Why is it so unamerican to have negotiated a good contract for yourself?

What I would really like to write about is Gen. Powell's endorsement of Sen. Obama and why his comments lay out, quite intelligently, at least three specific reasons why his support, despite being a Republican, is behind the distinguished gentleman from Illinois. I would suggest that if you did not see the interview, the transcript speaks for itself.

I do want to mention, briefly, that despite my best intentions, I am still watching, even as I speak, some of cable news. The problem with these talk shows, which purport themselves as news shows, is that they are not: they are opinion commentary shows; there is a significant difference. Whether the general watcher realizes this or not is irrelevant. So long as everyone watching understands that each guest is carefully selected to endorse or rebut the point the show is trying to make, the perception should not be influenced beyond what it would be from one's own decision-making process. What disturbs me is that I doubt this sort of thought-process takes place. I have no solution to this problem at this time. Regardless...

But what prompts this quick reaction and the title of this entry stems from seeing the recent (and continuous) negative news reaction about CEO compensation. From a legal perspective, what rights does a non-stockholder have over what a private entity and its stockholders decides to pay its CEO? Not very much. See, e.g., Bailout's Bid to Limit Executive Pay will be Tough to Realize. Regardless of how far their golden parachute opens, these CEO's are going to come out on top one way or another. See, e.g., BoA Gives Top Job to Merrill Lynch CEO in the Merged Entity.

My limited point is why does it matter that these CEOs are making a lot of money? For the headache they have to go through in running a company, I'm sure a lot of that money is incentive to serve in the first place. Nobody seems to be complaining about how much money these news outlet CEOs and other industry CEOs are making in comparison.

People seem to be mad whenever they hear about how someone else is doing really well. It's rather absurd, actually. Didn't the Yankees pay A-rod about a quarter of a billion dollars to come in and turn the team around? I haven't seen them win a world series since he's been on the team. Should we renegotiate his contract and take away what has already been promised to him? Absolutely not. Should it impact how future contracts are negotiated? Perhaps. But notwithstanding this example, can't people be happy for someone when they are successful? Of course, all of this is facetious.

This is sort of getting circular and I haven't given it any significant amount of thought, but it just infuriates me when I see someone (particularly on cable news) bitch and complain about some ex-or current bank CEO or whoever who has been paid their contract. There are certainly ways, legally, to curb excessive pay, and if the stockholders want to do something about it, they certainly can. Why make this a news issue? It's not news. It's business.

And what exactly is a pro-America area of this country? And where are the anti-American areas? I can't wait until this election is over so the media will finally have something better to report about.

Tags: excessive ceo pay