Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JBTFD who wrote (109007)	2/25/2010 8:25:07 PM
From: ajtj99	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Mark, I didn't pay the wages (stock options) for United Health Care's CEO. However, I do help pay the wages for the state and local government employees in my area via my taxes. While the compensation package you cite is enormous, it is voted on by the board of directors of the company he works for. Those directors are voted in by the shareholders. If you are against the compensation package of a CEO, you need to wage a proxy fight to get your advocates on the board. That's the only way you can effect change there. To effect change at the local level, we can vote out the folks who are complicit. We can also refuse tax increases, causing localities to reform, even if they may appear to do so involuntarily. FWIW, if you are mad at the huge compensation packages CEO's at large companies get, then you should be an advocate for higher capital gains taxes. Prior to the Reagan tax cuts, most CEO's made their compensation through wages. However, after the capital gains tax cuts, the vast majority of the compensation came through capital gains via various stock grants. Your problem with executive compensation is really with Ronald Reagan and his tax cuts when you get down to it. Well, that and bull markets.

To: JBTFD who wrote (109007)	2/28/2010 11:26:18 AM
From: Sr K	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

What is your source for believing the "idea" that United Healthcare's CEO "EARNED $1.7 Billion in 2007"? Or should I take you literally, that no one will ever convince you that he [McGuire] did? Thanks to the WSJ investigation in 2006, he and others were caught for backdating options grants to the most favorable dates. Because of that investigation, he was forced to pay for that and resign. The SEC clawed back $468 million, but it was the shareholders of UNH who gave it away, and then they did not fight to claw back any more. From en.wikipedia.org McGuire's settlement with SEC On 6 December 2007, the SEC announced a settlement under which McGuire was to repay $468 million, including a $7 million civil penalty, as a partial settlement of the backdating prosecution. He was also barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company for ten years.[21][22][23] This was the first time in which the little-used "clawback" provision under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was used against an individual by the SEC. The SEC continued its investigations even after it in 2008 settled legal actions against both United Health Care itself and its former general counsel.[24].