Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Please, I read his post and agree with the FHFA.
Did you read it? Because you don't seem to understand what it said.
I think RIJIMMY is just perturbed that the government under Obama's leadership didn't offer up a fat minimum wage package as part of their socialistic agenda. He has nothing to bitch about so he has to make something up.
-spence
|
No, Spence you don't get it. They are spending tax payer money to the tune of over $51 billion to keep this company going. Obviously, there is something wrong when the goverment has to spend that kind of money on a company that has been that poorly managed. Then to top it off, paying the CEO over $2 million in salary? Why not pay the CEO $1 and give big performance based incentives? Other CEO's in comparable financial services businesses have taken huge pay cuts and some have even stopped taking a salary. I don't see anything wrong with for pay for performance in a situation like this.
Threaded Mode