Buy:VPXL.Soma.Viagra Super Force.Tramadol.Maxaman.Viagra.Levitra.Viagra Soft Tabs.Propecia.Cialis Professional.Viagra Professional.Viagra Super Active+.Super Active ED Pack.Cialis Super Active+.Zithromax.Cialis.Cialis Soft Tabs….

Buy:Wellbutrin SR.Advair.Nymphomax.Seroquel.Zocor.SleepWell.Lipitor.Aricept.Benicar.Amoxicillin.Buspar.Cozaar.Prozac.Female Pink Viagra.Lipothin.Zetia.Acomplia.Lasix.Female Cialis.Ventolin….

Buy:Viagra Super Active+.Cialis Soft Tabs.Zithromax.Viagra Professional.Cialis Professional.Viagra Super Force.Viagra.Propecia.Maxaman.Soma.Cialis Super Active+.Viagra Soft Tabs.Tramadol.Levitra.Super Active ED Pack.VPXL.Cialis….

You made reference to how Toyota’s executive compensation is lower and by your standards more reasonable. However you don’t make the connection with GM, Chrysler and Ford being driven from the market because of their poor decisions. Now the government wants to bail them out because “they cannot fail”.

Failing is the way free markets weed out the companies with poor policies.

The reason the current economy is in crisis is the housing market. The government set up rules that caused companies to operate against free market principles.

In a free market system it isn’t a free for all. It’s more like a football game where companies are the teams and government is the rules official. In the current climate everyone wants to blame companies for their selfishness but in a free market you don’t decry selfishness you count on it. In my football analogy if the officials stopped calling face mask penalties it would be fool hardy for teams not to use the face mask as a tackling strategy. Not using it would give your opponents a huge advantage and something for you and your players to talk about in the unemployment line.

Is executive compensation analogous to grabbing someones face mask? No it’s a strategy some companies have employed to gain an advantage by hiring the most talented leaders available. However the strategy has its limits and is now one of the many poor decisions working against the Big 3 car companies. What should happen in a free market is when enough poor decisions are made in a company that company will start to falter and could possibly fail if the ship isn’t righted in time.

If it is allowed to fail current and new companies will take note of the causes of failure and adjust accordingly. However if the government bails it out the lesson will be to have enough employees so that politicians will receive enough pressure from the voters that said company cannot be allowed to fail. New and current companies will see that is okay to “grab the face mask” and adjust accordingly.

Will this be the fault of greedy executives? No. It will be the fault of the government and the voters who pressured them into the bail out.

I hope we stop the bail outs and investors see that when executive compensations are too high they vote with their dollars and invest their money else where.

In the end I am against your proposal because it arbitrarily sets the level of executive compensation. If the amount is is not correct it will hamper our ability to compete in the international market against other countries who let the free market decide the amount. We don’t want the best talent going overseas because they see our faulty rule and offer 1% more to acquire the best executives.

Our problems with creating and keeping competitive companies has more to do with our not sticking to free market rules and lack of officiating than with greedy executives.

Good idea to post it!

I heard everything but the last two (2) minutes of your interview, and quite frankly, I thought that you hit it out of the park. Your presentation was very clear, concise, and straightforward. It should appeal to the “common sense” element of all us. As I have discussed with someone you know, I think that there are two (2) challenges that you would face, besides the fact that the incoming administration has more socialist leanings:

1) It times of panic, most of us turn to the government for comfort and security. Unforetunately, our government’s current plan would be the equivalent of prescribing viacodin for a broken leg- short term relief that won’t result in a long-term fix. Real sustainable, tangible growth will only come as a result from the private sector.

2) The analogy of the “Great Depression” and a FDR style “New Deal” is all the rage; only problem is, FDR’s “New Deal” by and large prolonged the “Great Depression”, and it was only the run-up to WW II that led to the explosion of economic growth that is the United States of America. I don’t think anyone is pining for another World War. However, the myth still is out there that the massive government intervention by FDR resulted in our recovery, hence the need for another Obama “New Deal”, which I am sure “the One” is only too happy to oblige.

Keep up the good fight, and if you get interviewed in studio by Alexis Glick, and would like to join you!

The reason we left out private companies is because of the backlash that generally surrounds tax cuts. Being a small company, we certainly understand why you would ask this question. We would like a tax cut as well. However, we needed a starting point that is easily measurable and that will make a positive impact on the problems the economy currently faces. We also chose publicly traded companies as a means through which confidence can be returned to the economy. By tying executive pay to that of “average” workers and changing their overall pay structure, we believe improved fundamentals and investor sentiment will lead to greater net investment in this country. This investment then spurs job creation and further investment in projects that develop our nation’s economy. Basically, we chose publicly traded companies because of their overall effect on the economy and the psyche of the general public.

This is not to say that small businesses are not hurting. We know the extent of economic pain 2008 brought. We also understand this is one aspect of a very large economic plan the next administration is going to enact. We hope that the proof of success in public companies will then translate into tax changes for private companies. Additionally, taxes paid by private companies vary based on the type of incorporation. Public companies have uniform tax regulations, making the initial change much easier.

This is not to say that small businesses are not hurting. We know the extent of economic pain 2008 brought. We also understand this is one aspect of a very large economic plan the next administration is going to enact. We hope that the proof of success in public companies will then translate into tax changes for private companies. Additionally, taxes paid by private companies vary based on the type of incorporation. Public companies have uniform tax regulations, making the initial change much easier.