A 'pay czar'?
June 15th 2009 06:48
Barack Obama has now appointed a "pay czar":
I expressed in the past how silly I thought it was for Obama to appoint an army of "czars" to handle every little task in his administration. Regardless of what you call it, though, I think it is a good idea to have someone focus on this task. If the government has to prop up a company with taxpayer dollars, it winds up, in essence, owning the company. Certainly, that has happened with GM. It's also true of some banks as well. And if those companies are essentially owned by the government, why should they be free to pay exorbitant salaries and/or bonuses to their executives? You don't see multimillion dollar salaries at the Department of State or the Department of Education. Likewise, you shouldn't see large payouts at these government-supported companies. I'm sure you'll recall the outrage at the huge bonuses given out by AIG. We don't need that to happen again. If it takes a "pay czar" to prevent such mismanagement of taxpayer dollars in the future, then I'm all for it.
The Obama administration on Wednesday named Kenneth Feinberg, the lawyer who oversaw the government's compensation fund for victims of the September 11, 2001, attacks, as its pay czar to police compensation of top earners at companies receiving "exceptional" government aid.
I expressed in the past how silly I thought it was for Obama to appoint an army of "czars" to handle every little task in his administration. Regardless of what you call it, though, I think it is a good idea to have someone focus on this task. If the government has to prop up a company with taxpayer dollars, it winds up, in essence, owning the company. Certainly, that has happened with GM. It's also true of some banks as well. And if those companies are essentially owned by the government, why should they be free to pay exorbitant salaries and/or bonuses to their executives? You don't see multimillion dollar salaries at the Department of State or the Department of Education. Likewise, you shouldn't see large payouts at these government-supported companies. I'm sure you'll recall the outrage at the huge bonuses given out by AIG. We don't need that to happen again. If it takes a "pay czar" to prevent such mismanagement of taxpayer dollars in the future, then I'm all for it.
| 45 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by S.L.
The Political Brief
Comment by Lester Caudill
Round Politics
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate
Then again, I have some concern with pay structures -- even in private companies. I think we're in this mess now because some companies reward executives when they offshore jobs (i.e., because they cut labor costs). We don't need a pay czar to address that, but we should have financial incentives for companies to keep good jobs here in America. Otherwise, I don't see much of a future for us.
Comment by PopulistConservative
Angry Electorate