Sentence of the day

June 8, 2009

From the NYTimes articles on a White House effort to control executive compensation in the financial industry:

“In the past, banks had free rein to determine the base salary and bonuses they awarded their employees.”

Me: Or put it this way: “”In the past, companies could pay their workers at a level that made business sense.”


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

“It is not clear how the government will define too much risk.”

Does a trillion dollar deficit and a government in search of where to spend instead of how to pay fall under the category of too much risk?

Posted by JMichael | Report as abusive

Yes, it really made sense to pay Stanley O’neill etc hundreds of millions to drive their companies into the ground.

Posted by hmpierson | Report as abusive

What a private sector company chooses to do with their dollars is entirely up to them — — Probably the strongest argument against bailouts.

On the contrary, public funds raised through taxes most certainly are not subject to the same indiscretion. Setting pay restrictions in the private sector sounds like an idea taken straight out of the Communist Manifesto. This notion of disincentivizing people to produce and generate more products and wealth will inevitably guarantee a future of mediocraty in a country founded on innovation and private business.

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”
~Winston Churchill

Posted by JMichael | Report as abusive