me that Will's Law is more of a response to such a trend as opposed to the actions of the Fed and Congress which do represent a "stepping-away." However, I think Congressional action, taking advantage of a small Democratic majority, can be seen more as a response to the obscenely extreme laissez-faire attitude of the Bush Administration and the previous Republican Congressional majority.
As for the Fed, well, I don't know what in the hell they're thinking, but I believe Will's Law would most likely curb the worst fallout of their bailout action.
"However, I think Congressional action, taking advantage of a small Democratic majority, can be seen more as a response to the obscenely extreme laissez-faire attitude of the Bush Administration and the previous Republican Congressional majority."
Hmmm. I not only hope you're right but I think you're right. Depending on what happens in Nov, there may be a chance for some sort of control on the worst corporate excesses (again speaking of those that are feeding at the government trough).
What do you think about corporations with large government contracts (Blackwater et. al.)? Should they also be subject? Or just those organizations that are accepting bail-out money?
(Like this thread-- it has become quite provactive (absolutely meant as a compliment))
Nice to know that someone in the sea of sheep is thinking about these things.
Superficially, it seems there are no similarities between government contractors such as Halliburton and bailout recipients like Bear Stearns. However, this assumes a fair bidding process where the only avenue to an award is the ability to do the job correctly and efficiently at the lowest cost (not price, but cost [a whole other conversation, that one]).
If, however, affiliations and relationships are allowed to intrude on that process in any way (that would never happen, would it???), then you have a case of teet suckling and, as a result, Will's Law becomes applicable.
Post a Comment