Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

CEO Pay and the Great Recession

CEOs of the 50 firms that have laid off the most workers since the onset of the economic crisis took home 42 percent more pay in 2009 than their peers at S&P 500 firms

Anyone see a problem with this?

 
mommom2000

Asked by mommom2000 at 7:08 PM on Sep. 1, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 24 (21,584 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (22)
  • No it doesn't.. IMO~You have been brainwashed by the liberal blogosphere....
    ____________________________
    That's just BS. It's not "liberal blogosphere." It's economists. Flat taxes are unfairly burdensome on people who use all of their income to buy necessities. What is the level of taxation that would be needed to produce the needed income? The flat tax would be a MOOT point if you ended up paying more, wouldn't it? If slashing corporate taxes works, why do we have such high unemployment? Why did Bush's tax cuts fail to create job growth throughout his presidency?
    stacymomof2

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 8:23 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • So stop shopping, buying, partaking, and refuse to give them an ounce of your money.... Tell your friends to join you.... You know~So then these CEO will lose their jobs and the 'big evil' corporations can shut down...  Of course that will cause MORE people to be unemployed... But then again, look at Obama... The American people are 'tightening'' their belts and his cronies are decorating his office to the bill of $800,000.... Guess he and his cronies didn't see a worthwhile cause to give that $800,000 to... So they decorated the Oval Office....  So, what do you want?  Fairness across the board?  If the typical answer to flamboyant Governmental spending is~ it has been done before by all presidents/politicians...  And that is OUR tax money.... Who cares what a private company does.. Don't like their business principles? As a consumer, don't give them your money.. Wish I could do that with the gov't...

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 7:22 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • I agree grlygrlz2. If the tax is 10% (I use that because it is easy) then, $100 pays $10, $1000 pays $100, $100,000 pays $1000..... it is fair across the board. So, if you make $1,000,000, you pay $100,000. It is equitable across all economic groups. If all pay their share, then we might not be in quite the fix we are in. You can't have only 48% of the population paying the tab for 100% of the people. It just doesn't work.
    jesse123456

    Answer by jesse123456 at 8:13 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • How about we do your idea and keep their tax cuts. Do you think they will hire then? If they have that kind of money to pay themselves why the lay offs?


    They are private companies. They can do whatever they want...In your "perfect world"  America wouldn't be America....  You don't like capitalism.. We get it... Guess what??  America is based on Capitalism.... And In MY perfect world, I would want a flat tax rate in America. Including businesses paying a flat tax. No special interest tax cuts, etc.... Companies would only be able to reduce their taxes paid based on deductions on capital purchases.. This would encourage investing into the corporations.

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 7:41 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • Private companies can do what they want. That is how this country works. It's called capitalism, and if the gov't would quit with the bailouts, things would correct themselves much sooner. It might not be pretty or comfortable for a while, but it would be better in the long run.
    29again

    Answer by 29again at 7:47 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • Stacy you can believe in Hope, Change, and Economics all you want... The facts are, supply side economics work. "After extensive analysis of the 1986 rate reductions, both Lawrence Lindsey and Martin Feldstein concluded that for taxpayers previously facing marginal tax rates of 40 percent or more, the drop in tax rates caused such a large increase in taxable income that the government was collecting even more revenue from taxpayers in these top brackets. This would mean that tax rates of 40 percent had had a highly destructive impact on economic activity.

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:44 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • The problem with Bush? He, his administration, and Repubs chose to spend MORE.. They essentially put the cart before the horse... Had they ridden out the tax cuts, our nation would have been better off... Now we have a Pres who wants to raise taxes AND spend more. Nothing good can come of this.
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:44 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • All a flat tax does is penalise the middle class and poor. The tax we pay on our money is food off of our table. What is the tax they pay taking away?


    No it doesn't.. IMO~You have been brainwashed by the liberal blogosphere.... Educate yourself beyond their world..  Bush's Tax Cuts would be a mute point in a flat tax model.

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:04 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • You can't have only 48% of the population paying the tab for 100% of the people.


     


    It just doesn't work. If only some of the Nanny-Gov dependent Liberals understood that....

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:17 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

  • Flat taxes are unfairly burdensome on people who use all of their income to buy necessities


    How... Do this calculator, and tell me the burden?  Based on our 2009 taxes~We are middle class by every defintion.  We would have MORE money in our pocket to save for retirement, spend, etc... 

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 8:47 PM on Sep. 1, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN