Denver
42°
hide
Change your location
Alamosa
Aspen
Aurora
Boulder
Broomfield
Centennial
Colorado Springs
Cortez
Denver
Durango
Fort Carson
Fort Collins
Grand Junction
Greeley
Gunnison
La Junta
Lamar
Leadville
Limon
Montrose
Pueblo
Rifle
Saguache
Springfield
Telluride
Trinidad
hide
Blogs
Health Care
Tech Talk
Green Living
National Parks
Super School News
The 1930s
Name
e-mail
Facing the Mortgage Crisis
Colorado State of Mind - Women, Power and Politics
Should we send more troops to Afghanistan?
Women in power: what drives them to lead and what holds them back?
Public lands in the media spotlight
Native American Heritage Month
Health Care
Packard: An American Classic Car
Tuesday at 8pm
Masterpiece Contemporary: Place of Execution (Part 2 of 2)
Sunday at 9pm
How the Beatles Rocked the Kremlin
Monday at 9pm
America's Veterans: A Musical Tribute 2009
Sunday at 10pm
Sherlock Holmes: The Red Headed League
Thursday at 8pm
CEO Salaries
posted Friday, Feb. 13, 2009 2:02pm
See more on:
Colorado State of Mind
,
Economy
Should the federal government dictate pay limits for executives of companies taking federal "rescue" money?
Tune In
Colorado State of Mind
"CEO Salaries"
Watch Colorado State of Mind
Complete episodes online.
Watch now
.
What's your point of view?
Bob Carnein
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 7:56pm
I think the problem isn't so much executive compensation as it is our regressive tax system. We should tax profits made on risky investments and raise tax rates for those who receive the highest compensation. I think Reagan and his friends destroyed the basis for stability in our tax system.
Rachell Benson
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 7:59pm
The ordinary American complains about the salaries/compensation of the rich. Don't they realize that the rich put their money back into the economy by spending their income and hiring the ordinary Americans? It is the rich who can hire nannies and caretakers, buy new autos and airplanes, purchase clothes, eat out, etc.
Susan B Bloomquist
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:01pm
Mr. Milsted's comment - "we weren't paying attention several years ago" - I have advocated for over 12 years (letters to my congresspeople, etc.) a corporate tax structure such that CEO compensation over a certain multiple of the lowest paid worker in the company puts that company in a higher tax bracket - that way IF the board feels that the CEO is worth it (including ALL forms of compensation), they will accept paying higher taxes. Simple. No regulation. Decisions made in the best interest of the company. Why has no one else come up with this?
sonja elison
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:02pm
I agree with the woman who is "fed up" with CEO salaries. My husband worked for a Fortune 50 company which sold out it's seed (in the form of patents and products) in order to pay the CEO another few million year after year. The company laid off thosands, and has demoralized the workers who are left --and they are highly intelligent scientists, engineers and other professionals. The argument that if they don't get paid they will go elsewhere is fallacious. If the government limits these exorbitantly paid execs, they won't have another company to go to, to collect hundreds of millions in compensation. Also, because of the fact that the stock market is enriching only the few in NYC, average Americans, whose wealth they lost, have lost faith in them. I won't be giving them any more $!
Don Collins
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:08pm
The greed of Wall Street types is obvious but why do we treat this like it was something new? What about the multi-million dollar salaries paid to sports players and entertainers?
This has even gone on the the world of classical music. Why should a wonderful performer like Yo Yo Ma be worth $50,000 or more for playing one concerto in an evening?
R.L. Mitchell
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:42pm
Philosophically and practically, if we really want a system with integrity and consistent fairness, then we should be analyzing every job to see what salary range is needed to allow a person the minimum lifestyle to perform well in the job. When all the folks at the bottom and the middle (e.g. teachers, police, firemen, etc.)are paid what they need to maintain both mental and physical health, raise and educate a family--including the hiring of household and other help when needed, live in decent housing and pay their utilities, transport themselves to work and other necessary places, afford at least a modest vacation, etc. then we can work our way up to the top. The same standards of "need" should apply to all.
Janet Simmons
Sunday, February 15, 2009 › 4:57pm
The CEO pay should only be a reasonable precentage higher then the lowest payed employee. Since RMPBS has hired a new CEO I wonder if you had such a moral standard? I would very happy if you did and feel better about the money I give.
R.L. Mitchell
Sunday, February 15, 2009 › 6:01pm
Re J. Simmons: While such a formulaic approach may make sense in some organizations, and is probably better than nothing to rein in outrageous compensation at the top, it would not be practical in every situation. It depends on the structure & functions of the org. E.g., what the employees at every level actually do, what it took to prepare them to do it, and what it takes to keep them doing it well, growing in experience, and contributing to improve the org. The greater morality AND practicality is in not treating people like machines, regardless of the kind of work they perform. Standardized/impersonal/ mechanical approaches often seem to be fair at first, but then end up doing more harm than good. Real fairness requires ongoing thoughtful effort, and concern for the common good.
Charles Smith
Sunday, February 15, 2009 › 8:24pm
I'm with those who are fed up, and I'm very surprised by the comments of most of the panel. I agree that appropriate levels of executive compensation are difficult to establish, but it's time to end the bidding war. We are, whatever we may wish to think otherwise, all in this together, and it's time we starting acting like it. Since most CEOs are mere employees, their salaries should bear some relationship to that of average employees--so cap their pay at, say, 20 times that of the average. Much of the satisfaction in and reward for work, esp. for CEOs surely, lies in the success of the company, not how high the salary. The banking collapse illustrates absolutely that high executive salaries guarantee nothing about success. End obscene disparities between rich and poor.
Javascript is required to view this web page.
Bob Carnein
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 7:56pm
I think the problem isn't so much executive compensation as it is our regressive tax system. We should tax profits made on risky investments and raise tax rates for those who receive the highest compensation. I think Reagan and his friends destroyed the basis for stability in our tax system.
Rachell Benson
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 7:59pm
The ordinary American complains about the salaries/compensation of the rich. Don't they realize that the rich put their money back into the economy by spending their income and hiring the ordinary Americans? It is the rich who can hire nannies and caretakers, buy new autos and airplanes, purchase clothes, eat out, etc.
Susan B Bloomquist
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:01pm
Mr. Milsted's comment - "we weren't paying attention several years ago" - I have advocated for over 12 years (letters to my congresspeople, etc.) a corporate tax structure such that CEO compensation over a certain multiple of the lowest paid worker in the company puts that company in a higher tax bracket - that way IF the board feels that the CEO is worth it (including ALL forms of compensation), they will accept paying higher taxes. Simple. No regulation. Decisions made in the best interest of the company. Why has no one else come up with this?
sonja elison
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:02pm
I agree with the woman who is "fed up" with CEO salaries. My husband worked for a Fortune 50 company which sold out it's seed (in the form of patents and products) in order to pay the CEO another few million year after year. The company laid off thosands, and has demoralized the workers who are left --and they are highly intelligent scientists, engineers and other professionals. The argument that if they don't get paid they will go elsewhere is fallacious. If the government limits these exorbitantly paid execs, they won't have another company to go to, to collect hundreds of millions in compensation. Also, because of the fact that the stock market is enriching only the few in NYC, average Americans, whose wealth they lost, have lost faith in them. I won't be giving them any more $!
Don Collins
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:08pm
The greed of Wall Street types is obvious but why do we treat this like it was something new? What about the multi-million dollar salaries paid to sports players and entertainers?
This has even gone on the the world of classical music. Why should a wonderful performer like Yo Yo Ma be worth $50,000 or more for playing one concerto in an evening?
R.L. Mitchell
Friday, February 13, 2009 › 8:42pm
Philosophically and practically, if we really want a system with integrity and consistent fairness, then we should be analyzing every job to see what salary range is needed to allow a person the minimum lifestyle to perform well in the job. When all the folks at the bottom and the middle (e.g. teachers, police, firemen, etc.)are paid what they need to maintain both mental and physical health, raise and educate a family--including the hiring of household and other help when needed, live in decent housing and pay their utilities, transport themselves to work and other necessary places, afford at least a modest vacation, etc. then we can work our way up to the top. The same standards of "need" should apply to all.
Janet Simmons
Sunday, February 15, 2009 › 4:57pm
The CEO pay should only be a reasonable precentage higher then the lowest payed employee. Since RMPBS has hired a new CEO I wonder if you had such a moral standard? I would very happy if you did and feel better about the money I give.
R.L. Mitchell
Sunday, February 15, 2009 › 6:01pm
Re J. Simmons: While such a formulaic approach may make sense in some organizations, and is probably better than nothing to rein in outrageous compensation at the top, it would not be practical in every situation. It depends on the structure & functions of the org. E.g., what the employees at every level actually do, what it took to prepare them to do it, and what it takes to keep them doing it well, growing in experience, and contributing to improve the org. The greater morality AND practicality is in not treating people like machines, regardless of the kind of work they perform. Standardized/impersonal/ mechanical approaches often seem to be fair at first, but then end up doing more harm than good. Real fairness requires ongoing thoughtful effort, and concern for the common good.
Charles Smith
Sunday, February 15, 2009 › 8:24pm
I'm with those who are fed up, and I'm very surprised by the comments of most of the panel. I agree that appropriate levels of executive compensation are difficult to establish, but it's time to end the bidding war. We are, whatever we may wish to think otherwise, all in this together, and it's time we starting acting like it. Since most CEOs are mere employees, their salaries should bear some relationship to that of average employees--so cap their pay at, say, 20 times that of the average. Much of the satisfaction in and reward for work, esp. for CEOs surely, lies in the success of the company, not how high the salary. The banking collapse illustrates absolutely that high executive salaries guarantee nothing about success. End obscene disparities between rich and poor.
THIS SITE REQUIRES JAVASCRIPT
Please enable javascript in your browser.
Leave this field empty
Name:
E-mail:
Your e-mail address will not be shown.
Comment:
characters left
We welcome your comments, and hope to host energetic, civil discussions. As you post, please keep the following in mind:
Keep your comments focused on the topic at hand.
Don't use profanity, personal attacks or hate speech.
Don't promote a business or raise money.
When all else fails, think "Golden Rule": Treat others the way you'd like to be treated yourself.
We reserve the right to remove posts that don't follow these guidelines.
Notify me when there is a new post in this thread.
Sign me up for Rocky Mountain PBS' weekly E-news.
Contact Us
|
Jobs
|
About Us
Copyright© 1995-2009 Rocky Mountain Public Broadcasting Network, Inc. All rights reserved.
Help
|
Privacy policy
