The going rate

posted by Rob on September 20, 2008 09:54 AM

Here's a little snippet from the news for you:
"During the last five years of his tenure as CEO of now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers, Richard Fuld's total take was $354 million."

I don't want to get all Marxist about it, but that sort of thing is dangerous. You look at your salary and you wonder whether the guys on seventy-five million a year really are thousands of times better at their jobs than you. And if they get the big bucks for taking all the big risks, how come they can retire to a private island after a few years while their employees are queueing up at the dole office? Is it really true that you can't fill the top spots with the right people unless you pay those sorts of salaries? Or is it just a sort of Old Boys Club? And do you really want a boss who'd walk away if you paid him less than a million a week?

When too many ordinary folk start noticing that the system awards a king's ransom to the people who lose them their jobs it's time for a few concessions. I fully expect to hear a fair bit of socialist, populist rhetoric in the coming months from our elected representatives. And I wouldn't even be surprised if those who attempt to control these things decide it's time to let the world have another Democrat president to lead the world's most influential economy - just until we all calm down a bit.

spacer

Comments: 2


Over the last couple of years, I've felt more out of sync with the world as we seem to return to the "greed is good days" of the 80s. The inept and corrupt always seem to be rewarded, or retire with their yacht and Caribbean Island, or even retain their posts in the resulting buy-out, and are able to walk away from the mess in many of these sorts of situation.

If you look at any cohort of people (school peers, university colleagues or even people in your street), the people in jobs that truly require skill or knowledge (the higher education sector is one I have personal experience of, but also look at the average salary of authors, amongst many other examples) don't seem to be doing as well compared to the people in the world of business and finance.

A friend that I met when we were doing our PhDs (easily the brightest of his year), struggled to secure a permanent job in academia and became an actuary. In his words it was a doddle, and he only intended to do it for a few years until he was sufficiently rewarded so he could leave and do something that actually interested him.


You might be amused by the following from Bill Bonner (editor of The Daily Reckoning) last April - the First, of course, but for one intoxicating moment one thought/hoped it might be true.

"This report from Bill Bonner yesterday:

A group of corporate executives, present and former - including Stan
O'Neal, Richard Fuld, Ray Irani, John Mack, Barry Diller and William
Foley - appeared at a press conference in New York. The spokesman for
the group startled reporters when he announced the group's intention to
return a considerable part of its earnings to the shareholders for whom
they worked.

"We've thought long and hard about this," said Mr. Fuld. "And we've come
to realize that these salaries are just absurdly high. None of us can
think of anything we've done anytime in the last ten years to warrant a
salary of even half of what we get paid - much less the $38 million Stan
got or the $322 million Ray got. Speaking for myself, I spent
practically all of last year attending meetings, parties, and ceremonies
- and frankly I can't recall what any of them was about. None of them
needed me. And I'll tell you something else, when I attend those board
meetings, half the time I don't even know what the accountants and
lawyers are [there] talking about. We got together this morning and
asked each other how those CDSs work, for example. None of us had any
idea. And apparently, believe it or not, between us, we've got billions
of them on our books."

As we've been saying here at The Daily Reckoning , executive salaries
are preposterous. But we never thought we'd see the day when executives
would admit it.

spacer

Post a comment

We love hearing from our readers, but please stay relevant and pleasant. The comments are for responding to the specific blog post above. If you have any other queries, please contact Snowbooks via email. Off-topic or offensive comments will be removed without notice.

To screen out automated spam, please answer the following very easy question:

What colour is nice, new snow?

(please use all lower-case characters for your answer; no capitals)


Back to the blog »